2014-08-20
Madam Speaker Purick took the Chair at 10 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of two Year 5/6 classes from Moil Primary School accompanied by Brenda Kellam and Mr J Nim Jayawardhana. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to you and I hope you enjoy your time at Parliament House.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have given permission for Mr Shane Eecen to take photographs in the Chamber today. He will be compiling ‘A Day in the Life of the Assembly’, a photo essay which will form part of the 40th celebrations of the Legislative Assembly.
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Madam Speaker, I seek leave of absence for the member for Arnhem, for personal reasons.
Leave granted.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Health): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that, pursuant to Standing Order 123 Notice No 2, introduction of the Tobacco Control Legislation Amendment Bill 2014 (Serial 89) be postponed until 26 August 2014.
Motion agreed to.
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal Bill 2014 seeks to establish in the Northern Territory a new tribunal with jurisdiction to hear and determine a broad range of matters. The bill creates the tribunal, it contains the membership provisions and sets out the tribunal’s generic functions and powers.
The bill does not, however, confer any jurisdiction on the tribunal. Conferral of jurisdiction will be the subject of a series of separate bills.
It is with great pleasure that I present the first of these conferral of jurisdiction bills related to my own portfolio of Attorney-General and Justice.
The Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Conferral of Jurisdiction Amendments) Bill 2014 is the first step in providing the new Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal with its initial jurisdiction. This bill consequentially amends legislation to transfer jurisdiction from the courts to the tribunal where the courts have original or review jurisdiction under the following legislation: the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act; the Fences Act; and the Victims of Crime Act.
Turning now to the specific changes to legislation which will result from this bill.
The Births Deaths and Marriages Registration Act: the act currently provides that a person aggrieved by a decision of the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages may apply to the Local Court for a review. The act is being amended to transfer this review jurisdiction from the Local Court to the tribunal.
The Fences Act: the Local Court has original jurisdiction to hear and determine applications made under this act. The act is being amended to transfer this original jurisdiction from the Local Court to the tribunal.
The Interpretation Act: the act is being amended to include a new definition. This will mean that the term ‘Civil and Administrative Tribunal’ in any act passed by the Legislative Assembly must be interpreted to mean the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal established under the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act.
The Victims of Crime Assistance Act: the act currently provides that a person aggrieved by certain decisions of the Director of the Crime Victims Services Unit or an assessor appointed under the act may apply to the Local Court for a review. The act is being amended to transfer this review jurisdiction from the Local Court to the tribunal. Consequential amendments are also required to the Victims of Crime Assistance Regulations to reflect the changes made to the act.
This bill is a small but symbolic step in establishing the new Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal and I look forward to presenting further bills over time to continue the process of jurisdictional transfers to this new tribunal.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
This bill puts in place a wide-ranging package of measures by proposing amendments to the Superannuation Act, Superannuation Regulations, Northern Territory Government and Public Authorities’ Superannuation Scheme Rules, Northern Territory Supplementary Superannuation Scheme, the Legislative Assembly Members’ Superannuation Fund Act, the Administrators Pensions Act; and the repeal of the Unclaimed Superannuation Benefits Act.
The bill continues the reforms to modernise the Territory’s defined benefit framework to achieve sustainable and cost-effective administration of the schemes without affecting member entitlements. Another key objective of the reforms is to pursue flexibility within the legislative framework to respond more readily to ongoing changes to Commonwealth superannuation-related law and policy. Without action the cumulative effect will see the Territory schemes become outdated and out of step with industry best practice and become increasingly complex and costly to administer.
In summary, the bill proposes 13 separate reforms to:
repeal the Unclaimed Superannuation Benefits Act and allow the transfer of unclaimed and lost member superannuation benefits to the Commonwealth
allow the Superannuation Trustee Board (STB) to form committees incorporating all the relevant scheme funds it administers
ensure STB-related costs can be proportionately levied across the relevant scheme funds it administers
ensure Northern Territory Government and Public Authority Superannuation Scheme (NTGPASS) members working for ‘public authorities’ are adequately captured for membership purposes
remove the Northern Territory Government Death and Invalidity Scheme (NTGDIS) Anticipatory Payment
remove the NTGPASS entrant medical declaration provisions
broaden the interpretation of ‘dependant’ to include ‘interdependency of relationship’
increase the payment threshold without the grant of probate
convert penalty offences across the superannuation legislative framework to be compliant with Part IIAA of the Criminal Code and update and apply confidentiality provisions
replace the current Superannuation Review Board with an external administrative tribunal process
introduce time limits for review of decisions
allow the release of superannuation money in compliance with Commonwealth legislation for the payment of a relevant tax liability or refund of excess contributions
the ability to cease offering the NTGPASS account-based pension and transfer remaining pension accounts under a successor fund transfer.
I will now address the changes proposed in the bill in more detail.
The first proposal is to repeal the Unclaimed Superannuation Benefits Act and allow the transfer of unclaimed and lost member superannuation benefits to the Commonwealth. Unclaimed superannuation arises when a member turns 65 years of age and the superannuation provider is unable to contact the member entitled to a benefit after a prescribed period, or there has been inactivity in their account for a period of time.
There has been a push in recent years by the Commonwealth, in consultation with all jurisdictions, to centralise the administration and payment of lost and unclaimed superannuation with the Australian Taxation Office (ATO). Most other jurisdictions have already opted into the Commonwealth regime or are in the process of doing so.
The Territory has in the past resisted moving to this arrangement on the basis that we were better able to identify and locate our lost members, especially those living in remote areas or from an Indigenous background. It is now accepted that the ATO capabilities have improved significantly in terms of data matching and personal identification technologies since this earlier view.
Further, from 1 July 2013, the ATO pays interest, equivalent to the Consumer Price Index on lost and unclaimed superannuation accounts under their control. There is no longer a logical reason for the Territory to not opt in to the centralised Commonwealth regime.
The transitional arrangements in the bill allow the opting in to the Commonwealth upon the relevant Territory schemes being prescribed in the Commonwealth Superannuation (Unclaimed Money and Lost Members) Regulations.
Unclaimed money totalling approximately $0.5m currently held by the Territory in the Central Holding Authority will be transferred to the ATO along with the account details of those unclaimed members. As future lost and unclaimed accounts are identified these will also be transferred in line with ATO reporting requirements.
It is also proposed to allow the Superannuation Trustee Board (the STB) the ability to form committees which overarch the relevant scheme funds under the board’s control. The STB currently has $1bn under management, and oversees the funds of three of the Territory’s public sector schemes, namely the Northern Territory Government and Public Authorities’ Superannuation Scheme (NTGPASS); the Legislative Assembly Members’ Superannuation Scheme (LAMS); and the Northern Territory Police Supplementary Benefit Scheme (NTPSBS).
The use of the committee structure allows greater governance and oversight, and is a way of bringing board members closer to the day-to-day operation of the schemes and their respective fund. The committee structure is a common feature across the jurisdictions that have public sector schemes under management. The proposed reforms will also be in line with the recent Commonwealth StrongerSuper reforms and align with industry best practice.
Further, it is proposed in the bill to allow the STB to apportion costs as it considers appropriate for the management of the funds under its control. The current STB governance arrangements were only finalised in 2012 and did not adequately address the ability to apportion board-related costs. It is the intention in the bill to do so now.
It is also proposed in the bill to streamline NTGPASS and the Northern Territory Government Death and Disability Scheme (NTGDIS) to achieve equality of membership and to realise administrative efficiencies where possible.
NTGPASS and NTGDIS are both established as separate schemes under the Superannuation Act and provide equivalent total and permanent disability and death benefits to their respective members. They have very similar features; however, the formulas used to calculate a financial benefit are different.
NTGDIS covers most Territory public sector employees who are in ‘choice of fund’ superannuation arrangements upon meeting certain conditions of employment. NTGPASS has been closed to new members since 1999.
Mandatory medical classification provisions were repealed from NTGDIS as part of the legislative amendments undertaken in 2010. A medical classification was an assessment to determine if a new Territory public sector employee had a high risk of dying or becoming an invalid in their first 10 years of service. Those deemed at high risk were issued a ‘reduced benefit certificate’ and their benefit entitlement was reduced until the 10-year period had elapsed.
It was determined through actuarial advice that removing the medical requirements for new NTGDIS members would not materially increase the Territory’s liability. Further, the assessment process was very costly to administer. As such it is proposed to also remove the medical classification provisions for NTGPASS members, allowing the same equality of membership that applies to NTGDIS members. As NTGPASS closed in 1999, some 15 years ago, any ‘reduced benefit certificates’ on record will have expired.
It is also proposed in the bill to realise a number of administrative efficiency measures as part of the modernisation process to simplify, improve or remove complex and redundant provisions. One such measure is to remove the NTGDIS anticipatory benefit payment. Anticipatory payments are made to alleviate financial hardship if a member’s salary is suspended or reduced due to a member’s incapacity whilst undergoing an assessment for invalidity retirement.
Only one such payment has been made to date, meaning that from an administrative perspective the benefit is both inefficient and redundant. These situations are better addressed through employment measures such as the granting of additional sick leave by the relevant agency. Additionally, NTGDIS members belong to superannuation funds such as AustralianSuper. These funds provide a default level of benefit to their members, meaning there is no strong reason to continue offering an anticipatory benefit.
Another proposed measure is to raise the payment threshold that the Commissioner of Superannuation can make without receiving grant of probate or letters of administration.
The release of money is to help meet funeral expenses of a deceased member, or to dependants of the member. The current threshold of $20 000 was last updated in 2007 and has eroded over time due to the effects of inflation. It is now proposed to raise this to $30 000.
It is also proposed to broaden the current interpretation of a ‘dependant’ in the Superannuation Act to align with the definition of ‘dependant’ in the Commonwealth Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (or SISA) to reflect how people interact and support each other in modern times. The current interpretation of ‘dependant’ is considered too narrow and by no means gives a definitive guide in helping the commissioner make a transparent and informed decision, especially with regard to partial or whole dependency.
For example, two elderly siblings with adult children of their own, living together in a mutual care arrangement illustrates the potential for a member, or a person in society, to have more than one ‘interdependent’ relationship. The broadening of the term ‘dependant’ will allow these kinds of arrangements to be captured and considered. Further, aligning with the SISA definition will allow the steps set out in the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations to be considered when determining what is an ‘interdependency’ relationship.
It is also proposed in the bill to amend the Superannuation Act to make it easier to identify and prescribe a ‘public authority’ in the Superannuation Regulations for NTGPASS membership purposes. A ‘public authority’ can either be attached to an agency or be another type of body or agency classification. For example, a public authority can be a commission, a corporatised entity such as the Darwin Port Corporation, or a quasi-government organisation such as the Menzies School of Health.
The need to prescribe these authorities in the regulations is to, essentially, allow NTGPASS members to continue their membership when taking up positions with such authorities. To simplify the process it is proposed that a public authority will only be required to be prescribed in the regulations if it is not already in the Administrative Arrangements Orders (AAO) for the purposes of the Public Sector Employment and Management Act, the Financial Management Act or both.
It is further proposed in the bill to convert penalty provisions in the Superannuation Act to comply with the principles of criminal responsibility in Part IIAA of the Criminal Code, and to extend across the superannuation legislative framework updated confidentiality of information provisions. This is to afford better protection to members of all schemes with regard to the use of their confidential superannuation information. It is also proposed in the bill to ensure further protection to members of the Territory’s defined benefit superannuation schemes by extending better pathways to take action against bureaucratic decision-making or action.
It is proposed to replace the Superannuation Review Board and ‘opt in’ to the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal when it is fully operational; the Attorney-General has just spoken on that subject. The NTCAT will provide a one stop shop and transparent expertise to assess the merits of bureaucratic decision-making or their actions. A centralised tribunal approach will allow aggrieved members wishing to challenge an administrative decision a simple, transparent and direct avenue. As such, the right of review against bureaucratic decision-making or action will be extended across the superannuation legislative framework to cover members of other schemes, with the exception of the Supreme Court Judges Pension Scheme.
Not only is this in line with industry best practice across jurisdictions, but it is also this government’s intention to ensure citizens of the Northern Territory have greater transparency in dealing with the departments they interact with.
Further, time lines for seeking a review of decisions have also been added. Transitional arrangements in the bill ensure that members who may have a matter on foot or a grievance they wish to bring forward will not be excluded as a result of these very important changes. It is also proposed in the bill to close the NTGPASS pension product and facilitate the transfer of members to a successor fund equivalent or superior to the NTGPASS pension.
The closure of the NTGPASS pension product has become necessary due to the modest take-up of around 220 pensions. The low membership base means it does not have the economies of scale needed to offer a cost-effective product. No new pensions have been offered since 1 April 2014.
A due diligence process has been followed to select a successor fund that is equivalent or superior to the pension product to ensure that no member will be worse off as a result of the closure. There is, however, a degree of urgency for this to occur before 1 January 2015. This is when the Commonwealth’s new aged pension deeming rules come into effect. Income streams from pensions starting after this date will be assessed for social security purposes in the same way that applies to income derived from other financial assets.
Finally, it is proposed in the bill to facilitate a framework across the relevant schemes to allow for the release of superannuation money from a member’s account to meet a Commonwealth superannuation tax liability. Certain taxes are to be prescribed in the Superannuation Regulations, where the Commonwealth legislation allows a superannuation tax liability to be paid by the individual or by the superannuation fund on request from either the member or the ATO. The first to be prescribed in the regulations is the new Division 293 tax, where an additional 15% tax is applied to an individual’s superannuation contribution when their total income threshold, including their superannuation contributions, exceeds $300 000.
The Division 293 tax is designed to capture everyone over this threshold, except if the taxpayer belongs to a constitutionally protected superannuation fund. None of the Territory defined benefits schemes are constitutionally protected or exempt from this requirement. As such, members who exceed this threshold may be assessed as having a superannuation tax liability.
Finally, from 1 July 2013, Commonwealth legislation allows excess superannuation contributions that exceed the concessional contribution caps to be refunded to the individual taxpayer. Concessional contributions are before-tax contributions, such as salary sacrifice, made by members on top of their employer contributions.
In the past, excess contributions were subject to a high tax rate plus additional tax penalties. The framework to allow this is proposed in the bill with the ability to release any excess concessional contribution amount also prescribed in the Superannuation Regulations.
I commend this bill to honourable members, and table the explanatory statement to accompany the bill.
Debate adjourned.
Continued from 15 May 2014.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Mr Deputy Speaker, the opposition supports this bill.
As the Attorney-General mentioned in his second reading speech, this bill implements the recommendation made by the Northern Territory Coroner, arising from the inquest into the deaths of Mr Clifford Norman and Ms Kwementyaye Taylor.
This was a tragic case involving a high-speed chase and alcohol. The police involved used their judgment and chose not to continue pursuit as it was their belief it was a dangerous situation and that the driver, Mr Norman, was intoxicated.
Sadly, their concerns were justified. Mr Norman and Ms Taylor died in the resulting car crash and two more passengers were seriously injured. Miraculously, the true innocent in this, a four-year-old – unrestrained – managed to survive with only minor injuries.
The coroner said in his findings that he believed the Northern Territory police had taken the correct course of action and appropriate steps to call off their pursuit in trying to ensure a safer outcome. The coroner also said that people knew of the police’s policy and, as such, were exploiting it, to the danger of themselves and the general public.
As a result – this is why we are here – the coroner recommended introducing tougher penalties for offenders who speed or drive recklessly or dangerously when evading police. The opposition supports this recommendation.
It is important that people understand that when asked to stop by police they must do so, and that failure to do so will result in very harsh penalties. Driving dangerously puts people’s lives at risk.
The Attorney-General mentioned in his speech that there is a gap between the Traffic Act, the Criminal Code Act and the Motor Vehicles Act in regard to offences when a driver fails to stop for police and situations which contain offences that may be charged when dangerous driving occurs.
The Attorney-General is correct in identifying that the proof needed to pursue these charges can be difficult for police to obtain. The bill we are speaking to today was drafted to address this.
The Attorney-General has clarified that this bill does not give police more powers – or the discretion to direct a driver to stop a vehicle – than they already have. The bill is targeted at behaviour that puts the public in danger when people flee police and high-speed chases occur, and the opposition supports the new maximum penalty for this.
Our roads and workplaces need to be safe. Our roads, used by all in the community, need to be safe. We are satisfied the Attorney-General and government have ensured their definition of ‘pursuit’ is adequate to close any loopholes which may exist, but expect it is something that will need to be monitored.
The Territory road toll currently sits at 27. Every life lost on Territory roads is one too many, and having laws enacted to punish those who speed recklessly or drink and drive is good.
We respect the fact that government has acted on advice from the coroner and experts regarding actions it needs to take in law. We only wish the government would take more advice from experts; especially in this debate, my mind is cast to open speed limits. As was articulated by serving police officers again this week at the Northern Territory Police Association AGM, they do not support the return of open speed limits. Their president said he ‘did not believe a responsible organisation representing operational police officers could support any government reintroducing unrestricted speed limits on a trial or permanent basis’. He also said, ‘Dealing with the carnage on our roads is one of the most personally and professionally damaging elements of police work for our members – how could we possibly support (open speed limits)?’
It is incongruous and inconsistent for the CLP to support open speed limits and this bill. The Attorney-General is capable of speaking to and taking up the cause of serving police officers. They are asking this government to not support open speed limits in the Northern Territory.
We, as well as the government, support this bill, but I call on the CLP to reconsider its approach to open speed limits.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I also support the bill the Attorney-General has brought forward.
It is straightforward. Its intent can be summarised by reading the last part of the second reading speech, which says:
As the member for Fannie Bay has noted, this deficiency was noted by the Northern Territory Coroner, and is remedied by this bill.
When the Northern Territory Coroner makes recommendations it would be a very unwise government that did not do follow them. In Litchfield there were two fatal accidents on a bend, and the coroner recommended that lighting be improved there; subsequently, that is what the local council did. I do not recall any major accidents on that section of road since those recommendations were put in place.
Sometimes we introduce legislation to this parliament that looks good and looks like it could solve a problem, but, like many laws that are introduced with good intent, we do not revisit them to see whether they have made a difference. We create a law because we want to reduce a type of behaviour. It would be wise sometime in the future, perhaps a couple of years’ time after, to look at whether – I do not know whether figures would be available for you to do this in a purposeful manner, but it would be good to see, whether by the introduction of these changes to the law, there has been a reduction in the number of pursuits.
Again, I am not sure whether the police would record these matters and whether there would be any statistical record kept of them so you could say whether this type of behaviour had been reduced after the introduction of this legislation, after X number of incidents had occurred over the previous few years.
The government says we should not be overregulated, and I am not putting this in that bracket, but one of the reasons we say we do not want to be overregulated is that we do not want legislation that is not doing what it was intended to do. In the future, I hope the government says, ‘Since the introduction of stiffer penalties there has been a reduction in the number of cases of pursuit by police, and the introduction of this bill is actually working’. That would be a good thing for the parliament to hear.
I fully support what the Attorney-General has brought forward. I fully support what the coroner has stated, that we need to discourage drivers from failing to stop or attempting to evade police, because if we can reduce the number of people killed, either in the vehicle being chased or other innocent people on the road, that would be a good thing.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, predictably and sensibly, it would appear all members of this House are supportive of this legislation, for which I am grateful to them. However, it is merely an extension of common sense.
Nothing in this legislation prevents or stilts the operation of those offences in the Motor Vehicles Act and Traffic Act relating to failure to stop; I cannot quite remember which act that is in. However, having made that observation, this creates an offence which is substantially different to the existing legislation for a number of reasons, not least of which is that other offences that pertain to it can be heard on complaint. They are, essentially, matters for the lower courts without any real redress or direction to the superior courts, which means they are dealt with as summary offences.
This offence is an insertion into the Criminal Code Act. There are only one or two offences in the Criminal Code Act that are automatically heard summarily; I think common assault is one of them. This offence is an indictable offence, so the matter proceeded with is heard on information and is dealt with as a crime by the courts. Conceivably, it is not beyond the realm of reality that these matters could end up being heard in the Supreme Court, and the sentencing capacity of the superior court outweighs the sentencing capacities, in a general discussion, of the inferior courts.
Essentially, the message is a very important one: to run away from a police officer when you are instructed to stop is no longer a simple offence; it is now a crime. We are anxious to impress upon Territorians that if they choose to do this they are engaging in conduct which will be taken very seriously indeed; it will be heard upon indictment and will be dealt with as a crime against the Criminal Code Act, not only an offence against the Traffic Act.
The second component is that summary offences are, essentially, still within the domain – I could stand corrected on this – of the Traffic Act and Motor Vehicles Act as matters that have all excuse provisions available to them under the operation of the Griffith model Criminal Code.
The Territory is transitioning to the model Criminal Code, and has created the Part IIAA excuse provisions which apply to offences that are Part IIAA compliant. This is one of those offences. In fact, the Northern Territory government has decided that all offences advanced through this Chamber from today will be Part IIAA compliant and, as a consequence of that, will be subject to Part IIAA of the Criminal Code Act.
That includes this particular offence. Therefore, you will find terminology describing this offence as one of strict liability, set apart from absolute liability which are, essentially, regulatory offences. Offences of strict liability have inherent in them a structure that makes it easier to prosecute.
The second component of this legislation – it will be subject to a minor committee stage amendment – is that we will make certain the burden of proof demonstrating a person was not running away from police does not lie with the police, but with the perpetrator. As a consequence of that, the strict liability offences that apply to this offence are in section 43AN of the Criminal Code Act. Essentially, it still attracts all defences other than the mistake of fact, and creates a framework of default elements – what used to be known as mens rea as a general principle – within the framework of a strict liability offence. That means there will be limited excuses available for a person who stands accused of this conduct, whereas under general principles of the current offences the scope for making excuses is broader. What we are doing, essentially, is making the offence more serious and the get out clauses much more difficult for a person to maintain.
Without going into too much further detail I will send this matter to the committee stage. Hopefully we can move through the committee stage quickly to make certain this becomes an important law in the Northern Territory, which will hopefully not only protect the motoring and pedestrian public of the Northern Territory in a much more effective way, but where a person chooses to drive away from a police officer they then suffer the full consequences of the law, not merely dealing with an issue of this nature as a summary offence.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Clauses 1 to 4 taken together and agreed to.
Clause 5:
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Chair, I move the amendment to Clause 5, standing in my name. This amendment came out of a discussion subsequent to the original bill coming before the House. The Office of Parliamentary Counsel and the Department of the Attorney-General and Justice met to discuss the legal and evidentiary burden associated with that and, as a result, it became apparent the intent indicated in the second reading speech about the placement of the burden of proof with regard to section 174FB(4) was not as clear as it should be. This is a straightforward tidy up to make certain we have the intent of the legislation captured in the legislation itself.
Whilst a court may, for the purposes of interpretation, turn its mind to the second reading speech, it is better to have it in a situation where it does not have to interpret a bill because there is doubt or possible doubt in it. For the sake of clarity and ensuring we do not need to give the courts anything other than the legislation, this House produces a touchstone for proper interpretation. This proposed amendment does nothing more than make certain the intent of this House and this parliament in relation to the evidentiary burden provisions, should a prosecution against this legislation be commenced.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.
Remainder of the bill, by leave, taken as a whole and agreed to.
Bill reported; report adopted.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from 26 March 2014.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, the formal description of the Darwin Rates Amendment Bill before us today reads as follows:
Those last three words, ‘for related purposes’, tell the real story of this bill. The explanatory memorandum accompanying the bill says the main purpose is to modernise the act and allow for flexibility into the future.
The real intent of the legislation, or the opportunity being seized by the minister, lies in the sting in the tail of this bill. We have before us a bill that would amend the Darwin Rates Act and broaden its scope to potentially apply across the Territory, not only the 52 km2 of land in Darwin where it currently applies. The bill aims to rename the Darwin Rates Act, for a special and limited purpose, as a new Northern Territory rates act to broaden the scope of the existing act to allow for the future rating of unincorporated land in the Northern Territory outside of existing local government areas. For instance, this includes Dundee Beach and Marrakai.
The purpose of this bill is also to update the Darwin Rates Act and align terminology and exemptions from rating with the reformed Local Government Act. It is also to enable the rating of unincorporated land to include rating and or a flat rate, as well as the current rate based on the unimproved capital value of land. This bill will also enable the minister to set an interest rate for overdue rates.
If passed today, legislative amendments in this bill will provide a mechanism for the minister for Local Government to amend, by regulation, the area in which this legislation applies, and give him capacity to introduce a new tax on landholders in those parts of the Territory not within an existing local government area.
Examples that come to mind include Dundee Beach, Marrakai, small parcels of land in the Cox Peninsula – outside of the Wagait council area – and Aboriginal outstations or homelands such as Bulgul. I use the word ‘tax’ because that is what it is. The Local Government Association of the Northern Territory is very clear about the purpose of rates, and describes it as follows on its website:
The opposition will not support this bill because it paves the way for this government to apply rates to unincorporated areas of the Northern Territory, those areas which lie outside of a local government area. In effect, it paves the way for taxation without representation and the application of land tax without a local elected or representative body that can be held to account for the rates being levied on property owners.
In his second reading speech the minister for Local Government said:
That may be true enough for the moment, but it is timely to remind members and Territorians that this is what the same minister said in this Assembly on 4 December 2013:
A few minutes later, the minister for Local Government was much clearer when he said:
This bill has been presented as a long overdue update of old legislation. We are told the focus is on a refresh of the Darwin Rates Act and better aligning it with the Local Government Act. As the minister explained in his second reading speech, the bill focuses on refreshing the legislation as it relates to the current area where it applies: the East Arm Logistics precinct in Darwin’s East Arm Port area, as well as some adjacent areas of Berrimah, Tivendale and Wishart.
These are areas of land that fall between the gazetted boundaries of the City of Darwin council and that of the City of Palmerston council, land set aside many years ago to help grow and develop new industry associated with the growing Port of Darwin. The arrangement is that the Darwin Rates Act allows the government to apply a rate on properties as a local government body might do if the land was incorporated as part of a local government area, with rates set in line with rates charged for light industrial areas by the City of Darwin or City of Palmerston councils.
The land of areas where the Darwin Rates Act applies is defined in Schedule 2 of the regulations of the Darwin Rates Act. I understand there are about 260 ratepayers currently paying rates set under that act, generating around $1.4m in revenue which goes to the Department of Local Government and Regions, with no direct link to the provision of local government services in that area. Let us be very clear, it is a tax on land.
Tellingly, the department’s annual report provides no information on what happens with that revenue and whether $1.4m is applied or not applied for the benefit of landowners and occupiers in the Darwin rates area. The current Darwin Rates Act allows the Minister for Local Government and Regions to declare a rate on the unimproved capital value of all rateable land within the prescribed area, and to declare a minimum rate for a parcel of land within a prescribed area.
As expected, the act outlines the arrangements for a penalty to apply for the late payment of rates, currently specified as 1.5% for each month or part of a month during which any part of a rate remains unpaid, and mechanisms available to recover unpaid rates. The current act also outlines land that is not rateable, for example, that which may be used for a school, library, a public reserve, sports grounds and churches.
Amendments include introducing the capacity to use different kinds of rating in the Darwin rates area and any expanded rates area outside of Darwin. These options include a flat rate, a differential rate where the rating differs according to the type of land that is being rated, and rating based on the value of land, whether that be a percentage of the unincorporated value, improved value, or some other form of valuation employed by the minister in setting these rates.
Further, the bill provides for a change in the interest penalty applied for overdue rates. The current act sets this at 1.5% for each month, or part of a month, when the rate remains unpaid. The bill before us proposes a change to the penalty rate more in line with those set by a municipal council. For example, the penalty rate set by the City of Darwin council is currently 18% per annum, accrued daily.
If this was only a bill, as the minister said in his second reading speech, to update old legislation and align definitions and rating exemptions with the Local Government Act, we could be more inclined to support for it. However, this bill before us opens the door for the minister, at any time, to expand the prescribed area by regulation and to unilaterally apply rates to landowners and occupiers of land outside of an existing local government area across the Territory.
Importantly, the bill includes a significant expansion of options for rating, meaning the minister will have a raft of options available to him to rate properties included in the prescribed areas. As the minister said in his second reading speech, the bill introduces ‘maximum flexibility’ for him as the minister, maximum flexibility to rate landholders in places like Dundee Beach, Marrakai and Channel Point. I understand, following a briefing from the department of Local Government’s CEO, there is something like 4000 lots of land in unincorporated areas across the Territory. The government’s own website lists these as including my home town of Nhulunbuy – the Nhulunbuy town site – Alyangula and over 19 000 km of land outside the Litchfield, Coomalie, Wagait, Belyuen, West Arnhem and Victoria Daly council areas. I understand there are about 2000 lots which could be rated in the 19 000 km of land I have just described. If that course of events was followed, as seems to be the clear intent of the minister, given his comments in the past, what happens with the revenue from this form of rate collection?
Debate suspended.
Continued from earlier this day.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, as I said prior to the lunchtime suspension, the opposition does not support this bill. At the time we suspended the House I was asking the minister what would happen with revenue raised from this collection.
Most Territorians would expect that before they were charged rates for their land they would have the opportunity to vote for a local council, entrusting elected councillors to represent them, make rating decisions and be accountable for council revenue.
Despite the argument that the bill seeks to align the Darwin Rates Act with the existing Local Government Act, the Darwin Rates Amendment Bill does not use exactly the same definition of land exempt from rates as that applied in the Local Government Act.
The bill proposes that on Aboriginal land or Aboriginal community living areas rates will apply if that land prescribed as rateable in the regulations is subject to a lease or licence for occupancy, or is used for commercial purposes.
‘Occupier’ in this context means a person who either jointly or alone has actual possession of the allotment, to the substantial exclusion of others.
This bill proposes that if this form of land is to be used for a commercial purpose it is only rateable if the person using it is someone other than the land trust or Aboriginal community living area association.
Thought has gone into this – an exemption from rates for land trust and Indigenous landowners’ commercial operations on Aboriginal land or Aboriginal community living areas. The Local Government Act definition does not exempt commercial operations conducted by a land trust or community living area associations from rates.
This may be a desirable device to help foster commercial activities on this land, but this is not explained, so perhaps when the minister speaks during this debate he could do so. If this principle has enough merit to be included in this bill, why was a like amendment not proposed in the Local Government Amendment Bill, particularly given the opportunity to do so when debated in earlier sittings? What does this bill mean for the potential rating of Aboriginal outstations like Bulgul, which I referred to earlier? Will it be argued at some future time that Bulgul is occupied to the substantial exclusion of others and that residents are potentially liable for rates?
I also note that while this bill provides for the rating of pastoral properties and mining tenements outside a local government area, it does not propose the same arrangements relating to this kind of land set out in the Local Government Act. For example, there is no specific reference to conditional rating that applies to this land in gazetted local government areas, and no requirement for consultation on the level of rate applying to these properties.
How will rates be struck? What valuation methodology will the minister use as the basis for rates linked to the value of land, remembering many of the residents of unincorporated land in the greater Darwin region are cash poor. Many of these residents are pensioners or retirees deliberately choosing, often out of necessity, a cheaper lifestyle living in the bush.
The Minister for Local Government and Regions has previously spoken in the Assembly about looking at rating some of the unincorporated areas which still exist in the Northern Territory. The departmental briefing on the bill was clear that this legislation was an opportunity to make this possible for future government decision-making. Word in local government circles is that the minister is actively looking at the mechanism of a flat rate that can be applied to landowners and occupiers of unincorporated areas, at least in the short term.
I query the level of consultation this bill has been through. The legislation was to come back on 15 May, but, clearly, the minister was not interested in staying late that night, so it was deferred. We could have had it before the House at the end of the parliamentary sitting day in June, but the minister wanted to get home early that night as well, so here we are, three months after it was scheduled.
That is plenty of time to consult with people. The member for Nelson will probably raise this in his contribution, but he asked a question of the minister in February, before the bill had been brought before the House. He said:
The minister’s answer included:
He then went on to say:
Madam Speaker, I am sure you are familiar with some of the stakeholders out that way, as the member for Daly is also. I know for a fact that members of the Dundee Progress Association, as of yesterday, had not been consulted about the proposed changes.
I should not be surprised; it is typical of this government that it goes ahead and does things without consulting people, letting them learn and cop it after the fact. We have seen it time and time again. We heard it during Question Time this morning in regard to planning and bulldozing trees in the rural area ahead of the new hospital. There was no consultation whatsoever. I would be interested to hear the minister detail and table dates and times of meetings he has had with stakeholders, including the Dundee Progress Association.
For all of the reasons I have outlined during this contribution to debate, we on this side cannot support this bill. We cannot support taxation without representation, which is what the amendments in this bill mean. We will not support a mechanism for the minister to apply rating across unincorporated areas of the Northern Territory, at least not without a comprehensive program of consultation with potential ratepayers and clear arrangements in relation to the link between any rates, local government services and local government representation.
The opposition opposes this bill.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I do not support this bill either, and I have not supported the Darwin rates area from day one. People may or may not know there is an area between Darwin and Palmerston; it is basically the East Arm area, including Berrimah Farm, the prison, the Tivendale Road industrial area and most of what you see when you go to the railway station and the East Arm Port. Most of that area is the East Arm development area and it comes under the Darwin Rates Act.
That allows the government to rate the area. Anyone who owns a block or lives there has to pay a rate to the government, rather than local government. You may also notice if you are coming in from there that all of a sudden there is a lot of third-party advertising on the left-hand side. The government seems to exclude that area from normal third-party advertising rules. That is a sign that you have left Palmerston and not reached Darwin.
People live in that area and own properties, and the normal process if you are going to tax people – a rate is a tax – is to at least give them some direct input into those decision-making processes. That is why when we have rates, we have local government, or the other way around. You have a representative on your council who you can talk to – or representatives, depending on whether you have wards or not – and who can give your point of view at a council meeting, especially when it comes to the imposition of rates in an area. That also gives you rights to talk about other things, such as the state of the roads, the need for facilities, families who require some recreation facilities, rubbish collection, etcetera. They are the sorts of things councils are about, and in the case of the East Arm Port area, people do not have that right.
There may not be many people living there, but an awful lot of people own land there. It does not matter, as with any other council, whether you live within your council area or not – you can reside or own property – you would expect to be able to tell council your feelings about rates. In this case you cannot do that, except to go to your local member – his area partly covers it – but it is not the same as local government. The bill being put forward does not really change that.
The main purpose of this bill is to modernise the act and allow for flexibility into the future. There is nothing wrong with modernising the act, because much of the legislation we have probably still has thees and thous in it, but the key, interesting part is that which says to ‘allow for flexibility for the future’. We are going to change this act so it does not only cover the East Arm Port area as we know it; this act is being cited as the Darwin Rates Amendment Bill 2014, and will allow the government to rate any unincorporated land in the Northern Territory.
The question, as I asked earlier this year and the minister responded – he gave us the impression that part of the reason for this act to be amended is to allow the government to look at rating land, especially in the larger Darwin regional area. That would be Marrakai, Douglas Daly and Dundee. Those areas presently do not have any local government and are not rated.
I have been to meetings before, especially in the Marrakai area, supporting the case that those areas should pay rates, but at the same time be part of a council. The government is saying they should be paying rates, but there is no guarantee they will be part of a council. That means exactly what the member for Nhulunbuy spoke about, to do with the famous Boston Tea Party issue. It is taxation without representation, something I thought the government would support.
This is very difficult. I had my baptism of fire in politics when I went to the Corroboree Hotel one Saturday morning and put the idea to people that it would be good if they belonged to Litchfield Shire. After all, the small blocks start only a few kilometres over the bridge, and it would make sense because they use the tip at Humpty Doo, the shops and their kids go to schools in Litchfield. That sounded good until I went to the meeting, and did I cop it! I copped it in a respectful way, but I copped it. Even though people at least thanked me for putting my thoughts forward, they would not have a bar of it.
I have been to at least two other meetings in Marrakai. The previous government had a consultant who held a couple of meetings there. They ranged from medium to fiery; there were those who totally opposed local government, but there were some who were supportive of it. The previous government did not use its head, and this government seems to be ducking its head. If you want local government, you do not go down this path of charging people rates, you use a carrot-and-stick approach. You need to set it straightaway and say, ‘Yes, you will have local government’. You need to be clear, upfront and brave enough to take the flak. In the process you need to be …
Mr Tollner: Brave enough to take the flak.
Mr WOOD: No, hang on, hear me through, member for Fong Lim. At least I had a go, but I did not have the power to offer people alternatives. One of the issues that was raised as a possibility for people to come onside at Marrakai was the provision of services, that is, community services such as a community hall or a football oval, a place the people do not have presently that would help that community feel like it is a community.
Dundee – bless the place – is the worst subdivision the CLP ever created in its life. I started in politics, basically, because of that subdivision. It was a subdivision which had no public land and no requirements to bituminise roads to small blocks. It was a developer’s heaven and, to some extent, it still is. What happened? Taxpayers have paid for Dundee through bitumen roads, power, having to lease land for a school, I think, and through leasing land for a rubbish transfer station. All the things you would expect good planning to have allowed for did not happen at Dundee.
Somewhere along the line, there must be overall control through local government, kept at the standard Litchfield Shire used to be at – I do not say it is there now – which was little regulation, flat rates and minimalist functions for the council, such as roads, reserves and rubbish, which is what Litchfield based itself on to keep the rates accordingly.
Douglas Daly is a difficult area. It does not have as many people living there. I am not saying this is easy, but this is not the way to go about convincing people they need local government. This is the stick approach – ‘Hey, up there in Marrakai, guess what we have for you this Christmas?’ The member for Daly would love this! ‘We have a package for you: a $650 flat rate this year. We are not sure what for, but we want you to come in line with the rest of the community.’ There will be many letters to the editor.
If you want to go down the path of convincing people that local government is important in these areas, you must use your brains. You must be willing to take a bit of stick, because you will get it. However, in the long term, it is a decision the government must eventually make, because to have some parts of the Territory not incorporated while other parts are is unfair to those who pay rates in those other areas. Many of those people not paying rates use facilities in those areas that are paying rates. We need to ensure it is balanced. That does not mean they have to pay the same rates, because you could have different stages of flat rates.
You could bring it in as it was for Litchfield. Litchfield’s rates at the beginning in, I think, 1985 were $55 for the southern part and $105 for the northern part. They came in low and were adjusted according to the area they represented. It was eventually decided they would both be the same; there was no point in having different rates.
The first thing you need to do is not worry about this particular legislation. Talk to Palmerston and Darwin about taking over the East Arm Port area. People might say, ‘Oh, they cannot manage it’. What needs managing? Most of the infrastructure is already there. I have already seen the greater kingdom of Palmerston plans. Not only do they have Howard Springs and Holtze in sight, they have the Holtze industrial area and part of the East Arm Port development where the prison is as well. That is in their plans.
However, we need to be a bit more sensible about this. We need to be talking to Darwin as well. One of those councils should take over the lead role in managing that area and collecting the rates for it. Why would the government want to duplicate a service that is the realm of local government? The government talks about cutting costs and then wants to be a rate collector. No, if you want to streamline things, give that job to a council. That is its job, what it gets paid for and how the administration works. It is not a job for mainstream government.
Let us sort East Arm out from a local government perspective, and let us look at the Waterfront; I believe a review is close as to whether the City of Darwin council takes it over. They should see, by now, whether it is feasible. The initial concern about the development of the Waterfront was that it would cost them a lot more money to maintain it because it is in a filled and industrial area. Perhaps those discussions need to be taken into account.
You must do the hard yards. Minister, you stood in front of people in Peppimenarti, who all said, ‘Yes, we want our local government’, and you thought that was terrific. That is the easy one. You had to pay some money, but everyone loved you because you stuck with your election promise. This is the harder side of the job. This is where people do not particularly want local government, whereas, to be fair to the rest of the community that pays rates, they should be part of the system. You have to devise a way to do it which will show those people there is an advantage to being part of local government. As I said, it could be facilities; upgrading roads; sporting facilities for the kids, such as a basketball court; or maybe acquiring some decent land that can be for future community use, so you show you are willing to put some money into that area to help the community.
This act is a waste of time because I know what it is intended to do, and it is not the right way to go about it. I do not disagree with modernising an act, but it should be taken off the books at the right time. Talk to Palmerston, Darwin, Dundee, Douglas Daly and maybe Coomalie – because they are close to that area – Litchfield and Marrakai. Also, be willing to take some pain but, at the same time, be clever enough to offer people something which may encourage them to think twice about rejecting the offer to be part of local government.
I understand the purpose of the bill is to modernise the act, but the flexibility for the future is the wrong future. It should be done differently, and I am interested, when the minister gives his response, to find out if he has held a meeting at the Corroboree Park hotel with the Marrakai people. Has he held a meeting at Dundee Lodge and asked people what they think? Has he been to Fleming and discussed it with the Douglas Daly people? Has he had a chance to talk to the Palmerston and Darwin city councils about the option of them taking over that area? It is more than just this act, there is a bigger picture which must be looked at, and this is too narrow. We need to be discussing this issue in a much broader context. This will not achieve anything but grief in certain parts of some electorates in the Northern Territory.
Mr HIGGINS (Daly): Madam Speaker, I have my doubts about this legislation. As a member of this party I said I would only support this legislation going through on the proviso there is no plan to implement any rates in any of the unincorporated areas in this term of government. I take the minister on his word that will not occur.
I will go through the different areas with the member for Nelson. I agree about Corroboree. I held a meeting at Corroboree about a month ago and one of the issues raised …
Mr Wood: You are alive?
Mr HIGGINS: Yes, it was at Corroboree Park Tavern, and one issue which arose was local government. During that meeting I said I would not support any rating there until there was much more discussion, but I also said they need to set up something along the lines of a progress association. My electorate officer, with that in mind, has been helping them do that.
In the last month I have attended a meeting at Cox Peninsula in the last month to look at the expansion of boundaries. I passed the same comment, which was that I do not support the introduction of rates on unincorporated land without further consultation.
I do not have clear in my mind the question the member for Nelson raised about expanding Litchfield, Coomalie and Wagait, and picking up Belyuen. I am not clear where that should go, and I want time to think about what you would do with those. I do not see that this piece of legislation stops us performing that consultation, but I have said I do not support the introduction of rates on unincorporated land prior to holding a consultation. My period of consultation would be to the next election.
Dundee is a very complex area – the member for Nelson is nodding his head. Dundee is not one area, it is multiple areas and they do not necessarily all agree or hold the same views. When I was first elected, a final report was released on local government in that area, which had been commissioned by the previous government. The final recommendation of the report was divided. Some people knew they would have to go this way eventually; they did not want to do it now, but one thing that came across in that report very clearly is that they wanted a lot more consultation and input into it.
More recently there has been a lot of turbulence within the progress association and, I think, only in the last couple of weeks it has elected a new president or Chair. But I can assure everyone in this House that every meeting I have been to there where it has been raised, I have not changed my view. I would not support the introduction of rates until such time as there was widespread consultation.
It should be fair on everyone. If we are to introduce any sort of tax – whatever we want to call it – it must be the same for everyone. This is the issue I raised with these people, and I said they would eventually have to pay some rates. I agree with the member for Nelson when he says you can have varying rates depending on block size, the value and the services you are receiving. But I make the big distinction between the tax or rates portion and the service
Mr Wood: I support the flat rate, not variable rate.
Mr HIGGINS: A flat rate. These figures are probably wrong, but the minister can check; my last inquiry showed the rubbish tip – it is a transfer station – costs about $150 000 a year, so if any of his staff are listening they might want to check that. That is a hell of a lot of money the government is paying for a service, for which the people at Dundee do not contribute. It will come, but there must be a lot more consultation.
Coomalie was to be amalgamated. It is reasonably economically viable and has recently asked for an extension of its boundaries. I fully support that because it puts it on a better footing. Wagait Shire is still one of the old community government councils, as is Belyuen. I think I have said previously what a dog’s breakfast it is when it comes to councils, and this is why. I think Belyuen has been in administration for at least five, if not seven, years and there are some diverse views there.
People at Belyuen think they should be taken over by Darwin, Wagait wants to take them over and Coomalie wants to take over Wagait. Litchfield wants to take over Coomalie and Coomalie wants to take over Bulgul …
Mr Wood: And Channel Point.
Mr HIGGINS: Channel Point. It is not a simple problem which will be overcome by introducing a piece of legislation. I see the legislation as something that possibly could be used in two years’ time. I am not 100% convinced it would be used, or even needed, when we get there. It is not because these all fit into my seat; I agree that everyone should contribute in some way, but they should be consulted. We cannot come along with a big hammer, whack them on the head and say, ‘Well, stiff bickies; that is what is going to happen’.
The fact the electorate could get rid of me quite easily if I went the wrong way is not a consideration of mine. I am a lot older; I might have two terms if I am lucky, but I would rather be here doing something for the people of my electorate. You do not come into politics at 58 years of age as a career. I came into this House to try to achieve something, and shires were part of the problem.
I have my hands full setting up West Daly and making sure it is bedded in. I cannot spend all of my time setting up a progress association at Marrakai and consulting with it. I cannot deal with two councils that are already there, a third that is under administration, plus all these other things for something which will not do a hell of a lot for government. I am not convinced we will make hundreds of thousands of dollars out of this. I do not think it would ever cover the cost of some of the bridges being built there. It will definitely not cover the cost of bituminising some of the roads. It may cover the cost of the rubbish transfer.
It is a bit like the separation of Power and Water into separate entities. I supported that legislation, but I do not support the privatisation of Power and Water. I do not support selling it, and I have made that view quite clear. With this legislation, I am not too sure; I will see how we go at the end as to whether I support it or not.
I wanted to put my views on the record. I hope they are quite clear and I have not left any questions out. The issue of Aboriginal land and the rating of that is a different issue, but when I talk about everyone contributing, that is a factor which has to be thrown into the mix as well. However, I will not start that debate now.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for Local Government for bringing important legislation to this House. Nothing can be more important than passing laws in this place, and, as we have heard so far, it is a bit of a ‘just trust me’ scenario. You learn from everyone every day in this place. I have already had a casual conversation with the minister for Local Government, reminding him that
I learned a lot from him; he sat here just over two years ago, in opposition. I was on that side of the Chamber and I was bringing in major legislation around creating a residential building industry insurance scheme to protect Territory families from losing all their savings should the builder go broke, disappear or become insolvent. It was major legislation and the debate went on and on. The minister for Local Government, the member for Fong Lim, challenged me seriously in that debate about how much it would cost. At that stage we were negotiating with an industry fund to keep the costs minimal and to receive maximum protection for Territory families. I said in debate that we were working through that, and he slammed me with, ‘You cannot tell us how much it costs’. He then introduced this concept of how important legislation is and that it cannot be passed on the ‘just trust me’ factor. It does not compute. This is Territory law, so, minister, I am afraid you have brought legislation to this House that has very shaky foundations because it is all based on the ‘just trust me’ factor.
It is a little more deceptive, even with the name. When we talk about the Darwin Rates Amendment Bill to amend the Darwin Rates Act we are then introduced to a very short clause which says ‘for related purposes’ in inverted commas, because they relate to ‘just trust me’. Essentially, what I take out of that is this bill will relate to all unincorporated land across the Northern Territory, therefore, it has a direct implication for the electorate of Barkly.
I have two questions. Where does King Ash Bay stand in this and what about those blocks of land in the Sir Edward Pellew Group of Islands that were sold off by the CLP? Where do the landholders of those two parcels sit with this legislation? It is very unclear. I am not able to give those constituents a direct answer, and they have very direct questions. Unfortunately, we are at the stage where this government wants to see clear passage of this legislation through the House, and there are more unanswered questions than there are posed. That is why the opposition has said to put the brakes on, and that we cannot support this.
It was very interesting to listen to the member for Daly’s very pragmatic contribution to debate. Is a pragmatic approach to dealing with this legislation necessary now? Let us involve consultation, let us go back to the constituency and leave it to the next election. There is a member of the government with a very pragmatic offering to the member for Fong Lim, the minister. It seems to me to be perfect common sense in this case, where there are so many unanswered questions and where it does not only apply to Darwin, but can be applied across the Northern Territory. It relates to constituents in Barkly, as well as Daly, Nelson and Goyder. We could also include the seat of Greatorex; I am very interested to hear from the member for Greatorex on this subject during debate.
It is, essentially, an opportunity for a Liberal government to apply a new tax. If you want to call it for what it is, it is a new tax. Unfortunately, at the moment in this country we have a federal Liberal government and a Northern Territory Liberal government that have broken promises in a major way. Many of those broken promises relate to new revenue-raising streams; new taxes essentially, under the surface, this is a new Liberal tax.
You have to ask yourself why. I appreciate the difficulties in own-source revenue within the Northern Territory; it is a massive jurisdiction with a very small constituency and it is very difficult to raise the Territory’s own-source revenue. Why would the Minister for Local Government and Regions be so intent on this new tax? It obviously relates to the reform program in local government. Whilst there have not been major changes to that reform of local goverment, there has been one major boundary change. That is the creation of the West Daly Shire, which now must be putting serious pressure on the budget. We advised the government, in opposition, to be careful going down this road – there was very serious debate – because you might find the cost pressures of breaking up the Vic Daly at this stage, without real economic modelling, could incur hidden costs.
I am suggesting that is what has happened, and the minister is looking at this opportunity in unincorporated land across the Northern Territory to start creating a new stream of own-source revenue. There is a member within government, the member for Daly, who is very concerned about his own constituency and brings a good, tripartisan approach to this debate.
The ‘just trust me’ factor will not work, and this passage of legislation on the ‘just trust me’ principle – I compliment you on having taught me that – will not apply. It is not a good base for legislation passing through this House; it will not be a good outcome.
Let us look at some of the opportunities within the legislation. The Darwin Rates Act talks about the Darwin area, and then we talk about the East Arm logistics precinct and the Darwin port. In the nature of this legislation that is a good way forward. Being a previous member of the Labor government I had a very active stake in seeing the more contemporary elements of that precinct develop. We can talk about the duplication of Berrimah Road, the railway overpass and the Marine Supply Base, opened yesterday by the Country Liberal Party government. We can talk about all those developments in the East Arm logistics precinct and those businesses and buildings stepping out of the ground; it is a rapidly growing industrial area of Darwin. It will become a major revenue stream in regard to the proposal of this act.
It represents the essence of what the minister is trying to do. Having been involved in those developments and the visionary and pragmatic work of the former Labor government in the duplication of Berrimah Road, the railway overpass into the East Arm logistics precinct, the Marine Supply Base, the whole concept of servicing that offshore oil and gas industry and the Land Development Corporation and its incredible work growing that industrial precinct, I know that area will generate significant revenue for government in regard to the essence of this act.
We then go into the unknown and the questions. The minister will be able to respond; I am very interested to know, on behalf of constituents who live at King Ash Bay, where they sit within this legislation. Will all those blocks on the Sir Edward Pellew Group of Islands within the Barkly electorate suddenly be burdened with rates? Will they suddenly have new taxes on their livelihood? Will they suddenly have this new imposition on their cost of living? If that is the case, the counter argument will be about which services correspond with this new tax. If we talk about King Ash Bay, we will be talking about rubbish disposal, roads, fire and health services. These are all elements the minister provided in his speech when he spoke about the Dundee area. These services are there, already operating.
He believes:
It is very clear they will be charged for government services provided. However, in all other unincorporated areas, what economic modelling has been done and what is the reality of providing services? The balance will be, for the constituents I represent in those areas and across the Territory, what will come first, the charges or the services? Should they not come together? For future planning, should we not be undertaking economic modelling around those unincorporated areas? Should we not, as the member for Daly said, be having this conversation within the next two years?
In regard to good democracy, would it be better to use the ultimate in democracy by taking this to the next election having completed all economic modelling and that conversation with constituents, with people fully informed and knowing the territory they are moving into? We will have to wait and see, and the minister will no doubt respond. I am very interested to hear what he has to say.
This has been put as refreshing legislation, but we have heard enough in the Chamber to see it is not only about refreshing the legislation, that it has far more implications, and a number of speakers, including the opposition and Independent – the concerning clich about taxation without representation.
There are elements above and beyond pure service delivery; it is about governance. It is about having the Northern Territory community involved, which is what people deserve and expect. The member for Daly has placed a good time frame on dealing with these issues around services, governance and defining the unincorporated areas through economic modelling.
That is probably a good two-year project for a minister and their team to pull together; a logical conclusion would be to then bring it back to the House. As I said, I am a member of the opposition and we cannot support this legislation and its passage through parliament. There are too many unanswered questions. Good legislation does not pass through this House on trust alone. I was taught that lesson very well and that should apply to both sides.
I am very interested in the minister’s response to all speakers on this bill.
Mr TOLLNER (Local Government and Regions): Madam Speaker, I thank all those who have contributed to this debate; I have enjoyed listening to the comments.
If I have this correct in my mind, the main concern Labor has is about taxation without representation. Is that correct?
Ms Walker: If you had been in the Chamber you would have heard it all, minister.
Mr TOLLNER: There are a range of concerns, but the one that has been coming back to me constantly is this idea of taxation without representation. That is one of the reasons I have been keen to promote this legislation, because I hope people start voicing their concerns about taxation without representation and start calling for a local government in their area if they are in an unincorporated area.
It is my view, and I think it is the member for Nelson’s view, that if we have it right it should not matter where you live. Rates are a fact of life and if you want local government services you should pay for them. The member for Nelson has a concern with how we are consulting, etcetera, but his view is similar to mine, that is, if we are to have local government in the Northern Territory – it is probably fundamental to ask if we want local government in the Northern Territory. I cannot help thinking there are a number of people in this place who do not believe we should have local government in the Northern Territory because they do not believe certain people in our community should pay for those services.
Taxation without representation is an interesting concept the opposition has come up with. It is something we can all agree to and believe in, but look at their actions in government. They were nothing like they are in opposition. When Labor was in government only two years ago, it created the Darwin Waterfront, which it banged on about as one of its great achievements. Guess what? At the Darwin Waterfront, residents cannot vote in Darwin city council elections. Why is that? Because the former Labor government excluded them from the Darwin city council area.
Those people do not pay rates to the Darwin city council, they cannot vote in Darwin city council elections, but they do pay rates to the Darwin Waterfront Corporation. It is a corporation set up by the previous Northern Territory government and is 100% owned by the Northern Territory government, so people who pay rates at the Darwin Waterfront pay them directly to the Northern Territory government, something Labor says it is now opposed to.
It is not that long ago you were in government. Make up your mind! Do you support the Darwin Waterfront Corporation or not? It would be interesting to understand whether Labor has now backed away from the way it acted on the Darwin Waterfront Corporation, because there is no representation at the Waterfront if you own a unit there. You have to take with a grain of salt some of the comments we hear from the Labor Party. I will not tar the member for Nelson with that brush; I cannot remember whether he supported the Darwin Waterfront not being in the Darwin city council area or not.
Mr Wood: You were in Canberra.
Mr TOLLNER: I could have been in Canberra, that is true. I am interested to know whether the member for Nelson supported the government’s efforts to excise that area out of Darwin city council land or not.
Another concern is about not changing boundaries. Mr Deputy Speaker, I remember a couple of months ago when you stood in this place, very concerned about the extraordinary powers the minister for Local Government was giving himself with the ability to change boundaries and make rulings in relation to what we were doing at the Victoria Daly council. It was so extreme – ‘The minister can, with just a stroke of the pen, change the boundaries all over the Northern Territory. It does not take any effort at all.’ I said at the time I would not use these extraordinary powers I bequeathed on myself irresponsibly. They would only be used for the de-amalgamation of the Victoria Daly council.
Everyone was very concerned then, but the legislation was passed. Lo and behold, here we are now, and I have calls saying, ‘Change this boundary, change that boundary’, etcetera. I was stunned to read in the paper the other day of the member for Nelson complaining about a new suburb called Holtze, which, as I understand the article said, government and Palmerston council were conspiring to take from Litchfield Council. I do not know where the member for Nelson got this information from, but I have never had a conversation with Palmerston council about it taking over Holtze.
Palmerston City Council seems to think it is a done deal, but, as the minister, I have never been consulted; I have never talked to them about taking that land over. There is no done deal. The reality is, member for Nelson, I will not be changing any boundaries anywhere until at least after the next election.
I have had Coomalie lobbying me for extra land, I have had the Litchfield shire council asking for extra boundaries, I have had a range of councils – Palmerston wants to take over the Darwin rates areas, Darwin wants to take over the Darwin rates area. There is all of this static in the background.
The reality is I am not changing any boundaries. You got your little headline in the paper. That was all wonderful, but it was completely without truth. I have no intention of giving Holtze to Palmerston at this stage. I have not talked to any of them.
Ms Fyles: At this stage?
Mr TOLLNER: I have not had a conversation – here we go, we have the member for Nightcliff chiming in. How is your imaginary island going? Are you still protesting? Maybe the member for Nelson is taking the same tactic. He is promoting imaginary boundary changes.
Mr Wood: No, check the NT News Monday.
Mr TOLLNER: Check the NT News Monday. All of these things are all imaginary, but the opposition and the Independent will happily say this is what is really happening and there is a great conspiracy going on, a great conspiracy against Litchfield Council and that we are trying to steal land from Litchfield. That is not true.
Mr Wood: I did not say you were.
Mr TOLLNER: I think you referred to the government. That would refer to the executive arm of government. That would refer to the Minister for Local Government and Regions, who would be me. I am not aware of any discussions I have been involved in anywhere agreeing to any boundary changes, apart from the Victoria Daly de-amalgamation ...
Mr Wood: Read the NT News.
Mr TOLLNER: Member for Nelson, I know you were very careful in the way you spoke about the Victoria Daly de-amalgamation. In your heart of hearts, you are probably a supporter of it, having sat on the transition committee and seen the way everything was done reasonably above board. There were many doubting Thomases prior to us doing that. Many people looked at us out of the corner of their eyes and thought, ‘I wonder what these guys are really up to?’ However, as the member for Nelson has realised, there are no funny games; we are trying to get on with business. We want to do what people want to happen.
In relation to how we are changing the Darwin Rates Act, it will be called the Territory Rates Act. I have been very upfront in saying why. We all support the principle, I think, that local government should exist in the Northern Territory. If we support that principle, then we should occupy our minds with how we pay for it.
At the moment – I find it difficult to put any other word on it – there is a number of freeloaders in the system. Freeloaders are people who, largely, live in unincorporated areas who, quite rightly as the member for Nelson pointed out, use services in Darwin, Palmerston and other municipal areas which they do not pay for. They are paid for by the ratepayers of those communities. Meanwhile, the ratepayers of those communities receive no services when they visit many unincorporated areas. If you want local government services, you should pay for local government services.
I have been very upfront about rating Aboriginal land. Similarly, I have much empathy with the views of people in Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs when they say, ‘We pay rates in our communities, and we have people coming in from outside communities who do not pay rates. What is more, if I want to go to their community, I cannot even access it. I have to get a permit to get on to that land. Whilst my community is freely accessible, theirs are not.’ I agree that Indigenous Territorians are the ones who most want local government services because local government, for them, is the most important tier of government, as it is the most accessible. We should bear that in mind.
However, if we want financially sustainable local government in the Northern Territory, we have to find a model, somehow, that makes it sustainable.
It was interesting to listen to the member for Barkly talk about the Victoria Daly and West Daly Regional Councils not being sustainable. Very few of the regional councils in the Northern Territory are financially sustainable. There was a hullaballoo a couple of weeks ago about this Deloitte report; it said local government is financially unsustainable. My response to that is, whoopee! It has been unsustainable since the year dot.
When you have other Australians having to pay the rates for people in outlying and remote areas, it is obviously unsustainable. People on that land should be paying their way, the same as other people in other parts of the country pay their way. Until we come to that realisation, it will be very difficult to make local government sustainable in these regional areas. I am very keen to see land councils, land trusts and local government work constructively together to find a way to make local government financially sustainable into the long term. Local government is incredibly important to people living in the bush and I want to support that.
Since coming to government we have done our bit to make local government more sustainable. In my capacity as Treasurer, I have overseen more than $10m in additional money going into the local government area, $5m to make councils more sustainable and an additional $5m was given to support local authorities and the works they do in their local communities.
The Labor government, when it created super shires, took away the people’s voice and ability to deliver anything in their local communities by centralising local government. We have tried to decentralise it whilst maintaining economies of scale through shared service agreements, etcetera. We have tried to put local government back into the communities through the initiation of local authorities. Having local authorities on the ground gives people a real say in their communities. Not only do they have a real say, but with that contribution of $5m distributed amongst local authorities they have real purpose and can make decisions, spend money in their communities and improve services. To suggest we are not strengthening local government is wrong.
I find the idea of taxation without representation from Labor as a reason to oppose this laughable, given the fact it set up the Darwin Waterfront and excluded it from Darwin city council. I find the fact rates go directly to the Northern Territory government from the Darwin Waterfront completely at odds with what they have said today.
The member for Nhulunbuy might believe we have short memories in this House. Perhaps we do, but they certainly last more than a couple of years. We remember the Labor government excising the Darwin Waterfront from Darwin city council land and charging rates that went directly to government. There is a little hypocrisy there.
Renaming the Darwin Rates Act as the Territory Rates Act is due. There are areas which require refreshing, as the member for Barkly pointed out, but there is also a need to change it up. Member for Barkly, this may well interest you: because of our extensive land release program there will very shortly be another 3200 dwellings built, which will come under the current Darwin Rates Act area. I will say that again, member for Barkly, so you do not miss it: another 3200 dwellings will be constructed in the Darwin Rates Act area; that is the area between Darwin and Palmerston …
Mr McCarthy: I know that. They are the same ones we were working on.
Mr TOLLNER: That is right, but it needs to change because if we build 3200 new dwellings there we can only currently rate them as we rate the 260 industrial properties in that area.
We are keen, member for Nelson, to ensure we have a system where we can vary those rates, because we do not want to charge new houses the same rates as we charge industrial ratepayers in the area. We can have variable rates. There is no suggestion at this stage that we will instigate rates on any other unincorporated areas. My view, contrary to the member for Barkly, who talks about $650 per year for somebody living in Marrakai, is that we would charge them a nominal rate, perhaps $50 per year, so they become used to the idea they are living in a rateable area, and nothing more than that. We hope the idea of taxation without representation will take hold in some of these unincorporated areas and we have those people calling to be part of a local government area, rather than resisting it.
It is an interesting concept the member for Nelson and others talk about when they say, ‘There has been no consultation, you should talk to people about raising rates’. I asked my good friend the Minister for Education, ‘What if I came to you and said that I want to charge you an extra $500 per year in rates. What would you say?’ I cannot repeat what he said, but it was basically no. I said, ‘Well, what if it was $100 per year?’ He said no again. I then asked him about charging an extra $20 per year, and he was not interested.
That is consultation and it is fair to say, member for Nelson, when you ask someone to pay something they are not currently paying, they will not want to. Your response, generally, is the same.
If, however, we gave them the idea they are paying something and they might want to have a say in how that money is being spent, as opposed to not having a say, then the idea of local government taking hold in some of these areas becomes much easier. Ultimately, member for Nelson, your idea of local government and my idea of local government are very similar. We have different views on how we might get there, but the end goal is the same.
With other members opposite I am not sure, because I do not know whether they believe in local government or not, whether they think the Northern Territory should have a system of local government or it is a pain in the neck and something we would ditch if we possibly could. I have no dislike for people with that view. There is a number of people in our community, probably a majority of people in our community, who think we are over-governed and one level of government should go. That Labor wants to see the back of local government would not put it at odds with many people in the community.
However, whilst probably in some places, such as the urban areas of Darwin, we have a few too many politicians, etcetera, when you get into remote communities, where there are sparse numbers of people and few politicians, local government takes on a level of importance not seen in the townships and cities of the Northern Territory.
Mr Wood: I move we dissolve Fong Lim.
Mr TOLLNER: Member for Nelson, we should have the debate as to whether we dissolve Fong Lim and Nelson. It would be very interesting to understand the views of people in this place, whether they believe we are over-governed and what level of government we should get rid of, whether it is the second or third tier. Ultimately, they are debates for another time and place.
My bill is about the Darwin Rates Act, how we can change it to make sure it is contemporary and will meet the needs of an expanding community and also meet the needs of the minister for Lands and Planning, who wants to build more than 3000 dwellings in the current Darwin rates area. That is fundamentally what this bill is about.
As I said, there should not be any surprises in this for anybody in this room. I have been upfront and open about this. It has been a bold step to suggest my desire to see rates paid on Indigenous land. It is a bold step to say there should be rates paid on other unincorporated areas around the Territory. Having said that, the government does not intend in any way to utilise this legislation to raise further revenue, etcetera.
We are currently focused solely on the Darwin Rates Act area, which is the area between Darwin and Palmerston, but it does give us flexibility in future terms, rather than this term, to start discussing and looking at ways of having people in unincorporated areas pay something towards the services they receive, and to start talking about how we might be able to levy rates on Aboriginal land where services are most needed and where people demand the most representation.
The Assembly divided:
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time
Mr TOLLNER (Local Government and Regions) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I want to talk about something the minister raised during the second reading debate about the rating of Aboriginal land. Whilst I am not opposed to that, if you go down this path we ought to solve the issue of road ownership. The member for Arafura, the other day, mentioned roads on Bathurst Island.
Generally speaking, local government looks after public roads. One of the issues that has concerned me for a long time is that someone has to sort this out. There are roads in Aboriginal communities which require permits, therefore, technically, they are not public roads. There are other roads which are gazetted, therefore, they are public roads, so when you talk about rating people and bringing people into the local government arena you cannot speak about rates alone; you need to look at formalising the jurisdiction of a local government council area. I have been concerned for a long time that local government funds are spent on what are, technically, private roads.
As I said before, once upon a time they spent money on private roads on cattle stations, but I understand that has stopped. A road on a cattle station is the responsibility of that cattle station; I stand corrected if I am wrong in that area.
I thought I would note during the third reading debate that if you are looking at the issue of Aboriginal land, one matter is consultation, which is what we were talking about before, and the second is working through the issues that, obviously, will be complex because you have different leasing arrangements in these communities. You have land trusts and land rights legislation, but you also have the issue of what local governments’ responsibilities are on Aboriginal land which is, technically, private land.
I am not necessarily making judgments on those issues, but I hope if the government is considering rating it looks at a much broader vision of what its intentions are. You have already developed a new council at West Daly.
You mentioned my name in despatches; I am not against it and I have never been against smaller councils. My issue has been around the viability of those councils. The Deloitte report mentioned that it will cost an extra $2m to $3m to run that council. My argument was that government should have looked at the viability before it put its hand up for splitting a council because, regardless of whether you love these councils, they already have the administration and processes set up to run them. I thought I would mention that to you.
The other issue you raised was about whether the government was to take over Holtze. I refer to an article in the NT News, where two councillors from Palmerston had spoken to the Chief Minister, and he referred them to the minister for Lands and Planning, who is also the minister for changing names. There were two issues involved. People were already presuming this would be a Palmerston suburb, therefore, there would be a name change. The second is there was a map already issued showing a fairly large land grab that some people in Palmerston think would be appropriate to take away from Litchfield Shire. I have not mentioned you in despatches because I use the article from the NT News as the basis of my complaint. All I am saying is that people on that side of the highway should hold their horses. There is a lot more discussion about the hospital than worrying about whether Palmerston wants to take over the boundaries.
Mr Deputy Speaker, these were issues which needed a response.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, the Country Liberal Party was elected by the people of the Northern Territory on 25 August 2012 to lead the Territory out of the mess created by those opposite. We promised the people we would make the Territory a better place for everyone, and we are succeeding. Two years ago, the Country Liberals made 174 election commitments, and it is my pleasure to inform the House that 98% of those have been actioned. More than half have already been delivered and the remainder are being dealt with. Unlike those opposite, we track our promises and the results. We do not fudge the facts like the Labor Party; we make a commitment, plan it and deliver it. It is open, honest and accountable government at work.
We promised to reduce debt and we have. When the CLP came to power the Territory’s coffers were bare. The finances had been run down to such a point that it was difficult to fund any new initiatives to rebuild the economy. The Labor Party, with then Treasurer Delia Lawrie, had done its best to bankrupt the Territory. However, in May this year we delivered a net operating surplus a full two years ahead of schedule. By reducing waste, tightening out belts and staying focused on the outcomes, we have reduced the debt burden on the Territory by $1.3bn and reduced interest payments to service that debt by $55m a year. Let me repeat that: we have reduced our interest payments by more than $55m a year, or $4.5m per month. This is an outstanding achievement allowing us to get on with business and build a future which generates wealth and jobs for everyone.
We promised to plan for the future and we have. The Northern Territory government has taken the lead in the push to develop northern Australia. The Territory is ideally placed to supply more goods and services to Asia and the rest of Australia, and we are building on that for the future. We have opened the Northern Australia Development Office to spearhead the Territory’s role in this development, and laid the foundation for what is likely to become the longest period of sustained economic growth in the Territory’s history. We are working with our counterparts in Western Australia and Queensland, as well as the federal government, and I am pleased to say we are right on track. By unlocking and developing the full potential of northern Australia we are creating prosperity and jobs for everyone. We are increasing economic output, exports, improving our balance of trade and ensuring the Territory takes its place as one of Australia’s top economies.
This government is keeping its commitment to consult with Territorians about how they want to see the Territory grow. We held community meetings in Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and Nhulunbuy earlier this year, and feedback was extremely positive. We have just completed regional summits in Katherine and Tennant Creek, with feedback from both, as well as meetings with local residents who really appreciated being involved in the process and having their say about development of northern Australia.
Questions from the floor were wide-ranging and included live exports, land tenure, telecommunications and agribusiness. There is recognition that the Territory’s infrastructure must be improved to attract new development and that our northern Australia development plan is the way to make that happen.
I thank everyone who attended those forums, including ministers Westra van Holthe and Conlan, who did a fantastic job in Katherine and Tennant Creek, explaining this government’s plan for the future. Our northern Australia development website has been viewed almost 12 000 times; that is an average of 40 new visitors a day. The Northern Australia Development Office has hosted meetings with more than 650 people since opening in May, working with organisations such as the Northern Territory Seafood Council, the International Business Council, the Planning Commission and the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association to ensure the success of the development of the north.
The Country Liberals plan for the development of northern Australia will secure the Territory’s economic future well into this century. It encompasses the entire Territory and will create jobs, business opportunities and prosperity for all. We are succeeding where others have failed.
We promised to grow the economy and we have. The Territory’s economy grew by 5.6% to $19.9bn in 2012-13. This was the highest growth rate of all jurisdictions and well above the national growth rate of 2.6% and, according to CommSec, at the moment we are 36% above the average. Deloitte Access Economics forecasts that the Territory’s growth will continue to outpace other jurisdictions for the foreseeable future. In the year to March 2014, engineering construction work in the Territory increased by 41.6% to $4.7bn, the highest annual level on record and the highest growth rate of all jurisdictions. The Territory has also recorded 14 consecutive months of growth in trend retail trade turnover to June 2014.
We have established the Office of Asian Engagement, Trade and Investment within the Department of the Chief Minister to support Territory firms in building new business relationships and seizing the best opportunities in the region. Cabinet is now the principal mechanism governing Asian relations and trade matters to ensure they are managed efficiently across all government portfolios.
Darwin is closer to the capital cities of Timor-Leste, Papua New Guinea, Indonesia and Brunei than it is to Canberra. Asia consumes more than 50% of the world’s total food production and that demand is increasing rapidly.
By 2030, Asia will represent 66% of the global middle-class population and 59% of middle-class consumption. China alone has to feed 21% of the world’s population on 8.5% of the world’s arable land and is losing 2.5 million hectares each year to urbanisation. That creates enormous opportunities and the potential for increased agribusiness and exports, with a demand for a greater range and supply of quality produce.
As they become wealthier, our northern neighbours are demanding a greater range and supply of quality produce, and this presents the Territory with a unique opportunity. We are one of the few places in Australia with a capacity to significantly increase food for export production. We are investing $3.75m to promote international trade and Asian engagement to create more investment opportunities for the Territory.
This includes the appointment of a Northern Territory Commissioner for Indonesia and ASEAN, based in Jakarta, to strengthen our relationships in the region. We are promoting the Territory as a jurisdiction of choice for investors in developing new business links within the region via a suite of online investment guides written in Bahasa Indonesia, Mandarin, Japanese and English.
We are exploring opportunities to diversify workforce and migration strategies to support small businesses and targeted local industries. We are removing red tape and encouraging new investment.
I have travelled to Timor-Leste, Indonesia, Singapore, Japan, China and Vietnam to build on our strong links within the region. These talks have already opened up other potential industries, including the live cattle buffalo trade to Vietnam, with the potential to sell up to 10 000 head per annum.
The Territory is expending its cattle exports by connecting with new markets in the region and will soon diversify into packaged beef when the AACo abattoir comes on line later this year.
We have signed memorandums of understanding with Ho Chi Minh City and Haiphong to promote trade and investment with both of these major Vietnamese cities. A trilateral agreement is being developed by the national governments of Timor-Leste, Indonesia and Australia to build on the strong links between these three countries.
With the Northern Territory taking a central role in this relationship, a ministerial forum between Timor-Leste and the Northern Territory is scheduled for December 2014.
It was my pleasure to welcome a record number of participants and exhibitors to Northern Territory Resources Week at a reception last night. NT Resources Week includes the South East Asia Australia Offshore and Onshore Conference – SEAAOC – as part of the inaugural Building the Territory Conference. All four halls of the Darwin Convention Centre are being used for the first time to accommodate almost 200 exhibition stands and more than 1500 conference attendees.
Interest in investing in the Territory is at an all-time high. In July, Prime Minister Shinz Abe confirmed Australia is one of the most important suppliers of minerals and energy to Japan. The new Japan-Australia Economic Partnership Agreement is the most significant economic accord ever struck between the two countries, and is particularly significant for the Territory, given that over 50% of the Territory’s exports go to Japan.
Darwin will host the very first Australia Japan Joint Business Conference to be held outside of Japan in October this year. This is a great honour and provides a significant opportunity for the Northern Territory to showcase trade and investment opportunities to some of the most influential companies involved in Japan-Australia trade.
We are also looking at new opportunities for the Northern Territory in the growing market of South Korea, following the signing of the Korea-Australia Free Trade Agreement earlier this year.
We promised to strengthen law and order, and we have. Crime continues to drop across the Northern Territory, despite Labor trying to stop it. We have stopped the crime spree that was growing under Labor at an alarming rate and we have reversed it.
Property offences have dropped by more than 16.4% across the Territory since the Country Liberals came to government. House break-ins are down 25.6%, commercial break-ins are down 16.4%, motor vehicle theft is down 15.4%, general theft is down 12.2% and property damage is down 18.2%.
These figures speak for themselves. Labor – particularly the opposition spokesperson and wannabe leader, Michael Gunner, the member for Fannie Bay – often talk about our commitment to drive down crime by 10% a year and whether or not we have met it. We unashamedly set the target high – to reduce crime by 10% a year. It is something we hope to achieve. To the detractors in the Labor Party who say, ‘Motor vehicle theft has only dropped by 15.4% in two years, not 20%’, I say it is an outstanding achievement. We fought hard for an enormous target and we are striving hard to achieve it. In some areas we have gotten above 20% in two years and in other areas we are damn close to it, but most of all we are driving down crime in the Northern Territory, something Territorians are happy with.
In two years we have arrested and reversed a Labor Party crime spree. A real government came to power with real solutions on 25 August 2012. Our full suite of alcohol measures, including alcohol mandatory treatment, Alcohol Protection Orders, intensive temporary beat locations and Darwin Safe have been in effect since Christmas 2013, and we have seen dramatic reductions in personal crime.
The June crime statistics show assaults are down 14% Territory-wide, and alcohol-related assaults are down 18% across the Territory in six months alone. Alcohol-related assaults are down a whopping 27% in Alice Springs, 15% in Katherine and a staggering 47% in Tennant Creek over the same period. I expect the member for Barkly to congratulate us on our success.
Alcohol mandatory treatment is delivering on our promise to provide rehabilitation to those who abuse or misuse alcohol. We want to break the cycle of that alcohol abuse. More than 400 people have been referred to alcohol mandatory treatment to date, which is helping to turn the tide of damage caused by alcohol abuse, saving lives and changing lives for the better. By the start of 2015 we will have permanent and secure AMT facilities at Berrimah in Darwin, in Alice Springs and in Tennant Creek, with construction to start on new Katherine facility later in the year. You watch Katherine turn around once we open that facility.
We are also in the final stages of producing the first ever comprehensive domestic violence reduction strategy that will incorporate 10 agencies across government, removing the silos and working in partnership. In the 12 months to June this year there were 4453 victims of domestic violence, and those people need our help. In government, Labor tried to treat domestic violence like a misdemeanour, swept it under the carpet and left women and children to be beaten in their own homes. They did not prosecute the offenders of domestic violence, and they did not protect the women and children who were the victims of domestic violence. Enough is enough.
Minister Bess Price knows only too well the pain and suffering caused by this terrible and violent crime, and she made a huge contribution to this policy we will release. We will tackle domestic violence head on and give government agencies all the support they need to remove this scourge. Similar to the roll-out of alcohol mandatory treatment, we know Labor and those who like to be outspoken from the left will attack us for tackling domestic violence, but putting women and children at the forefront of protection is what this is all about.
It has been two years since the Country Liberals came to government, and in that time the only thing we have heard from Labor is the same old thought bubbles that failed every Territorian. As we roll out our two-year mid-term report, it is important to look at what Labor has done in those two years. They keep crying that someone else is taking credit for their plans. Which plans do they want to take credit for? The plan to fail, the plan to deceive, the plan to bankrupt the Territory? Which one of those plans will they take credit for? We know they were the ones driving up debt, crime and unemployment. They have nothing to contribute to the policy debate. After two years in opposition they have no policy, nothing at all. Labor failed when in government, nearly sent the Territory broke and now it is failing as an opposition. One thing is common in all of this: the Leader of the Opposition.
The Territory is the jewel in Australia’s economic crown. The resources sector plays a vital part in the Territory’s economy and will continue to do so into the future. It is estimated that the Territory has reserves of more than 240 trillion cubic feet of unconventional gas in six basins. Over 90% of the Territory is granted or under application for petroleum exploration, with $130m committed to onshore petroleum exploration programs for 2014 to 2018. The industry rule of thumb is that one trillion cubic feet of natural gas is enough to power a city of one million people for 20 years. To compare, INPEX is tapping approximately 13 trillion cubic feet. We have a gas pipeline running the length of the Territory to Alice Springs, and by building a gas pipeline connecting Moomba in South Australia with, for example, Alice Springs, we could sell gas into the domestic market in New South Wales or Victoria. We could also help with the international issues around supplying gas, or at least help to alleviate them. Importantly, this will open the Northern Territory to further exploration and development, creating more jobs and economic opportunities for Territorians, particularly in regional and remote areas.
We are in discussion with a number of groups interested in investing in the pipeline project and working closely with the South Australian government to make it a reality. The government is developing the terms of reference for a feasibility study, corridor identification and other opportunities to undertake work to speed up the pipeline construction.
To ensure onshore gas fields are managed correctly, this government is investing almost $1m to support an inquiry into hydraulic fracturing in the Northern Territory, and we expect to have the results of that inquiry by the end of the year.
Darwin is increasingly becoming a strategic hub for servicing the region’s expanding oil and gas, marine and Defence industries. Yesterday I had the pleasure of officially opening the new Marine Supply Base, a world-class facility which will help cater for growing industry demand for maintenance and logistics support in northern Australia. It adds to the crucial infrastructure driving the economic growth of the Northern Territory and helps unlock our economic potential.
We expect significant growth in the gas and oil industries. In order to capture this market opportunity the Land Development Corporation is master planning the marine industry park on waterfront land at East Arm. Consultation has commenced with prospective tenants for the park, of which a number have registered an interest in establishing marine maintenance and service facilities.
There are currently 15 projects which hold major project status in the Territory, 15 projects which are significant to the Territory economy as a whole, for regional economic development, or both. That means projects which create jobs, capital expenditure, business opportunities and a future for our kids. I can update that there are now 16 projects, with Tallis Holdings, the potential salt mine south of Alice Springs in proximity to Maryvale Station, or Titjikala, recently being granted major project status.
Of the major projects, the standout is the $US34bn Ichthys LNG project, which is the largest private investment in the Northern Territory’s history. It is the first Japanese operated LNG project in the world and France’s biggest ever investment in Australia. We have celebrated the halfway point in the project with dredging complete, one of two 30 m high LNG storage tanks nearly complete at Blaydin Point, the hull of the floating production and storage offloading facility built and the SEMAC-1 pipe-laying platform working in Darwin Harbour – or just outside of it – now.
More than $5bn of spending has been committed in the Northern Territory, with 150 locally-based companies awarded subcontracts or supplier purchase orders. We continue to fight to ensure Territorians benefit from these projects through direct engagement and employment.
The Ichthys project has underpinned one of the biggest economic booms in the Territory’s history. It has cemented the Territory’s reputation for delivering budget resource projects on time.
Toll Holdings is building the Ichthys offshore logistics supply base at Darwin’s East Arm business park precinct, which is due to be fully operational by early 2015.
We are in talks with other major resource companies about future projects which will build on the Territory’s proven track record as a reliable source of LNG.
Another project holding major project status is the world’s first floating LNG facility being built by Shell. This will be the biggest vessel ever built in the world. It is a project which has the potential to be a game changer in the gas industry and is being watched closely by other international companies.
Drilling of seven production wells at Prelude will be completed by 2015, and this project is expected to come on stream in 2017. Shell is currently constructing a purpose-built $25m warehouse to service Prelude.
Interest in the Territory’s gas industry is incredibly strong. There are more than 1500 people attending NT Resources Week and the South East Asia Australia Offshore and Onshore Conference in Darwin this week, wanting to create new business in the Territory. There is no doubt there is more investment to come, and I look forward to making some announcements in that area.
Mining projects include Minemakers, Australia’s largest known phosphate deposit at Wonarah. Arafura Resources is targeting production of rare earth oxide, equivalent to around 10% of the world’s supply, at its Nolans project. TNG is developing one of the largest new vanadium- titanium-iron projects in Australia, 50 km west of Barrow Creek.
Another project on the major projects list is the Ord River expansion. This has the potential to open up enormous areas to new agribusiness ventures. As I have already mentioned, the demand for produce and product in Asia is expanding rapidly. The Ord Development Unit has been established and native title regulations for the Knox, Weaber and Keep River plains are under way.
The Kimberly Agricultural Investment company is planning a substantial sugar export industry, including a $400m mill. The potential is enormous.
On the retail front, another major development with major project status is the Casuarina Square expansion, which provides for additional retail spaces, restaurants, student accommodation and car parking. The Development Consent Authority has approved three development applications associated with the expansion, and the construction of student accommodation is already under way. By giving the expansion major projects status I am able to personally oversee the development and facilitate any necessary government involvement. It is just another way the government is getting the Territory moving again and getting Labor out of the way. There is only one reason to expand Casuarina Square, and that is because the Country Liberals are driving the economy.
These projects, and many others like them, are the future of the Northern Territory. As we develop the north and build on our strong business ties with Asia this list will get longer, creating even more jobs and business opportunities. To me, this is what it is all about – a future for our kids.
We promised to open the Territory for business, and we have. To make new investment a reality we are doing what we can to streamline native title processes, negotiating one-stop shops for environmental assessments to reduce red and green tape, reviewing work health and safety laws in the Northern Territory and working on key areas of national reform, including infrastructure, deregulation competitiveness, productivity and reform of the federation and taxation systems.
This government is aware that the failed policies of the previous Labor government, now in opposition, put pressure on the cost of living. In the last six months we have dragged inflation back to 3.3%. It was at 3.9%, we brought it back to 3.6% and it is now back to 3.3%.
We are releasing land faster than any Territory government in history. We are investing more than $84m in new residential land releases this financial year to drive down the cost of living and make home ownership affordable for all. We have increased the First Home Owner Grant for new homes by $1000 to $26 000 and altered eligibility to encourage the construction of new housing. New housing creates more jobs and helps keep the cost of living down by increasing the supply of homes in a supply and demand environment.
We have reduced the cost of childcare services by increasing the childcare subsidies by 10% and expanding the scheme to include family daycare.
We have added an extra $5m to the Sport Voucher Scheme to get more children off the couch and into recreational, cultural and sporting activities. The vouchers have increased from $75 to $200 per child, and we have expanded the scheme to include more activities such as dance, music lessons, arts and ‘Learn to Swim’ lessons for children up to five years of age. This will encourage our children to live healthier lives and reduce the cost to families. We have doubled the Back to School voucher to $150 per child to ease the burden on families.
It is important the bush shares equality in the benefits of this extraordinary economic growth. A substantial increase in the Indigenous workforce continues to be a priority for this government, especially in remote areas. We have the highest workforce participation rate in the country, but we must underpin the capacity of Territorians in regional areas to participate in the wider economy.
We are supporting and supplementing regional economic development opportunities, programs and initiatives at every turn. We are spending a record $377.8m on roads this year because we know better roads will open up the Territory to new investments and opportunities, which will mean more jobs and more hope for people in regional remote areas. I have established Department of the Chief Minister offices in the East Arnhem, Big Rivers, Barkly and Central Australia regions to drive economic development outcomes and to ensure the development of the Northern Territory benefits all Territorians.
The Country Liberals team and I are removing road blocks to regional development and pursuing real economic opportunities within a number of communities. There has been strong interest in places such as the Tiwi Islands, Wadeye and Ngukurr. We have entered into a partnership agreement with the Tiwi Land Council to progress economic development.
We have also supported a partnership between Japanese multinational company Mitsui and the Tiwi Plantations Corporation, which has led to an MOU with Mitsui & Co, Australia’s fourth-largest woodchip exporter.
It was great to catch up with representatives of Mitsui last night at the cocktail party held in Parliament House for NT Resources Week and re-establish those friendships which brought about the commencement of the Mitsui partnership.
We have also brought an affordable ferry service to the Tiwi Islands, which carried nearly 5500 passengers last year. I am sure the member for Arafura is happy to see that Tiwi ferry service continuing. We are exploring the potential for ferry pontoons and a tourism precinct on the Tiwi Islands as well, and I look forward to being there to open that.
We are driving economic change in remote areas like never before. There are some who say we should have a silver bullet, click our fingers and change it overnight. This requires substantial, long-term investment and reform. We will achieve it, we will continue to roll-out new policies and we will continue to drive change for the future.
More than 40% of the total capital works budget for this financial year is being spent on improving infrastructure in communities and supporting regional development. We have completed an economic plan for Big Rivers and we are working on a new one for Tennant Creek. We have opened a $3.7m emergency department in Tennant Creek and a new GP service at the hospital.
We have delivered new bush police stations in Gapuwiyak and Ramingining, and we are now building new facilities in Arlparra, Pirlangimpi, Mount Liebig, Areyonga and Robinson River. We are accelerating the shire reform process with the introduction of new regional councils, served by local authorities made up of local people. We continue to hold out the olive branch; we want more regional councils to be established, breaking down from the old shire model and giving back to the people in the bush.
We have just completed the most comprehensive review of Indigenous education in 15 years to give our bush kids a future. The government is committed to improving educational outcomes for kids in remote areas, because we know a good education is the key to a good job and a future free of welfare dependence. The Country Liberals have committed $40m to implement recommendations from the Wilson Indigenous education review.
Pride is important, and owning your own home helps to build a culture that is proud and confident of its future. The government is committed to selling up to 50% of all remote public housing back to tenants in communities where there is a 40- or 99-year lease available. This will help restore pride in home ownership and further break the cycle of dependence on government. I do not expect to be knocked down at the door by people wanting to buy their own home, but it is a pathway to a future opportunity, and every person who comes through that door will be provided that service. It may take time to sell our first, second and third, but when we get to 20, 50 and 100 we will start seeing real change in people’s lives.
We said we would build a better future for all Territorians, and what better way than a better education and owning your own home.
The regional centres of the Territory can rest assured the government is focusing on ensuring everyone benefits from northern development. Following Rio Tinto’s decision to suspend production at the Gove alumina refinery, this government has been working tirelessly to support the Nhulunbuy community and local businesses to make a positive transition, despite opposition by the member for Nhulunbuy. The government remains committed to the township as East Arnhem’s economic and services hub. Very early on we made the commitment to spend more than $1bn over five years, to 2017-18, on services and infrastructure. The existing asset base on the Gove peninsula is a remarkable resource and we are working with Rio Tinto Alcan, industry bodies and regional stakeholders to build on it.
Defence spending in northern Australia has been increasing steadily for the past 15 years. Defence spent $1.42bn in the Territory in 2012-13, or around 7% of gross state product, the highest proportion of GSP of all the states and territories. Our location makes the Northern Territory the Australian Defence Force’s strategic edge. We currently have around 10% of Australia’s permanent Defence Force personnel and two thirds of the Army’s combat power based in northern Australia. We expect increased operations at Tindal and a squadron of the new Joint Strike Fighter aircraft to be based in the Top End.
The new Rheinmetall MAN heavy vehicles will begin arriving in Australia in 2016, with many of them destined for Darwin, creating new opportunities for business to service and support these vehicles. New wharf facilities at HMAS Coonawarra are under consideration by Defence. The US-Australia Force Posture Agreement signed by President Obama and Prime Minister Tony Abbott in June this year has put in place the formal structure required to increase the rotation of US Marines through Darwin and to embark on trilateral military exercises in Southeast Asia, something firmly welcomed by the Country Liberals, but not by Labor.
It also lays the foundations for new alliance defence initiatives yet to be announced. I plan to travel to the United States in the near future to promote this government’s position that the Marines should utilise local industry to support the Marine rotational force in Darwin, wherever practical and wherever possible. This includes the supply of rations and the warehousing and maintenance of equipment.
I also look forward to visiting the US to provide support to the US government for the Marines based in the Northern Territory for their rotation and to extend that support not only to the Marines, but also the Air Force and Navy.
The Northern Territory government has actively encouraged the continued growth of Defence in the NT, and the newly-created position of Director-General Strategic Defence has been tasked with ensuring the Territory’s position is front and centre as the Australian government develops its Defence White Paper.
I have spent a great deal of time today talking about money and budgets, but one of the things Territorians hold dear to their hearts is our unique lifestyle. In June this year the government created Festivals NT, a festival calendar that builds on existing events and incorporates new sporting, business and cultural elements, many of them with an Asian flavour. Festivals NT is already proving to be an enormous success, with an expanded program of events for the Darwin Festival, work on the Alice Desert Festival and supporting visual arts.
There is plenty more to come, including the inaugural arts forum TRADING IDEAS: Creative Investment, between the Northern Territory and the Asia Pacific, which will be held at the end of October. TRADING IDEAS will bring together arts, government, business, trade and education to create new networks and opportunities to build on our trade links, access new markets, deepen our engagement in the Asia Pacific region and grow sustainable, creative and culturally diverse communities.
Festivals NT will continue to build on existing festivals across the Territory, with a focus on Asian engagement. A new creative director will be appointed within the Department of the Chief Minister to oversee Festivals NT and develop a signature event to celebrate Territory Day in the coming years. Festivals NT is cementing the Territory as a gateway between Asia and Australia, as a meeting place for conducting business, a destination of choice for tourists, a place where the arts are showcased and where sporting events and competitions are expanding. I am also working with the Parliamentary Secretary for the Chief Minister, the member for Drysdale, on how we can expand opportunities for the Darwin Symphony Orchestra. I look forward to announcing, hopefully very soon, that the DSO will perform a special one-off show in Tennant Creek; that is a work in progress. I am sure the member for Barkly will complain about that like everything else.
In closing, it is my pleasure to stand here as the leader of an exceptional team of ministers and members. In two short years, this team has made the hard decisions to get the Territory back on track and set a clear plan for the future. It is now time to make more hard decisions to move the Territory forward even more rapidly.
The Treasurer will today explain, in detail, the measures he has taken to build a stronger economy. The Attorney-General will explain how a tough stand on law and order is working. The Health minister will inform the House about our plans to build a brand new state-of-the-art hospital. The Minister for Education will talk about extra spending on school infrastructure and a focus on outcomes, not inputs. The Mines and Energy minister will focus on exciting developments within the gas and pastoral sectors. The Tourism and Sports minister will speak about the fantastic work being done to boost our tourism numbers, the great sporting events we now enjoy and how that partners up with some of the biggest economies in this nation. The Infrastructure minister will address our growing list of exciting new projects occurring right across the Northern Territory and the time line for those to be rolled out. The Minister for Parks and Wildlife will outline the excellent work being done to preserve and protect our world-class parks, investing in the environment, but also seeing strong economic outcomes.
I could go on; I want to talk about the members for Blain, Daly, Drysdale and Goyder and the hard work every member of this team is doing for their electorates, the team of government and, most importantly, for the Northern Territory. Ultimately we are a team, and I want the team to share in today’s midterm statement to parliament, because as a team we are strong, and with a dedicated public service, we are delivering.
I thank the public service for its hard work and tenacity. The transition from one government to another is never easy. It has been two years, we have put out strident reform and we have had strong outcomes and performance. The future looks extremely bright for the Northern Territory, and we will continue to deliver and prosper.
On a last note I personally thank the police force. The police have been instrumental in assisting government to drive down crime. Put in partnership with those working in alcohol mandatory treatment and the health sector, those three tripartite services have provided exceptional leadership, responsiveness to government and have made the Territory a safer place, fundamentally changed people’s lives from alcohol abuse and misuse and, above all, protected so many women from the scourge of domestic violence.
As a government we are making our promises a reality and are leading the Territory to a prosperous future.
Madam Speaker, I also thank you for your service to this Assembly for the first two years of government. Your strong stewardship of this Assembly has provided good guidance and excellence in democracy in the Northern Territory, and I look forward to working with you into the future.
I move that the Assembly take note of this statement.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise receipt of a message from the Administrator concerning the Superannuation Legislation Amendment and Repeal Bill presented this morning. Notwithstanding the requirement of Standing Order 233 that the message for a financial proposal be announced before a bill is presented, I have been informed that the government has legal advice which indicates the message being read prior to the vote being taken will suffice.
In the message the Administrator recommends to the Legislative Assembly a bill for an act to amend the Superannuation Act to insert provisions that provide for the payment from the Consolidated Holding Authority of amounts currently held in respect of unclaimed superannuation benefits, which are to be paid to the Commonwealth to be held in accordance with the Superannuation (Unclaimed Money and Lost Members) Act 1999 (Cth).
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I will reply to a shambolic mid-point statement by the Chief Minister that sums up what his government is really like. I will quote a comment from a local business person, who said, ‘I keep reading this everywhere – develop the north, they say. How about supporting the people and the businesses who have already started developing the north?’
This Chief Minister, as we know, was not elected to the position. He took the job from a colleague who, as everyone in this Chamber would know, was an honourable man in the way he went about his business and signed up to several pledges when he was Opposition Leader; I am referring, of course, to the former member for Blain, Terry Mills. At the midway point of this government it is useful to look at some of those:
1. Lower the cost of living: the CLP inherited inflation at 2.1%; it hit the peak of 3.9% and has just pegged slightly back from that. It has doubled under the CLP. In real terms, what does that mean? Families and business are struggling. Three-hundred-and-forty businesses across the Territory have hit the wall, shut up shop and gone bust. Huge tariff hits through power, water and sewerage were too much for businesses to cope with.
2. Safer communities: we heard the Chief Minister proudly espouse his track record, but the reality is – I know he does not want to hear it – violent crime hit record levels last year and is slightly off those in the latest data. Domestic violence is at unacceptable record levels, with a promise that has been hanging around for months and months – the ‘Wait for it, we will have a whole-of-government strategy’.
3. Affordable housing: the CLP’s version of affordable housing is $500 000, yet they scoffed when in opposition that product at $375 000 was simply not affordable and out of the mortgage range of the average family. You have not met that one.
4. Education standards: standards have not improved. The government is pretending it has only sacked 35 teachers, when the evidence at estimates showed 125 teachers have been sacked, as well as 60 crucial support staff.
5. Access to healthcare: Alice Springs and Tennant Creek Hospitals are enjoying new emergency departments through Labor-funded projects. New health clinics across remote communities are also Labor-funded projects.
When you look at their track record, Katherine is buckling under the crisis of the alcohol regime the CLP government introduced. Ask anyone in Katherine what it is like getting into the emergency department there and what they have to deal with on a daily and nightly basis. You will not because you do not want to listen.
The CLP has delayed the Palmerston Regional Hospital by four years, which is a disgrace. Why? The Royal Darwin Hospital is in crisis, and when you tell them they say you are making it up. When the Australian Medical Association, representing doctors, says it is in crisis, when the Australian Nursery & Midwifery Federation, representing the nurses, says it is in crisis – we are all making it up because this government, as its hallmark, does not listen. It likes to live in its own little bubble where everything is good, and it ignores the facts and the reality that every day, Territorians are grappling with.
To its eternal shame the CLP created this crisis by not bringing online the purpose-built 100-bed medi-hotel at the Royal Darwin Hospital to ensure appropriate, supported medical conditions for people before they use acute beds and people, after needing acute beds, entering subacute treatment. To your eternal shame you have brought about this crisis by not using the medi-hotel for the purpose it was built. Now, in a mad rush, because we literally have a hospital which has been in crisis and meltdown for months – there has been bed-block for months, people waiting in the accident and emergency department for days, as well as double-bunking. I challenge the Chief Minister and Health minister to spend a day there listening to staff grappling with untenable situations and patients talking about the situation you are putting them through.
Where are the other 70 beds at the medi-hotel? You said you were bringing 30 beds online. You do not have a date; we are told it is soon or weeks away. Where are the other 70 beds in that facility and why are they not being brought online? They too are needed.
In access to healthcare we have gone backwards. To its eternal shame the CLP is not proceeding with the funding sitting there for the emergency department refit in Nhulunbuy.
Finally, there is number six: improved service delivery. Point to anywhere in the Northern Territory where service delivery has improved. There are delays for government services. It has been a shambles, and little wonder, when you move through the community, across regional towns, remote communities and our large urban centres of Darwin and Palmerston, there is one common phrase – ‘This is the worst government ever’. That comes from people I know have been CLP to their boot heels for many years. I say, ‘Hang on a second, you are telling the Labor Leader of the Opposition, when I know you have been a card-carrying member of the CLP, they are the worst government ever?’ and they say, ‘That is right. They do not behave in the best interests in the Territory and are too busy self serving.’
The run of jobs for mates has been the most scandalous ever witnessed in the Territory. That is saying something because we saw a bit of that in the later years of the CLP before 2001.
Promises to the bush were not part of the election commitments submitted to Treasury and have been happily ignored. You have not delivered on promises to the bush, and if you sit down with the traditional owners of the Northern Territory you will hear that. Listen to the people and you will hear what this debate will contribute. However, you do not want to hear it and you will not meet with the people. That too is a very common theme running throughout the Territory.
I meet with a range of peak organisations across business, non-government organisations, religious groups and cultural groups. There is a common theme in their comments that you cannot arrange meetings with ministers or the Chief Minister; they are not accessible. These people had quarterly meetings established with their relevant line ministers, as well as the Chief Minister and me as the deputy, but you cannot get in the door to see these ministers.
You have broken every major promise there is to break; I just listed your six core areas. You are a government people know cannot be trusted. It is little wonder you have been dubbed the worst government ever and have been given a D-minus on your first report card.
We continually hear the government has a plan. Where is it? Aside from the glossy ‘Develop the North’ brochures and the spin machine, where is your plan? At first the Chief Minister said the plan would be called Framing the Future, and he led with a draft. He released a ministerial statement that still, to this day, has never been debated in this Chamber on the interim and we have never seen the final document. Was Framing the Future your plan? Where did it disappear to and why have we never seen the final document? Did you realise it was so pathetic that you quickly jettisoned it and wrapped yourself in the cloak of developing the north?
If anyone thinks any government, regardless of political calibre, has not been developing the north since self-government in the mid-1970s, you are kidding yourself. On this side of the House we have grave concerns that it is shambolic, chaotic, dysfunctional and self-serving; there clearly is no plan.
Your first budget was a road map backwards. It scrapped many of the infrastructure projects and initiatives that had been set in place. It had no plan and added $1.1bn to the Territory’s debt. Your second budget was a litany of cuts and deception; in the firing line were teachers, health professionals, pensioner concessions, public servants, and mums and dads literally forced to pack up and leave the Territory because they could not cope with the burden of the cost of living, following your power, water and sewerage tariff hikes. These went to inflation and were added on to consumers in the Territory everywhere they turned. You did not engage with the bush and say, ‘By the way, your power card will be chewed through at twice the rate’. That is what is happening.
I will set the record straight on Labor’s time in power, because the Chief Minister cannot take his vision from the rear view mirror, which is part of the CLP’s problem. He cannot look forward because he is stuck looking backwards. That is a critical fundamental flaw in the character of the man, which is a hallmark of the government. You do not have a vision looking forward because you cannot get out of the way; you are constantly looking backwards.
Let us look at the facts. The Auditor-General identified that Labor left a net operating balance surplus of $16.7m as at 30 June 2012, not long before the general election and not a deficit, as you deceptively claim, Chief Minister.
The Auditor-General stated that the Northern Territory had suffered through lower GST revenues from the Commonwealth, which we now know was a direct result of the global financial crisis. This resulted in massive reductions in revenue beyond the control of the Territory or any state or territory government in our nation. The global financial crisis meant a massive contraction in private sector spending. To keep Territorians in work, Labor doubled infrastructure program spending, the one-off capital, and it worked. We created 13 000 jobs during the global financial crisis-affected years and literally kept the Territory economy in growth, not dropping into recessionary figures. When you return to your offices, look out of the window and you will see the growth of the city which occurred under Labor.
We navigated the Territory through the global economic crisis, and we came out of it with strong economic growth which continues today on the back of projects initiated by Labor.
Members opposite said we would not be able to deliver the major Ichthys project. The former Chief Minister described it as a 19th century project which had no place in our harbour. The member for Fong Lim talked it down to business, saying Labor could never deliver it, yet it is now the fuel of our economic growth.
The correctional services centre and the Marine Supply Base underpin those economic growth figures, projects the Chief Minister is cutting the ribbons for and claiming as his own when he had nothing to do with them and, in fact, talked them down in opposition. Did we borrow for infrastructure? Absolutely, as did every major economy. That is what you needed to do to get through the global financial crisis years without entering recession.
There is no budget crisis, there was no budget crisis and Territorians are scratching their heads and asking why they are paying for the lifestyle of the CLP and its mates. You inherited an operating surplus and a Territory with strong economic growth. In contrast, you have set about damaging the building blocks of our economy. There is reduced infrastructure spending, and you have scant regard for policy areas such as education, health, essential services and training for jobs growth.
It is alarming to see a government that does not understand and value the building blocks of the community and that very special relationship between community and economic policy. You have mismanaged our economy and you are making it harder for businesses in the Territory. You have failed to deliver a single new project, and there is no major new project on the horizon. You are living off the legacy of Labor’s economic credentials. You are quick to spruik economic growth and engineering construction work that is at record levels thanks to the Ichthys project and the Marine Supply Base, projects delivered under a Labor government. All economic commentators point to the fact that oil and gas projects are underpinning our economic growth, projects facilitated by Labor. It is the CLP that simply cannot admit it. Remove, as I said, the impact of the major projects and our initiatives like the Marine Supply Base and the correctional centre construction, and you will apply a handbrake in a significant way to our domestic economy.
We are now a two-speed economy with the haves and the have nots. Under the CLP, many Territory businesses are losing momentum. Territorians are falling behind and many have had no choice but to pack up. Three-hundred-and-forty businesses have shut their doors since the CLP came to government. I am informed 120 of those are in Alice Springs. The government has made it harder for business in the Territory. The closure of 340 businesses is a travesty; there are small business people who have invested their money and entrepreneurial effort to set up a business and provide Territorians with jobs.
Jobs cuts have created, with our rising unemployment, uncertainty in the community. The CLP price hikes on power have pushed many businesses to the wall and, in other instances, have stymied business growth. The irresponsible decision to hike up power, water and sewerage prices has been a big hit on businesses that have either had to absorb costs, stifle expansion or pass prices onto consumers, and it has contributed to our unacceptable inflation rate. You talk of a three-hub economy; the business community is asking where the next big project is and what you are doing.
The community wants to know what is after Ichthys. The Office of Northern Australia Development is good for producing glossy brochures, but there is no policy, no projects and no extra funding for the roads, bridges and infrastructure needed to grow the economy. Construction has nosedived under this government and there was a $500m reduction from December 2013 to the March 2014 quarter. As no new projects come online, construction businesses – our biggest sector in the Territory – need to think about survival.
Every ribbon-cutting event you have undertaken in government has been at a Labor project. Yesterday the Chief Minister was opening the Marine Supply Base, a key Labor project to transform the Territory economy, a $110m investment in our future which builds on Labor’s success in attracting oil and gas industry and creating the all-important oil and gas hub.
Adam Giles, the current Chief Minister, criticised this very project when the first sod was turned in 2012. He said he was concerned that the government is supporting construction and spoke about Labor’s obsession with the Marine Supply Base. Yet, all of a sudden, it is his project and it is the great saviour of economic growth. Shore ASCO will operate the base for up to 20 years and has contracted local company Macmahon to construct it. It is a good news story, but it has had nothing to do with the Chief Minister espousing that it is, all of a sudden, his project.
I am concerned by the way the Chief Minister behaves in engaging with the corporate end of town. He has, through his behaviour, set back our relationships with corporations. I have gone out of my way to ensure I engage with our major oil and gas companies on a regular basis. There are real concerns about some of the announcements the government has made; companies are wondering why a fracking inquiry was announced without a heads-up and without understanding what the energy committee of parliament was about. They are concerned about the views around sales, consistently hearing from industry that it does not support the sale of the port because they know, as we all know, it will lead to increased prices. Industry does not want to pay more, just as the mums and dads of the Territory do not want to pay more.
They are concerned about the delay in the gas project at Wadeye and that the government has selling the Wadeye airstrip on its agenda. Have you spoken to the traditional owners at Wadeye about that plan? Seriously, you need to listen. You need to abandon the ambition to sell the port and stop kowtowing to Canberra with the sale of assets which is, essentially, a quick cash grab we will all pay for forever through increased freight costs. Industry understands how crippling those costs would be to them, and the mums and dads, sadly, would understand all too late.
Tiger Brennan Drive is another key example of CLP ribbon-cutting projects, a project the member for Fong Lim, when he was in federal parliament, could not deliver. It took Labor governments federally and in the Territory to deliver Tiger Brennan Drive, yet it took seven CLP politicians to cut the ribbon on it. What an embarrassment!
Your government has snubbed local business. You have made it harder for them, and a constant concern we hear from local businesses is about tenders going to interstate companies. The bus contracts went interstate and the government’s travel contracts also went to two interstate firms, snubbing the many local travel agencies around the Territory, those small businesses which found it to be a devastating blow. The contract went to interstate firms without going out to competitive tender. You must question why locals miss out to interstate firms without there being a competitive tender process.
You do not have a jobs plan. You have slashed training funding by $64m each year for the next three years, yet you pretend you are about jobs for locals. We have less support for apprentices, trainees and upskill programs and you have lost sight of that all-important role of government in facilitating access to training, which is a leg up to jobs for local Territorians. You scrapped the target of 15 000 new apprentices and trainees. Since you came to government 1400 fewer people have entered vocational education and training in the Territory. You have accepted a cut from the Commonwealth of some 500 fewer places for apprentices and trainee commencements this year alone. You simply rolled over to that.
The cronyism which has been a hallmark of the government of late cannot go unmentioned. The consistent feedback I receive from business is grave concern about the appointment of former Chief Minister, Denis Burke, to the role of the Chair of the Development Consent Authority. They had hoped to see someone without political bias in that role, as it is crucial in proper planning processes.
I will have my shadow minister for law and order contribute at a later date, but the cut to the promise of an extra 120 police officers has been condemned by the NT Police Association. You have not met a violent crime reduction target, you have opened up a dangerous stretch of road to an open speed limit and we see road death rates continuing to increase at unacceptable levels in the Territory. We have Territorians dying at three times the national average, and you believe it is okay to open up a stretch of road to allow people to drive as fast as they want. It is an incredible step backwards and a return to cowboy country under the CLP.
In regard to health, one of the fundamental services Territorians quite rightly expect is a good system. Sadly, the federal government is introducing a tax on support and access to GP services; this Territory government has rolled over when it is such a critical front line for us and has such an important role in taking the pressure off our main emergency departments which, as we know – particularly at RDH – are in crisis.
We have seen a $33m cut to the Health budget by the Commonwealth, reduced to an $11m cut with no explanation as to where these reductions are occurring across the health system because this government shrouds itself in secrecy rather than transparency.
We have a Minister for Disability Services who, I am advised, does not make herself accessible to meet with parents of young adults with disabilities who are in dire need of post-school options. When the Minister for Disability Services does not meet with the parents of young adults with a disability, you have to wonder what they are doing in that role. I urge the Minister for Disability Services to meet with that group of parents.
It has been a disgrace to see the extent of cuts to the Education budget. We have lost valuable and skilled teachers and support staff across our schools, and our schools are buckling under the strain. You are introducing the global school budget, which is a way of ensuring the cuts continue to roll on at school level and you can wash your hands of responsibility.
School councils are very concerned about the process being rushed through as it is, but the Minister for Education is deaf to the calls by COGSO, the representative parent body, to backtrack and give everyone a chance to have a genuine contribution on why global school budgets are not the way to go in improving education. In fact, it will be a significant backward step.
With the Indigenous education review you did not listen to Territorians. You have a frame and focus on direct instruction out of the Gulf country. It is disappointing and disrespectful to Indigenous educators in the Territory that you have ignored their submissions into the Indigenous education review.
The cost of living has doubled under the CLP. That is across power and water, sewerage, fuel, registration, car charges and housing. The CLP said it would ease the burden in housing and, of course, we have rental prices going up, with an increase of 4.8%, and about an 8% growth in the mortgage market because you stripped out opportunities to access first homeowner concessions and you cut a couple of key housing finance programs in My New Home and HOMESTART Extra.
The saddest thing, and the hallmark of your government, must be the abandonment of the township of Nhulunbuy and the announcement of the curtailment of the Rio Tinto refinery, at the hands of Chief Minister Giles. The oil and gas industry was looking forward to a doubling of the domestic gas market, which would have occurred if the gas deal had not been reneged on by Chief Minister Giles. Instead over 1000 jobs have been lost. At a guess, we will see 2% stripped from our gross state product, and we have a town that has been left swinging in the breeze, with no structural adjustment package from the Commonwealth or Territory governments. There has been no pressure on Rio Tinto to do the right thing for the town, dismantle the plant, rehabilitate the red mud ponds and provide real jobs and opportunities. There has been no effort by this government at all to have a project delivered into the town that would provide respite and supported accommodation for sufferers of Machado-Joseph Disease, renal and aged care – you simply walk away from your responsibilities.
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LAWRIE: It is shameful Central Australia barely rated a mention in the Chief Minister’s contribution, given Alice Springs is his home town. For Central Australia there was no articulated plan for the future and no plan to stimulate the economic development of a region crying out for support.
They are not looking for handouts, they are looking at where the investment will be coming from in Central Australia. In that, I mean the Barkly region as well. This government is so out of touch, it does not seem to be aware there are at least 16 empty shopfronts in the Todd Mall precinct. CBD businesses such as Don Thomas, Murray Neck Leading Edge Music, Centre Souvenirs, Rusty Zipper, Travel Baggers, Fresh in the Desert – under your watch, these locally-owned small businesses, many who have been in the town for 40 years or more, have simply shut their doors.
These are small businesses which were the lifeblood of our regional town, not only providing employment but supporting community events and sporting teams. Under the CLP’s watch these are the businesses closing their doors. Just this week, Alice Springs’ largest steel supplier, OneSteel, announced it is closing its doors.
OneSteel has been in operation in Alice Springs since the 1950s, but because of the economic downturn in the building and construction industry in Central Australia, it is shutting up shop. Alice Springs town councillor Kylie Bonanni says other building industry companies in the Centre are contemplating doing the same. What response do we have from this government and the Chief Minister, who lives in Alice Springs? There is nothing.
You have had the opportunity to invest in locally-driven projects to create jobs and provide economic stimulation, for example, the second stage of the Todd Mall, which you knocked back, or a major residential development in the CBD, which you, again, knocked on the head. You produce lovely, expensive advertising campaigns, trying to persuade people they are part of some mythical northern development, but there is no development under your watch to invest and support the future of Central Australia. Meetings and glossy brochures are not driving economic development or planning for the future in the Centre.
Central Australians are not fooled; they know this government and Chief Minister have promised big and delivered very little. You promised a police call centre, but you reneged on that pretty quickly. The Chief Minister likes to beat his chest and say Labor does not have any plans; I do not doubt he would not turn his mind to reading Territory 2030, a strategic plan developed by Labor in partnership with the community, setting real targets and achievements for economic sustainability, education, health, knowledge, creativity and innovation.
The plan includes meeting the challenges of providing an effective health system through bold reforms; ensuring the availability of appropriate and affordable housing through targeted land release; kick-starting key projects and initiatives by investing in major projects that provide economic and social development, such as building the Palmerston hospital; investigating the development of Alice Springs as a regional transport and service centre and a hub for tri-state health delivery; assisting local businesses by reducing the cost of setting up in the Territory; and increasing government support for business development.
Territory 2030 provides for the growth of regional areas by fostering the growth of real jobs and wealth creation through innovative and collaborative solutions by working with Indigenous Territorians and, most importantly, with the federal government to ensure funding and investment decisions reflect the needs and aspirations of people on the ground. Territory 2030 drives development, captures new opportunities, targets investment and allows for investment in key infrastructure projects. It stands in stark contrast to the haphazard selective approach adopted by this government, which is more interested in looking after its mates and itself than developing the future of the Territory and ensuring every Territorian receives a fair go.
Mrs PRICE (Community Services): Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to contribute to the excellent statement of achievement and to acknowledge the Chief Minister. His statement outlined the great things we have achieved in our first two years of government.
Despite the mistruths and negativity of those opposite, we have achieved a lot for Territorians with not much left in the bank account, thanks to the debt and deficit legacy left by the Leader of the Opposition.
My portfolio areas have been very busy, with a number of highlights. I will start with the Parks and Wildlife Commission. The commission manages 87 parks and reserves across the Territory on behalf of Territorians. Our parks and reserves provide the natural spaces for the recreation of Territorians and are a major draw card for interstate and overseas visitors. The commission also contributes enormously to the social, cultural and economic fabric of the Northern Territory and its future. It also underpins the conservation of the Territory’s wildlife and the best of its environments.
The commission has been integral to the cultural identity of many Aboriginal people who are joint management partners with the government for one third of these parks.
There are about three million annual visits to parks managed by the Parks and Wildlife Commission. Many visitors are Territorians for who parks are a key part of a great outdoor lifestyle, places of inspiration, learning, exercise and fun. Territorians naturally feel great affection and stewardship towards our parks. I am pleased to report that in the last financial year there were 2.89 m visits to our parks, up from 2.8 m in 2012-13. This is a great display of confidence, and while we have more work to do, we are on the right track. We have worked hard to fulfil all election commitments as well.
New bylaws have been implemented to ensure the existing rights of commercial and amateur fishers are maintained in the Limmen Bight Marine Park. I am working hard with a number of groups and agencies to provide greater access to national parks and camping grounds.
A memorandum of understanding has been signed with the NT four-wheel drive association that provides benefits to both parties in the Top End. A memorandum of understanding has also been signed with Field and Game NT to allow permitted camping by members in return for management assistance. In late 2012 a memorandum of understanding was signed with the NT four-wheel drive association to allow their members greater access to four-wheel drive tracks within parks and reserves, specifically Litchfield and Mary River National Parks.
Five-year pig hunting permits were created to increase park use and reduce red tape and the number of feral animals in Top End parks. The commission facilitated the process which led to the first 10-year commercial sublease arrangement in a jointly-managed national park. On the Larapinta Trail in the West MacDonnell Ranges National Park, the commission has facilitated two high-quality camps operated by the global western tours company, World Expeditions. This outcome has paved the way for similar arrangements with other commercial operators and increased the area under the conservation management of the Parks and Wildlife Commission by 1000km2, with the addition of the proposed Woodgreen Conservation Reserve.
I am sure the member for Nelson will be interested to learn that visits to the Howard Springs Nature Park have doubled following the opening of a new family-friendly water play area and playground. In 2013-14 there were 1390 visitors.
The government has worked hard to maintain a balanced environment in our parks through proactive feral animal management. Throughout the past two years aerial feral animal management has been undertaken in the West MacDonnells, Finke Gorge, and Owen Springs Reserve to reduce the impact of these animals. This work has also reduced the impact in Garig Gunak Barlu and Nitmiluk National Parks.
The commission is developing integrated conservation strategies which promote healthy native flora and fauna, promote the sustainable and commercial use of native wildlife, and is also developing conservation strategies for specific parks. These plans take an integrated approach, identifying key values and threats to them, as well as setting measurable targets for achievement over a five-year time frame. Progress towards the achievement of these plans will be reported in public park report cards to promote public interest and support for our parks and to ensure management is adaptive and continues to improve over time.
Draft management plans for Nitmiluk National Park, Howard Springs Nature Park and the Adelaide River Conservation Reserves have been released for public comment, and will soon make passage through the Assembly. Management plans for several more parks are well progressed.
The commission has also been hard at work in managing asbestos in parks and reserves in the Territory to preserve the safety of our parks and protect visitors. Recent works have taken place in George Brown Darwin Botanic Gardens and on Casuarina Beach near Rapid Creek.
Talking of public safety, the commission has a main role in crocodile management. In 2013-14, Parks and Wildlife conducted 21 Be CROCWISE presentations across 14 community groups, businesses and schools. In 2013-14, the commission reviewed the Be CROCWISE education and engagement program to assess its effectiveness and identify new and innovative opportunities to raise community awareness about the dangers posed by crocodiles. This will see a refreshed program released over the next 12 months with more targeted programs at adults. Sixty permits have been issued for the management of problem crocodiles on private land to reduce impacts on pastoral productivity and to protect public safety.
The commission also partners with my colleague, the Minister for Land Resource Management, and the Department of Land Resource Management to undertake extensive crocodile surveys in the Adelaide, Daly, Katherine and Mary Rivers. These surveys are part of the crocodile management strategy to inform decision-making in relation to it.
Not only do we provide crocodile management here, but our croc management team also has a worldwide reputation for its professionalism and effectiveness. In the last 12 months, the Territory has provided management advice, training and assistance to Timor-Leste and the Solomon Islands in relation to saltwater crocodiles. We have also assisted in the research of freshwater crocodile populations of the McKinlay River with Wildlife Management International.
I thank Tommy Nichols and his crew for their excellent work, often undertaken in very sad or distressing situations. Tommy and his crew have developed strong working relationships with each of their stakeholders.
Talking of strong working relationships, the commission works hard in building and encouraging strong and productive working relationships between traditional owners, landholders, communities and special interest groups, industry, land councils for 32 parks and reserves, and local government. These strong relationships have led to groundwork undertaken around fire, weeds and feral animal management throughout our parks.
The commission has improved fire management across Top End parks, including Litchfield and Nitmiluk National Parks, in collaboration with Charles Darwin University and the Department of Land Resource Management.
Talking about collaboration, the commission has also increased engagement with Berry Springs Primary School, which now uses the Territory Wildlife Park as an outdoor classroom, as well as with Charles Darwin University, which uses the Territory Wildlife Park as a training location for Land Management students.
The commission also sustains and protects our environment by analysing land, water and flora and fauna information to facilitate sound decision-making. The commission is working with the Department of Land Resource Management to implement a five-year rolling program of biological surveys in the Territory’s most important parks for biodiversity, including Nitmiluk, Litchfield, West MacDonnell and Watarrka. The George Brown Darwin Botanic Gardens maintains seed banks and conducts botanical breeding to preserve the genetics of rare and threatened plants.
The Territory Wildlife Park and Alice Springs Desert Park conduct endangered species breeding programs to maintain the genetic diversity of native animals, have shortened processing times for permits to take threatened cycad species, worked with the Department of Land Resource Management to integrate approvals with land clearing applications and assisted the Department of Land Resource Management with surveys to assess small mammal decline at Charles Darwin National Park, Holmes Jungle and the Casuarina Coastal Reserve.
The commission works with volunteer groups, not-for-profit organisations and other stakeholders to provide opportunities for Territorians to come together to experience different cultural heritage and traditions and to participate in healthy outdoor activities.
The commission has also provided $47 000 in signage to improve interpretation along the Larapinta Trail to reflect the cultural values of the trail and inform the community about the importance of the area for the local Arrernte people. Culturally-themed signage has also been developed to enhance the visitor experience on the Shady Creek Walk at Florence Falls in Litchfield National Park and on the Nawulbinbin Walk at Joe Creek, Judbarra/Gregory National Park.
The George Brown Botanic Gardens draws thousands of people every year to enjoy the plants and floral communities through events such as the Darwin Festival, BASSINTHEGRASS and other concerts, the Etsy pop-up market, the Mother’s Day Classic Run, the Tropical Garden Spectacular and other events.
We have invested $150 000 in developing a 28 km network of mountain bike trails through the Alice Springs Telegraph Station Historical Reserve. This is stage one of a larger plan to confirm Alice Springs as an international mountain biking destination. We have participated in and coordinated a variety of events, including information stalls, community activities in parks, presentations and exhibitions for a total of 20 379 visitors, including over 2000 participants during Parks Week celebrations and over 9000 during the short circuit. In addition, the unit gave presentations at 71 schools to over 4232 children. We have successfully completed renovations of the Wesleyan Church and opened Eva’s Caf, which provides a new opportunity for visitors to enjoy the George Brown Botanic Gardens.
The commission has also worked hard to improve our Territory Wildlife Park visitor experience. This has seen a 7.4% jump in visitor numbers from 2012 to 2013. This contributes to developing and growing a strong Territory economy. Tourism in national parks makes an estimated contribution of $1.2bn to the Territory’s economy, including an estimated 2600 jobs directly and 2000 jobs indirectly. Visitor satisfaction ratings have been maintained at above 90% across all Territory parks and reserves.
The commission continues to work with our partners to develop and secure new investment in parks and sustainable wildlife enterprises, demonstrating the significant value parks can provide to the local economy through employment.
The commission has worked closely with the four-wheel drive and mountain biking associations, hunting organisations and others to enhance opportunities to pursue recreational activities in parks and reserves.
There is so much going on in our parks that I will run out of time, so I will move on to my portfolio of Community Services. Since August 2012, the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority has continued to achieve efficiencies. Processes of sacred site protection have continued to support development in the Northern Territory, with timely advice to stakeholders about risks and opportunities associated with sacred sites. This has involved significant management and the resolution of issues to achieve outcomes that satisfy the requirements of all stakeholders.
Since August 2012, the authority has successfully negotiated and issued 488 authority certificates to proponents of development, with no certificates refused and no requests for ministerial review of decisions made by the authority. Each certificate represents a response to a development proposal in the Northern Territory. Furthermore, the authority has responded to 1139 requests for information, including abstracts of the authority’s existing records and requests to access the registers of sacred sites and authority certificates.
During this period, the authority has registered 30 sacred sites, recorded 443 new sites and responded to 43 reports of alleged site damage. Only three cases of site damage proceeded to prosecution. The authority has facilitated a number of large projects, providing authority certificates and enabling proponents to develop good risk-management strategies around sacred sites during the planning phase. This has included projects such as the roll out of the NBN through the Northern Territory, the proposed gas pipeline from Katherine to Gove, and Bynoe Harbour environmental monitoring programs by INPEX, to name a few.
While the Department of Community Services only commenced as an agency in September 2013, we have had a busy 11 months bedding down a new department and growing its influence across the Territory, starting with the remote engagement coordination and language services area.
A few of the achievements include developing and implementing First Circles, a framework for which was approved in May 2014. On 2 July 2014, I attended the official launch of the First Circles program in Alice Springs.
Moving away from traditional representative and elder consultation models, the First Circles program focuses on future Indigenous leaders. Members will develop leadership skills while being actively involved in decision-making around Indigenous issues, supported by departmental staff. A key component of First Circles will be that members will have the opportunity to discuss issues and strategies for improving outcomes with the Northern Territory Cabinet.
Turning to language services – over 10 370 Aboriginal language interpreting jobs were completed, a total of 60 000 hours of interpreting. There were 10 355 ethnic and migrant language interpreting jobs completed in the two years to 31 July 2014, bringing a total of more than 19 000 hours of interpreting in 71 languages. There were 2685 ethnic and migrant language translating jobs completed in the two years to 31 July 2014 in more than 50 languages.
On 1 July 2014, the Aboriginal Interpreter Service, in partnership with the ABC, launched a 12-month pilot project to deliver daily broadcasts of ABC news bulletins in two Aboriginal languages, Warlpiri and Yolngu Matha. A department services engagement and coordination area administers the Stronger Futures national partnership agreement. The department has coordinated six-monthly progress reporting to the Australian government since 1 July 2012. This has resulted in the Northern Territory government receiving over $200m in national partnership payments. The Department of Community Services has administered grants for Stronger Futures data improvement projects with funding provided by the Australian government.
The projects enhance …
Mrs FINOCCHIARO: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the minister.
Motion agreed to.
Mrs PRICE: The projects enhance the capacity of agencies to collect and report on Stronger Futures project data. Indigenous governance and leadership development in June 2013 commenced a two-year project of practical governance and leadership support to individuals and decision-making groups in five remote Northern Territory communities. Delivered by the Northern Institute of Charles Darwin University, the project is making visible both Aboriginal and western governance systems in Gapuwiyak, Milingimbi, Ntaria, Ramingining and Wurrumiyanga. A distinctive ground-up approach that engages project participants in learning activities appropriate to their own governance and leadership needs has been used to grow knowledge and skills in governance and leadership. The project is now in its second and final stage where governance and leadership support activities designed in stage one are being implemented. Individuals and groups are enthusiastically participating in workshops, tutoring sessions and innovative knowledge-sharing events, such as the Q&A forum recently held over two days at Ramingining.
Turning to the remote service delivery unit, homelands, outstations and town camps: our homelands policy, launched in 2013, has been implemented. This policy reflects the government’s commitment to provide better services and living conditions for people residing in homelands. This includes some $206m committed over 10 years under the National Partnership Agreement Municipal and Essential Services Implementation Plan for the provision of municipal and essential services to over 500 locations, including homelands, communities and town camps, with 2469 dwellings and approximately 6000 residents.
We have introduced contemporary funding agreements with improved accountability and transparency for the delivery of municipal and essential services. Darwin town camps received a much-needed boost in 2012-13 with the release of $2.7m in grant funding to refurbish abandoned homes and upgrade essential services. The Northern Territory government has committed $25m over 10 years to support the provision of municipal and essential services to 45 town camps with over 750 dwellings, as well as $12m for projects to improve municipal and essential services on homelands and other capital infrastructure grant programs from 2012-14.
One-hundred-and-thirty-seven full-time equivalent positions were also provided for Aboriginal engagement in municipal essential services as part of the NT Jobs Package. Funding of $11m was allocated to this program in 2012-14. An amount of $14m has been provided for all repairs and maintenance of dwellings on homelands and town camps, and other housing maintenance programs over the period 2012-14, as well as $40m for the provision of municipal services on homelands and in town camps under the municipal and essential services program. The Homelands Extra Allowance was developed in 2012-13 and rolled out in 2013-14. Four-hundred-and-seventy-seven applications have been approved for 173 homelands at some $2.7m. An amount of $10m allocated to the program will be available for the next two years.
Talking of infrastructure, the department contracts Indigenous Essential Services Pty Ltd, a not-for-profit part of the Power and Water Corporation, to provide electricity, water and sewerage services in 72 identified remote Indigenous communities. A new three-year agreement from 2013-16 was implemented on 1 July this year for the provision of essential services to nominated Indigenous communities. In 2013, 83% of remote Indigenous community stakeholders surveyed expressed satisfaction with electricity, water and sewerage services provided under the Indigenous Essential Services program.
In 2013 seven major water supply upgrades were completed in five communities – Angurugu, Umbakumba, Wurrumiyanga, Wadeye, and Galiwinku – under the COAG strategy on water and waste water in remote communities. Water production capacity was increased at Maningrida in 2013 and at Lajamanu and Hermannsburg in 2014, with new bores drilled and equipped through capital funding of $2.45m at Lajamanu, $2.2m at Hermannsburg and $1.8m at Maningrida. In 2014, Milingimbi water supply infrastructure was upgraded with the installation of new ground and elevated water tanks to increase storage capacity. The project was completed through Australian government funding of $4m.
In 2014, Hermannsburg and Wallace Rockhole were connected to the Alice Springs electricity grid through the construction of a new 91 km high-voltage power line to replace the existing diesel power station at Hermannsburg. Grid connection to Alice Springs will provide Hermannsburg with a secure electricity supply and support future development in the region. The $6.5m project was jointly funded by the Northern Territory and Australian governments. IES also employs a total of 178 essential service operators for the day-to-day on-site operation of essential services in 72 remote Indigenous communities. A total of 75, or 42%, of these ESOs were Indigenous employees. In addition, 39 ESO trainees were employed, with 50% of these being Indigenous. Of all ESOs employed, 100 ESOs hold essential service certificate qualifications, with 51 of these being Indigenous. It is great to see Indigenous people being involved in their own communities.
The department also coordinates and monitors infrastructure development in remote communities to ensure adequate essential services are available. Major remote infrastructure investment programs include new health centres, child and family centres, police stations and facilities, new trade training centres, government employment and housing, new and upgraded remote community public housing, and new and upgraded community stores being project managed and funded by the Australian government.
The remote program office also coordinates asbestos removal work, taking medium-risk asbestos-containing materials from public buildings in remote Indigenous communities, such as stores, churches, art centres, community halls, regional council buildings and buildings managed by Indigenous enterprises. The Australian government has provided funding for the program of $19.5m for three years from June 2013.
DOCS has engaged Coffey projects – an Australian company – until 5 December 2016 to assist in the delivery of the asbestos removal program in 34 communities identified with asbestos-containing materials that fit within the scope of the program. The works program commenced in late 2014 with inspections of asbestos-containing materials at Belyuen, Maningrida and Kaltukatjara prior to the commencement of removal and restoration works in these communities.
The Northern Territory and Australian governments are jointly developing the Ilpiye Ilpiye town camp to current urban subdivision standards. It will benefit from a total of $10.63m available from the Australian government for the construction of a subdivision and upgrades to existing infrastructure. The upgrade works are being delivered under contract by Probuild NT Pty Ltd. Indigenous development opportunities within this project will be available through the construction phase, which is estimated to be six months. On 29 May, I was joined by Ilpiye Ilpiye traditional owners and town camp residents to officially launch commencement of the works at the Ilpiye Ilpiye subdivision development.
The remote program office is also managing a $7m, three-year rolling project for cadastral survey plans to be commissioned in 51 remote communities. These surveys support requirements under the Planning Act and allow leases to be entered into for a period in excess of 12 years. The Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment has carriage of delivering the project. In relation to the cadastral survey project works undertaken to 30 June 2014, nine communities have had survey field work completed, field work has commenced in one community and and 15 surveys are planned to commence …
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! The minister’s time has expired.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am sorry, minister, your time has expired.
Mr CHANDLER (Education): Mr Deputy Speaker, this government has had significant achievements in the past two years. For anyone to say it has not would be wrong; mountains have been moved. We went to the election with a detailed plan to get the Territory back on track after more than a decade of Labor’s madness. Over the past two years we have been working hard to implement that plan and much progress has been made.
I would like to share some of the achievements in the Lands, Planning and the Environment portfolio. The biggest achievement in this portfolio has been the release of land. We know those opposite talked a great deal about land release but never delivered. We are getting on with the job. Over 70 infill development sites have been identified for land release across the NT. I will correct the record …
Mr McCarthy: You want to talk about truth? Katherine.
Mr CHANDLER: The member for Barkly is correct. Did the previous government release land? Yes. Did it recognise, plan hard and get ready for the speed of the economy with the involvement of INPEX in the northern part of the Northern Territory? The answer is clearly no.
Over 70 infill development sites have been identified for land release across the Northern Territory, with the potential to yield 2700 dwellings, providing additional opportunities for Territorians to secure housing. Twenty-one lots of the 2013-14 infill program have been auctioned in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine, Darwin and Palmerston, with the successful sale of 18 of those.
Four residential greenfield sites have been released to the market since May 2013, with the potential to yield approximately 1350 residential lots. Kilgariff Stage 1A in Alice Springs is being undertaken by the Land Development Corporation, with 19 affordable lots already sold – a great take up. On 3 June I was pleased to announce that Sitzler Bros was awarded the $2.6m subdivision contract for Kilgariff, where subdivision works have commenced on site.
Katherine East Stage 1 has been awarded to Downes Graderways. This 19 ha site is expected to yield over 100 lots and support more than 200 dwellings.
Affordable lands is one of the key objectives to be met as part of the release of Katherine East Stage 1, with an average price between $110 000 and $130 000.
Zuccoli Stage 2 has been awarded to Territory Life and is expected to deliver at least 400 residential lots. The request for proposal process for Zuccoli Stages 3 and 4 closed on 28 July 2014 and is expected to be awarded in late September 2014. Stages 3 and 4 will deliver at least 750 lots, resulting in approximately 1300 new dwellings in Zuccoli. A key objective in the development of these new stages of Zuccoli is the delivery of land with an average price between $160 000 and $180 000, something the previous government did not monitor and did not put any management controls in place for. It is one thing to have land, but another for that land to be affordable.
A 37.5 ha greenfield industrial site at Humpty Doo was released to the market on 21 August 2013. Humpty Doo Industrial Park Pty Ltd is the successful developer. Constructions works are expected to be completed by mid-2015. This government is committed to pursuing good processes in the way we manage our built environment to ensure growth while protecting the environment.
On the Humpty Doo subdivision, one of the failures of the previous government was not releasing land in the rural area for commercial activity. One of the biggest complaints I heard from rural residents was about the fact their next door neighbour, or neighbour down the road, was using their residential/rural block to run industrial type businesses. The unfortunate thing is when I asked what we were doing to police that – it is very hard to police something when there is no alternative for people. There was no alternative land use for people and, therefore, you had created a problem by not releasing land, forcing people to use land they should not be using or which was inappropriate for the area. At least now we are starting to release land in the rural area for appropriate uses and, hopefully, over time less pressure will be put on people to use land in an inappropriate manner.
Talking about environment and cultural heritage assets and closer community consultation, an independent Northern Territory Planning Commission was established on 1 January 2013, to prepare integrated strategic plans for inclusion in the Northern Territory Planning Scheme. The Planning Commission also provides advice to me, as the Minister for Lands Planning and the Environment, on planning matters.
The Planning Commission has completed three substantial pieces of work: the Katherine Land Use Plan; a Tennant Creek land use framework; and the Berrimah North Area Plan. The Katherine Land Use Plan was exhibited for public comment. The plan positions the town to respond to growth opportunities in the future, while also protecting valued environmental assets.
Following consultation with the community – we seem to be criticised all the time for not consulting – the Northern Territory Planning Commission provided me with an integrated strategic plan for the Katherine region and requested I consider an amendment to include the Katherine Land Use Plan as a policy document under the NT Planning Scheme.
I am pleased to advise that following completion of statutory processes under the Planning Act, the NT Planning Scheme was amended to include the Katherine Land Use Plan as a policy document on 23 June 2014. The Tennant Creek land use framework was completed and included in the Northern Territory Planning Scheme. The Northern Territory Planning Commission completed a draft area plan for Berrimah north, the area west of Vanderlin Drive. Berrimah north is well situated for urban development, being central to the main commercial and employment centres and serviced by main transport corridors.
The Planning Commission is also progressing three other significant pieces of work, the development of a Darwin Regional Land Use Plan 2014, planning controls in the Alice Springs CBD in relation to building form and heights, and a draft conceptual plan to guide the potential development of the old hospital site and Flagstaff Park.
Late last year the Northern Territory Planning Commission released the Towards a Darwin Regional Land Use Plan. Community input led to approximately 100 submissions. The commission, following consultation and consideration of public submissions, has refined the plan. They listened and released a Draft Darwin Regional Land Use Plan 2014 on 23 July 2014 for further public consultation. I encourage members and the community to make further submissions in relation to the plan, which is on exhibition until 1 September 2014.
Correct me if I am wrong, but we have set out with a public plan. The Planning Commission has consulted with the public. We have had private businesses involved in the consultation process, and we then have a revised plan put up to the minister because of listening to the community. The final draft has now gone back out for public consultation. How that is not consulting with the public – I do not know what to do.
Mr Wood: You had no meetings in the rural area on the first draft.
Mr CHANDLER: Member for Nelson, you get in trouble if you do consult, you get in trouble if you do not consult. We have not consulted in Yuendumu or on Groote Eylandt; there are probably many places we have not been to for consultation, but there is a limit to what you can do. In fairness, there has been much consultation in regard to this.
Mr Wood: He loves me.
Mr CHANDLER: I do. Key elements of the conceptual planning include an expanded heritage precinct, large areas for community space, residential development and the potential for an iconic public facility. Extensive community consultation was held between 1 May and 11 June 2014. The Planning Commission has provided me with a report on the community consultation and the concept plan. Planning and building reforms have been implemented to streamline processes for the benefit of the development industry and the community.
The progressive online lodgement of development applications has increased the speed of processing them, and applicants can now track the progress of applications online. People may now have their applications for subdivision clearance, commonly referred to as part five, approved on the day of lodgement, provided they supply all clearance documents, thereby reducing the time in obtaining titles as part of the subdivision process.
Planning processes have been improved and streamlined with the continued development of the Development One Stop Shop, which allows developers and the general public to access information about development application processes and current applications online. The processing of development applications is being reviewed on an ongoing basis to minimise assessment times. Members of the public can now access proposals and make submissions online.
Development Consent Authority agendas are now available online two days prior to its meetings. This initiative provides improved transparency in the planning process by improving access to DCA reports, particularly for people living in regional and remote areas. Prior to this initiative people were only able to access paper copies by visiting departmental offices in Darwin, Alice Springs and Katherine. They are now available online for all to see. Delegations for all divisions of the DCA have also been reviewed to facilitate the processing of DCA decisions more efficiently, so as to generally allow applicants to receive a determination in a shorter time frame after meetings.
September 2013 saw the final release of Building Approvals Online, enabling private sector building certifiers to lodge building approvals online.
While I am talking about the DCA, there has already been a lot said about appointing Denis Burke as the Chair of the DCA. For the record, there were about seven applications for the job. The former Chair, Mr McQueen, who did a fabulous job for eight years, did not apply for the position again. I would go as far as saying that if you were to draw a long enough bow you could, in some way, find a link between at least five of those applicants and the Country Liberals in some form or another, and it did not matter.
As the minister responsible for making the decision, it would not have mattered who was ultimately selected, as there would have been someone drawing a bow and pointing it back towards a job for the boys. In this case I thought long and hard, because any one of the applicants would cause me a political headache as far as the perception of this as another job for the boys. To put the record straight, what did I do in that situation? I went back to my roots. I have put many people in different jobs over the years, and I went back to the quality of the application. I put all politics aside and said I had to find the right person for the position.
I worked out what I needed, what this government needed and what the Northern Territory needed in regard to the experience required to do the job. I listed about five to eight ideas, or terms of reference. I then judged each of those applications based on the terms of reference, and Denis Burke was a standout.
Denis Burke was the one who could provide us with the experience and ability needed for a growing Northern Territory. I put it down to that, and that is the truth. I went back to looking at and unpacking those applications, knowing any one of at least five of the seven of those applicants would cause some political pain. Do you think I am that silly not to know that? I had to look at those applications one on one and determine the best person based on the needs of the Northern Territory. That is on the record.
September 2013 saw the final release of Building Approvals Online, enabling private sector building certifiers to lodge building approvals online. An amendment to the multiple dwelling zone now allows for 300 m2 freehold lots. Deregulation of dependent units, commonly known as granny flats, now allows an occupant of an independent unit to be someone other than a dependent of a resident from the primary dwelling, while also increasing the size of permitted units in rural areas by 30 m2. This is a great initiative towards providing more housing choices for families and addressing the housing shortage in the Northern Territory.
The Planning Act was amended to provide for a concurrent assessment of planning scheme amendments and development applications, creating a single process for rezoning and development in planning legislation to save time and money. This amendment commenced on 1 May 2014.
Eight remote towns have been included in the NT Planning Scheme, something I am particularly thrilled about. In the last 12 months, Borroloola, Gapuwiyak, Gunbalanya, Kalkarindji, Numbulwar, Wadeye, Maningrida and Ali Curung have all become part of the NT Planning Scheme.
In May 2014, representatives of the Territory and federal government met with traditional owners to settle the Kalkarindji native title claim via consent determination and Indigenous land use agreement. This extinguishes all native title within the developed area of Kalkarindji and some additional land required for future development.
In Budget 2014-15 funding has been allocated for regional land release projects near Katherine, including Kalkarindji, Pine Creek, Mataranka and Timber Creek. This funding will facilitate future development in Kalkarindji, and subdivision design work is already under way for approximately 20 residential lots. This work is a great demonstration of how a township can develop once native title has been settled – Aboriginal people owning homes in their own towns, the way it should be.
The Territory government is engaged in negotiations with the Northern Land Council and native title claimants for a whole-of-town settlement in Borroloola. These negotiations are being undertaken in good faith by all parties and are proceeding in a positive and pragmatic manner. Whole-of-town settlement will support residential and commercial development, including Indigenous housing.
I will put my hand on my heart for a minute and think from an education perspective alone. We are trying our best to educate children in remote communities. What are we educating them for if there are no economies in their communities? Some will leave but some, ultimately, will remain in those communities for the rest of their lives. Through land tenure and creating economies in these communities, jobs will be created and, through that, there will be inspiration for a child, educated today, who can have something to work towards.
Mr Wood: Which jobs?
Mr CHANDLER: It is about creating economies in these remote towns.
I have tasked my Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment to consult with industry and council on the concept of introducing uniform subdivision guidelines for use by developers when designing infrastructure. In the Territory, each urban council, with the exception of the Barkly shire council, has its own set of subdivision guidelines specifying different requirements for infrastructure. Some examples include different requirements for footpath and road widths, as well as kerbing. Not only do standards differ across the Territory, they have been inconsistently applied across subdivision developments within the same municipalities or shires.
The introduction of uniform subdivision guidelines will provide more certainty and transparency to the development approval and infrastructure clearance processes. It will alleviate the complexity in costs that result from each local government authority having its own set of subdivision standards and, more broadly, the inconsistent application of standards from one development to the next by service authorities.
In addition, my department is also looking at bonding arrangements to enable early titling of financially viable developments. Bonding for early titles has its advantages to the developer in bringing forward titles, sales, cash flows and financing of a development in the first place.
As you can see, the Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment has been hugely productive in the past year. We are focused on the supply of new residential, commercial and industrial land. We will continue to cut red tape and find efficiencies in how government does business. This will support local families and industry.
Moving on …
Mrs FINOCCHIARO: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the minister.
Motion agreed to
Mr CHANDLER: At the Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment, I take my hat off to John Coleman, Leah, Fabio and all the rest. I will not go through all names, but there is quite a crew there and the work they have done in the past 12 months has been exceptional. In fact, only a few weeks ago during a northern development forum at the Northern Australia Development Office we were in a room with at least 20 to 22 developers – there are some frustrations in development – who praised this government and the changes we are making. It is not only the changes to processes and procedures; it is a change in attitude.
This government wants to get on and do things and develop the Territory. We want to stay in front of the wave, as I have said many times in this Chamber, because whilst we have an economy rocketing along as it is at the moment, if we do not keep up, particularly with land release, the price of land will continue to be out of the reach of the average Territorian.
Education is an area where we are making some serious reforms to improve outcomes. The stakes are too high for me to throw my hands in the air and make excuses. It would be very easy to say, ‘We are doing the best we can, there is nothing more we can do’. We have well-resourced schools, great infrastructure, passionate teachers and everyone is working hard, but the results are the results. I will not throw my hands in the air; I take education too seriously and I owe it to every child in the Northern Territory, as the responsible minister, to work my butt off to ensure we are doing everything we can. If there are better ways to do it, we can explore them, invest in them and deliver them.
The latest NAPLAN results show the system is failing students, especially in the bush. A total of 35% of students are not meeting the national minimum standards and that is not good enough. Two years in, our reforms are starting to bite, and some people on the other side do not like it. Focus on the classroom, not the department, was an election commitment, and changing staff ratios to better focus on the early years to build a better foundation for education – 66 additional teachers into our primary schools. The total Education budget has increased every year we have been in government.
Around 40 executive positions have moved from the top of the department and we have saved money on vehicle provision for these roles as well. If you want to criticise me for changing the focus from the department to the classroom, criticise me, but do not call it cuts to education. From the start we were upfront that our policies would require a loss of 35 teachers from high schools. Any other teacher losses in the Northern Territory have nothing to do with that policy. In fact, certain schools have more teachers today than they did 12 months or two years ago. This government has not put a cap on teacher numbers. As attendance rates grow – we work hard in that area – as we provide more schools and the Northern Territory grows we will need more teachers. There will be more teachers in the system this time next year. No doubt there will be more teachers in the system in five years from now because the Territory is growing.
If I save money by taking 40 executive contract positions – I have said before, in the five years before we took over government the net increase in student numbers was around 178 and the Department of Education grew by 780. That is not sustainable so yes, 40 executive positions were cut. That was a massive saving of 40 executive vehicles for the Department of Education. The focus is now on the classroom, not the department. We are not building empires here, we are trying to build an empire out there.
The Indigenous education review is tackling some of the real issues, not the easy ones, and focusing on results, not only the rhetoric everyone seems to focus on and which the other side is good at promoting.
I want to prepare kids to participate in the economy and strengthen culture and language in our schools. I would not bother going to places like North Queensland and trying to explore other methods of education if I did not think we had to.
As I said before, it would be easy for me to put my head in the sand and say, ‘You know what? The former government did the best it could. It cannot be done any better than it is at the moment.’ It can be, and we owe these children more; we owe these children every opportunity to improve their lives and give them an opportunity to have a life.
International education and training: it was another election commitment to create a 10-year plan, and this will be launched very soon. I have just been looking through some of the latest paperwork and I am extremely impressed with what I see. It has identified target countries to double our international student population and establish an international grammar school. It fits with the Developing the North agenda and with Asian engagement.
School autonomy: this has been put up as a masked plan to cut more money from schools. This is a personal policy that has come from many years of being associated with schools and the frustration associated with schools trying to get money out of the Department of Education for things such as approved minor new works.
Some schools have waited months, if not years, to get money back, and we owe schools a lot more than they have had in the past. School autonomy, and the fact they have control of their budgets, is exactly what is needed.
This is about improving outcomes – local decisions for local problems, which happens in other states. This does away with the horse trading that principals do every year to get the staffing mix right. It also gives schools councils a far bigger input than they have had before.
The review of middle years …
Mr WOOD: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! It is 5.30 pm.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: If you wind up in three minutes, I will work off my time here.
Mr CHANDLER: I will take the three minutes.
We should not be frightened to discuss things like school term dates. We should be mature enough to discuss them. Almost 4300 responses have been returned from the survey, which is amazing. This has created so much interest, because we want to see how we can change to improve outcomes and provide better support throughout the year.
On the expert panel on literacy and numeracy, another election commitment – getting the basics right and improving results. This is a fantastic group of academics and educators. The report was recently presented to me; I saw the first copy of it last night and I look forward to launching it next week during Literacy and Numeracy Week.
To finish up, I must put on the record that we need to do what we can to improve education in the Northern Territory. Again, we have passionate teachers, excellent infrastructure and well-resourced schools.
My biggest worry is results from remote communities, and we must do – I am hoping this will be a bipartisan approach – all we possibly can to improve them.
Debate adjourned.
Continued from 13 May 2014.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly establishes an inquiry under section 4A of the Inquiries Act to investigate all aspects of political donations in the NT in the interests of public transparency and accountability, with particular reference to:
1. all existing legislation and any other relevant legislation relating to political donations
2. all donations to political parties and Independents in the NT over the last 20 years
3. the role of politically allied companies, such as Harold Nelson Holdings and Foundation 51, and any other third parties to see if they are being used as fronts to avoid the disclosure of political donations
4. the transparency and accountability of existing funding regimes
5. other jurisdictions and their practices in relation to political donations
6. other matters the board of inquiry may wish to pursue that would assist in improving the confidence of the public in relation to the transparency and full disclosure of political donations and possible effects on government policies and approvals.
The inquiry should report back to the Administrator within six months or any other extended period it reasonably considers necessary with any recommendations it considers appropriate that would improve the transparency and accountability of any matters relating to political donations.
I will go through each of these sections separately. I do not intend to get into the debate from my point of view – others may wish to do that – but to explain why we must examine this issue of public transparency and accountability, how we should do it, point out some of the issues that have been raised in this parliament and in the media, and discuss what is happening in other states in relation to political donations.
The first item refers to existing NT legislation and any other relevant legislation relating to political donations. We at least need to know what is in our own legislation.
All states have legislation regarding political donations. In the NT we have section 10 of the Electoral Act, which deals with financial disclosure, the definition of an associated entity, the disclosure period and reporting agents of registered parties.
Division 3, section 189, ‘Disclosure of Donations’, deals with defined details in relation to a gift or loan to a registered party or candidate which included the name of the registered tender. Defined details in relation to a gift means a gift from a trust fund or funds from a foundation, which means the names and addresses of the trustees of the fund or foundation and the name, title and description of the trust fund or foundation must be provided.
Under section 191, ‘Disclosure of Gifts’, all gifts are detailed to the commission in the return of an approved form. Section 193 deals with donations to candidates and section 194 deals with donations to registered parties. Section 197 deals with anonymous gifts.
Generally in the Territory you must disclose donations over $200 and $1000, and you must declare whether you have received a loan. We have some conditions on the amount of money a candidate or party has to declare after an election. I hope an inquiry would review existing legislation to see if it is effective today.
The second point was about all donations to political parties and Independents in the NT over the last 20 years.
If an inquiry is to be thorough, it will need to go back through the records and see who donated to the various parties and individuals, especially as they relate to decisions made by governments of the day.
Some of this would require checking through the Commonwealth Electoral Commission, as returns were lodged with the Commonwealth up until 2004. By going back through 20 years you could see any trends of donors to parties.
People might say that is a fair way back, but if you are to investigate, as I will mention later, whether government may have been influenced and policies affected by donations, and who has been giving donations regularly, that is the sort of material an inquiry would need to look at.
Point three was about the role of politically allied companies such as Harold Nelson Holdings and Foundation 51, and other third parties, to see if they are being used as fronts to avoid the disclosure of political donations.
Labor has an associated entity once called Harold Nelson Holdings, which I think is now referred to on electoral return forms as the Northern Territory Investment Fund. The CLP also has an associated entity called CLP Gifts and Legacies Pty Ltd, as well as Foundation 51, which is a private company. I doubt, if there is no impropriety, there would be any opposition to holding an inquiry into these structures.
What bothered me in all of this messy business we have heard about lately, and which led me to this motion, was what the Chief Minister said in response to a question from Mr Vowles on 8 May:
He also said:
Those quotes are from the Parliamentary Record.
It is very unlikely that information, either from the directors or the party, will be forthcoming to verify whether there is any legal connection between Foundation 51 and the CLP. An inquiry, which I am asking for, would be the only way to clear the air.
The Chief Minister, in responding to a question during that same Question Time, also mentioned the slush fund of Harold Nelson Holdings and the relationship between it and the Labor Party; he said if there were such slush funds, then an inquiry could verify if that was the case.
People see what is happening in New South Wales with the ICAC inquiry, and they start to wonder whether our Northern Territory parties have similar ghosts in the closet.
Point four deals with the transparency and accountability of existing funding regimes. Presently, political parties can dim the lights a bit, as can be seen in how the system works when the public wants to find out who donated to a party, as distinct from Independent candidates. For instance, a candidate for a party can ask donors to send their donations through the party. If they went directly to the candidate, that person would have to provide details of those donations within 15 weeks after the polling day. By telling donors to send donations direct to the party, the return detailing those donations does not have to be completed until 20 weeks after the end of the financial year. For instance, the last election was held in August 2012. The parties put their returns in 20 weeks after the financial year, meaning November 2013, and they only then made the Electoral Commission’s webpage in March this year. That is hardly a transparent and accountable process.
The government had been in power for 18 months before we knew who donated to which party. An inquiry would be an opportunity to make sure all candidates were on a level playing field when it came to financial disclosure of donations. Early returns should be for everyone.
Point five talks about other jurisdictions and their practices in relation to political donations. An inquiry could look at what is happening in other states and see whether there is legislation that would benefit our system if taken on by the government. For instance, in New South Wales there is not only a limitation on the reporting of donations, there is also a list of prohibited donors and an applicable cap on donations.
In New South Wales, prohibited donors are defined as the following: property developers; tobacco industry business entities; and liquor or gambling business entities. It is unlawful for a prohibited donor to make a political donation and it is unlawful for a person to accept the political donation from a prohibited donor, which is probably one of the reasons so many people have lost their jobs in New South Wales.
New South Wales obviously feels governments can be corrupted by receiving donations from various industry groups which would have much to gain by donating to a party.
If you look at the donations to our parties, certain donors come up time and time again. We have developers, the AHA and various gambling companies mentioned on both sides. Just because some of these groups give to both sides does not mean they cannot influence. For example, the AHA gave $150 000 to both parties at the last election, and both sites voted against restrictions on closing hours.
As I said, in New South Wales there is a limit to what a member of parliament can receive. I will give you an idea of what the caps are. Caps on political donations for state elections: Division 2A from 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2015 is $5700 for political donations to or for the benefit of a registered political party; $5700 for political donations to or for the benefit of a group; $2400 for political donations for the benefit of an unregistered party; $2400 for political donations to or for the benefit of a candidate; $2400 for political donations to or for the benefit of an elected member; and $2400 for political donations to or for the benefit of a third-party campaigner.
To make sure the rules are adhered to, New South Wales has an election funding authority which has a number of purposes, two of which are relevant to this debate. The election funding authority’s job is to enforce the imposition of maximum amounts, or caps, on the value of political donations that might be lawfully accepted and the electoral communication expenditure that might lawfully be incurred; to enforce prohibition of donations from a limited class of intending donors; and to enforce the requirement to disclose the source and amount of all political donations received and the amount of electoral expenditure for state, parliamentary and local government election campaigns.
The act imposes a duty on the election funding authority to exercise its functions in a manner that is not unfairly biased against or in favour of any particular party, group, candidate or other person, body or organisation.
If we hold an inquiry I hope we consider whether we need an election funding authority.
It is interesting to note that while we are talking about these caps, Queensland has just lifted its threshold for disclosure from $1000 to $12 400. That certainly would hide some consistent donations in the Northern Territory.
Point six: other matters the board of inquiry may wish to pursue that would assist in improving the confidence of the public in relation to the transparency and full disclosure of political donations and possible effects on government policies and approvals.
As I said before, New South Wales has a list of prohibited donors who deal with property, tobacco, alcohol and gambling. If you were to peruse a list of donors to both parties in the Northern Territory which might fit into this category you could ask whether government planning and development decisions or policy assisted companies which had donated to a party or parties whose decisions were influenced by those donations, for example, whether decisions about not restricting closing hours in Mitchell Street had anything to do with large donations from the AHA.
If we had similar electoral laws to New South Wales you would not have been able to donate to the CLP or Labor in previous elections if you were a prohibited donor. Should we look at prohibited donors? If we did, should it cover more than just the four categories in the New South Wales legislation?
Do entities such as large fuel companies control government policy? We have very high fuel prices in the Northern Territory and do not seem to have any influence on reducing them. Do constant donations from land or property developers over a number of years have any bearing on the government’s decision as to where development should occur? Can unions, through their donations or lack of donations, influence government policy?
I have the returns for the last few years from both parties. The Australian Labor Party had – this is mainly to do with the last election, if you were to take up some of the issues in New South Wales for instance – a donation, not very big, from Shenannigans. That is an alcohol provider, so therefore it would not be allowed to provide. There is the AHA as I mentioned before, as well as Halikos, Morandini, Strangways – more developers.
Under New South Wales legislation the ALP would not have been allowed to accept donations from those groups. By the way, I am not picking on those groups; they are just names I have pulled out. In the case of the CLP, before the last election there was a quite a large donation of $150 000 – similar to donations the AHA gave to both parties – from John Halikos. There is the Australian Hotels Association, Morandini, Randazzo and Shenannigans. There was also SportingBet, Strangways and one I do not know much about, which was from a few years ago – the Australian Lottery Company. If you examine the New South Wales process those companies would not be allow to donate.
I know there is some debate about whether this is fair or not, but it is a good idea. It can run into the problem of defining a developer, but if the inquiry was looking into that issue I hope it would study not only the New South Wales legislation but also talk to ICAC and see which issues have been raised in relation to whether this sort of legislation is workable. Whilst I might have a philosophical belief this is the way we should go, I hope the inquiry would look at the practical implications of trying to have donors who are not allowed to donate to a political party.
An inquiry should be able to investigate all of these matters. It could look back at which projects, developments or businesses saw favourable treatment by government and whether there was any correlation with donations, either directly or indirectly.
We are not the only ones talking about this issue at the moment. I have copies of the Australian Financial Review from Tuesday 19 August, as well as the day before. The heading is, ‘Developer’s $150 000 party donation’.
I will read from an article to give you an idea that we and New South Wales are not the only ones discussing this issue. It says:
Someone said it was 10 – I am not sure, but it is at least eight – members of the New South Wales Liberal Party who have either resigned or gone to the cross bench. I am not sure if they have all resigned, but there have been some issues in receiving donations that go against NSW electoral laws, and they are based on the capping and prohibition of receiving or giving donations from industries. I note – I may be wrong – the Mayor of Newcastle has now resigned as well. It begs the question as to whether we should look at something similar ourselves.
The last point is that the inquiry should report back to the Administrator within six months or any other extended period it reasonably considers necessary with any recommendations it considers appropriate that would improve the transparency and accountability of any matters relating to political donations. There may be other matters which have not been covered which the inquiry might find helpful in improving the manner in which political donations are dealt with. One option raised in relation to the scandal rocking the New South Wales Liberal Party was the idea of public funding in election campaigns to avoid private donations that can influence a government later on.
I knew Ted Mack, who used to be the Independent, when he was the Mayor of North Sydney Council, and he was a person who always spoke his mind. I believe he was also an Independent member representing New South Wales in the federal parliament for a period of time. He was interviewed about this matter and he put forward the idea that people standing for election should be publicly funded. That could be very controversial.
It may be that people do not accept they should have to pay for politicians to run an election campaign. On the other hand, it may take away all the concerns people have about the influence industry bodies, companies or individuals can have in making the policies of a government move in a way they would like.
There is a lot of politics in this debate, but if members of this parliament would like to clear the air on this issue, if only for the sake of looking at our legislation and seeing whether it is doing what it was intended to do and whether we could improve on it, whether other jurisdictions’ legislation is worth considering as part of a revised piece of legislation, while we are discussing this it could give parties an opportunity in an inquiry to talk about ways in which they raise money for their political purposes.
Much of this has been around Foundation 51. I have a great range of media releases from various people. I will use one to show you how the issue gets blurry. This is an ABC news item, ‘Foundation 51 had direct line to NT Chief Minister Adam Giles, FOI documents reveal’:
Are there methods where people can donate, remain anonymous and that donation somehow finds its way into the corpus of any political party? I raise this motion tonight asking for support on both sides.
Territorians want to see governments they can trust on both sides. They want to make sure people who donate to those parties do not have any undue influence on policies, because we would hope governments make decisions for all Territorians, not for friends or people who have done them favours, otherwise our democratic system becomes corrupted.
You can see what is happening in New South Wales, and I do not want that to happen in the Northern Territory. I hope our process is sufficiently transparent. Some people might say we need to set up an ICAC. I do not know; perhaps that could come out of the inquiry if it felt things were happening that were not above board. I could not make any comment on that because it would be the role of the inquiry to look at those matters.
I raise this as a matter of public importance as well, not in the official way of having our matters of public importance, just in the broader context that this is an issue where people want to make sure everything is up-front, correct and transparent. I hope both parties will support this motion.
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this motion because it is about honesty, trust and transparency. It brings the focus of Territorians back to how we encourage people to think in the Northern Territory. It is about honesty. When we raise our children, some of the core principles we teach them are about honesty, transparency and not lying.
Why should Territorians lose out to big business which donates to the two major parties? Foundation 51 has been, as the member for Nelson said, the subject of huge debate in this House. As a former member of the Country Liberal Party, and on behalf of my two colleagues, the members for Arnhem and Arafura, I would like to ask a question. If we all support the inquiry the member for Nelson is asking for, I would like an inquiry into who paid for my, Larisa Lee’s and Francis Xavier’s campaigns.
These are the issues we need to be open and up-front about. Mr Deputy Speaker, maybe you need to ask who paid for your campaign. Was it Foundation 51? We know one of the donors for the member for Port Darwin. There are many people.
We have accused the new member for Blain of receiving a donation of around $10 000 from Foundation 51 that is not cited anywhere. This is the honesty and transparency we need. He is a Christian man, a teacher who taught about openness, transparency, honesty and trust. That was in your maiden speech – trust; maybe you can allow all of us to trust you and believe you are telling the truth. Did Foundation 51 fund or help you? You need to be very cautious in the answers you give.
I put on the record how important the questions are that people ask about our integrity. This is about the integrity of parties, and Territorians need to know. An inquiry would be one way of putting this to bed.
Let us be honest and transparent. I have asked, if an inquiry is approved, for the election campaigns of my two colleagues and me to be looked into. That is about trust, honesty and transparency. It is about telling Territorians that we listen to their voices, even if they are small and somewhere in the northern suburbs.
The member for Nelson is correct; this is about the integrity of this government and parliament. We need to show Territorians we are sincere and here to represent them. We will make sure, if there is any doubt, that we erase those doubts in the minds of Territorians asking these questions, whether they are journalists, the media or ordinary people.
There is doubt and there are questions being asked. It is up to everyone in this House to make sure we restore the trust, faith and integrity by allowing such inquiries to happen. We do not want to be like New South Wales or any other jurisdiction where you have huge inquiries happening and ministers and four politicians resigning because they know what is coming up might have an impact on their future as a politician.
If we are not scared of uncovering things we might not want other Territorians to see, we should be open and transparent. Everybody in this Chamber should be supporting the call by the member for Nelson, because it is about honesty. Are we ashamed? Are we hiding something? It will be very interesting to see, member for Nelson, who votes for this. It is about sending the message we are honest and truthful. It is about the integrity of the Northern Territory, and when we see the direct attacks on the free, democratic process here we must question ourselves.
Why is this happening? We need to make sure the integrity of this parliament and ourselves is returned. Let us close all the loopholes with regard to disclosure and donations to political parties. Let us not be ashamed or afraid to close all of those gaps. If we see gaps in our connection with each other let us close them. Let us say, ‘Okay, none of this will happen. We will close all of these little loops.’
I want to read into Hansard some of the e-mails between the Chief Minister, the president and some CLP members of Foundation 51.
Foundation 51, a private company, is described in e-mail correspondence between Graeme Lewis and the president of the CLP as providing the following service. I quote Graeme Lewis:
Again:
While the member for Blain has now disclosed the amount of funds he received from Foundation 51 and its directors – was it $10 000? It did not show up on the Northern Territory Electoral Commission website. It was thought that closing Foundation 51 would make this investigation go away and that all wrongdoing in past and present activities would vanish.
Graeme Lewis also said:
Accountability, disclosure and transparency are vital components of good financial management for any organisation, but political parties must take extra care to ensure they do not trespass on the trust of the people and their supporters. Associated entities are required to disclose donations, as clearly identified in the Northern Territory Electoral Commission disclosure handbook for donors. If it looks like, smells like and behaves like an associate entity, then Foundation 51 is an associate entity.
To keep secret the identity of donors to organisations such as Foundation 51 and Foundation 51’s own financial contribution to the CLP can lead to a range of unfair advantages to those who donate secretly, especially if they are involved in tenders that win government contracts and/or applications for government support that can provide financial reward or gain to those companies or individuals.
It is in the interest of Territorians, and in our best interests as representatives of the people, that we support the member for Nelson’s motion.
Are we afraid to expose ourselves? Are we scared of something that might be find out? Or are we happy to support this motion and allow an inquiry to make sure all of these allegations can be cleared through that process? That is the only way we can put all of this to bed.
This is another e-mail from Graeme Lewis, sent Wednesday 26 March 2014, at 10.14 pm, to Ross Connolly. Copied in are Eli Melky, Daniel Davis and Damien Moriarty. SMS messages to Eli Melky were the subject of this email, written and sent in absolute confidence. It said:
It is because of allegations we throw at each other inside this Chamber that I speak, on behalf of my two colleagues, to ask for support of this motion from the member for Nelson, who has asked for an inquiry, openness, transparency and trust. It is what we all need, so we can put all of these allegations to bed. It is sending a direct message to Territorians that they can have faith in their leaders and representatives.
Mr VOWLES (Johnston): Mr Deputy Speaker, I too support this motion.
The activities of the CLP and Foundation 51 have undermined the fabric of the democratic process in the Northern Territory. Foundation 51 has much in common with Eight by Five, an entity established by the Liberal Party in New South Wales to conceal unlawful political donations. Investigations by the Independent Commission against Corruption in New South Wales have exposed illegal and corrupt practices by fundraising entity Eight by Five and members of the Liberal Party.
If the Chief Minister was really committed to good governance and propriety he would initiate a wide-ranging judicial inquiry into Foundation 51. He has refused to do that because he has much to hide about the CLP’s secretive fundraising activities via Foundation 51.
Foundation 51 is a slush fund set up to circumvent the disclosure of political donations required by the Commonwealth and Northern Territory Electoral Acts. Mr Graeme Lewis, a member of the CLP management committee, a former CLP Treasurer and, until recently, the CLP-appointed Chair of the Northern Territory Land Development Corporation, is a director of Foundation 51.
A former director of Foundation 51 is CLP-appointed magistrate Mr Peter Maley. Recently the Northern Territory Bar Association raised a broad range of serious concerns about the suitability of Mr Maley to continue to hold office as a magistrate in the Northern Territory. One of those serious concerns was magistrate Maley’s directorship of Foundation 51. Chief Minister Adam Giles has consistently stated there is no connection between the CLP and Foundation 51. That is simply not true.
In a recent e-mail disclosed under FOI, despite previous denials, the Chief Minister’s direct relationship with Foundation 51 and its director, Graeme Lewis has been clearly exposed. I seek leave to table an exchange of e-mails.
Leave granted.
Mr VOWLES: In an e-mail on 11 May, Foundation 51 director Graeme Lewis asked the Chief Minister to clear a media release refuting claims that Foundation 51 is a CLP slush fund. His e-mail to the Chief Minister said:
The use of the words ‘help’ and ‘hinder’ are an instructive. The clear objective was to help cover up and hinder exposure of the truth. The draft media release set out in the e-mail states:
On 13 May Mr Lewis issued a media release which omitted reference to the close alliance between Foundation 51 and the CLP included in the draft referred to the Chief Minister. The Chief Minister’s motive is clear. Under no circumstances did he want his mouthpiece, Graeme Lewis, to confirm in public the close connection between Foundation 51 and the Country Liberal Party.
Further confirmation of the Chief Minister’s involvement in Foundation 51 is exposed in the tabled exchange of e-mails with Mr Lewis.
On 22 May Graeme Lewis said in an e-mail to the Chief Minister:
In his e-mail reply of 25 May, clearly concerned about revelations concerning his involvement in Foundation 51, the Chief Minister said
Despite his previous denials, the e-mail confirms the Chief Minister was fully aware that Mr Lewis’ appointment as Chair of the Land Development Corporation was a clear conflict of interest with his directorship of Foundation 51 and membership of the CLP management committee. It is also clear from this e-mail that Graeme Lewis, the Chief Minister’s hand-picked Chair of the Land Development Corporation, was being set up to take the fall for the Chief Minister, Adam Giles.
On 5 July, the NT News reported:
We know from CLP sources that Graeme Lewis was pressured to resign by senior government figures to take the heat off the Chief Minister. This is the same Chief Minister who knew Graeme Lewis was the member of the CLP management committee and a director of Foundation 51 when he was appointed as Chair of the Land Development Corporation. This is the same Chief Minister who sits on the CLP management committee with Graeme Lewis and who has said in this parliament that he does not know about Foundation 51. The appointment of an active CLP fundraiser as Chair of the Land Development Corporation was always inappropriate.
There are startling similarities between the CLP’s activities in the Northern Territory and breaches of the law concerning the disclosure of donations by the Liberal Party in New South Wales. In New South Wales, the Independent Commission Against Corruption has exposed systematic rorting of donation disclosure provisions and other corrupt and illegal behaviour by the Liberal Party. A central element of the ICAC investigation is a corrupt scheme to make donations to the Liberal Party using a slush fund called Eight by Five to avoid disclosure provisions in the Electoral Act.
The Liberal Party’s Eight by Five and the CLP slush fund, Foundation 51, are both designed to hide political donations from public scrutiny. The Chief Minister has consistently denied any connection between the fundraising activities of Foundation 51 and the CLP. However, this deception was also exposed by e-mails tabled in this Assembly on 8 May. An e-mail from Graeme Lewis on 26 March confirmed he had discussed the operation of Foundation 51 with the Chief Minister on many occasions. The Lewis e-mail also confirmed the direct involvement of Foundation 51 in CLP fundraising activities. It stated:
The Lewis e-mail of 26 March also stated unequivocally:
The Northern Territory judiciary, the legal fraternity and the wider community may well ask; what did Foundation 51 director, magistrate Peter Maley, know about these activities?
In New South Wales, ICAC inquiries will be extended to the national level following disclosures that illegal donations in that state have been laundered by the Free Enterprise Foundation, an entity of the federal Liberal Party. There are close parallels between the illicit activities of the Liberal Party of New South Wales, exposed by ICAC, and Foundation 51, the CLP entity which has solicited and refused to disclose secret donations in the Northern Territory.
Recently, the Sydney Morning Herald reported a key fundraiser for federal Treasurer Joe Hockey has been called to give evidence to ICAC on alleged illegal donations to the North Sydney Forum. The forum provides exclusive access to Mr Hockey in return for donations in the form of annual membership fees of up to $22 000. This is the model used by the CLP’s Foundation 51.
In common with Adam Giles and Graeme Lewis, Joe Hockey and the New South Wales Liberals have refused to disclose the details of secret donations. A common thread in New South Wales and the Northern Territory is the questionable appointment of political operatives to key positions in the public service, statutory boards and authorities operating in commercial environments.
These appointments have compromised government propriety and decision-making. The appointment of Graeme Lewis as Chair of the Land Development Corporation clearly conflicted with his directorship of Foundation 51 and membership of the CLP management committee. His belated resignation as Chair of the LDC under pressure from the Chief Minister cannot hide this clear conflict of interest. There is growing community concern and anger about the long list of CLP jobs for the boys, especially those in key commercial and regulatory environments.
The recent appointment of former Chief Minister and lobbyist, Denis Burke, as Chair of the Development Consent Authority is a clear conflict of interest and should be revoked. There is also growing community disquiet about the appointment of Gary Nairn, former Liberal Party minister and president of the CLP, as the Northern Territory Planning Commissioner.
The body count from the ICAC investigations into Liberal Party activities in New South Wales is two ministers gone from Cabinet, two members resigned from parliament, four ex-Liberal backbenchers sitting on the cross benches, the Mayor of Newcastle has resigned, a former Premier sitting on the backbench and a federal Assistant Treasurer forced to stand aside.
On events in New South Wales, one political commentator said recently:
There is an endemic and pervasive disregard for propriety in the CLP government led by Chief Minister Adam Giles. The Territory community has a reasonable expectation that donations to political parties and candidates will be disclosed in the public interest and in accordance with the law. However, providing good governance and integrity always comes last with this CLP government. The survival of Adam Giles, an inexperienced, immature, arrogant and out of touch Chief Minister, is the primary and only focus of this government and the CLP.
There is a compelling case for a wide-ranging judicial inquiry into Foundation 51, including but not limited to the activities of Mr Graeme Lewis, magistrate Peter Maley and the CLP ministers and MLAs. This is the only way to expose the web of deceit at the heart of Foundation 51 and its fundraising on behalf of the CLP.
I look forward to and hope somebody from the CLP will make a contribution to this debate. Thank you.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, I wonder who the real member for Johnston is. We always hear these eloquent and well-argued speeches, and every so often he will drop the piece of paper and try to articulate his way through an argument as he ad libs it. He betrays very quickly the yawning chasm between the member for Johnston and the real member for Johnston. Whoever you are member for Johnston, you write very good speeches, which are delivered by being read out in this place. I congratulate you.
To the real member for Johnston, whoever you are, what I just heard was gumpf and politics. I will give you an example with the e-mail trail that was just tabled; it is many pages long, and I asked the Table Office to provide me a copy. It is the same e-mail printed out about six times in different forms. The member for Johnston tried to pad out the e-mail trail, when it is the same message repeated.
Once again, the starting point for the member for Johnston is dishonesty, misrepresentation and untruth. We have to establish that …
Mr VOWLES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I know you are trying to bait me, member for Port Darwin. Standing Order 62: offensive and unbecoming words, so I ask that he withdraw.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Which words in particular?
Mr VOWLES: Dishonest.
Mr ELFERINK: I withdraw the word, but I am not sure how else to describe it. I could use the word liar, but that would be unparliamentary, so I would not do that. The peddler of untruths, the manufacturer of misrepresentation, is trying to be deceptive from the word go. I thank the honourable member for the half of a forest he placed on the table, which is pretty much the same e-mail reproduced again and again.
There is great focus on Foundation 51. You will notice not once did he mention Harold Nelson Holdings, which appears in the motion.
Ms Lawrie: That was fully disclosed.
Mr ELFERINK: I am glad we can pick up on this. This is where I will challenge this argument and the whole way it is constructed. ‘Fully disclosed’, says the Leader of the Opposition – indeed, fully disclosed.
There are several issues that come up in this motion. The first issue is, what are the rules? The second issue is, how are they policed? And the third issue is, who broke the rules? Let us start with the first issue. The member for Nelson articulated some of those rules which exist. I have been around this House since 1997. In that time I have seen this debate played out on repeated occasions and from time to time the rules have changed. The same set of arguments has been run each and every time – full disclosure, people have the right to know, all of those sorts of things.
The rules that change are then placed in such a way, before the House, that they will fix all of those problems. However, we keep coming back to the same debate again and again. The issue now is that we must have an inquiry and look at those rules again. We have to see if those rules are working; I am happy to see references to those rules, but in the game of politics there will always be members in this House – and we have just seen it from the member for Johnston – who will try to build something around nothing. We have a tissue-thin series of allegations, the rest of the gumpf built around it, and we will have a discussion about what is happening in New South Wales and add that to the list.
The rules of disclosure in this jurisdiction are clear and well-articulated. As far as I know, they have been complied with. I have complied with my obligations under the rules of disclosure and would expect that everybody else in this House applies those rules of disclosure to themselves.
The rules have been established after many debates in this House, they continue to exist and, as far as I know, they are robust.
That raises the issue of how the rules are policed. We have the Electoral Commission, which has a capacity to investigate those rules. As I understand it, from time to time the Electoral Commission will proceed with investigations and go through the process. It undertakes those investigations in accordance with rules which have been dictated. I could stand corrected on this but, if memory serves me, the current set of rules were established under the former Labor Party.
These are there rules; these are the benchmarks and standards the Labor Party said were fine and are what we expect in this jurisdiction. The rules are policed because professional people police them. If there is a complaint to be made, I urge any member who has any grounds to believe there is a breach of the rules to make an appropriate complaint to the Northern Territory Electoral Commission, which is properly funded to to pursue these matters to their exhaustion.
This raises the next issue – where the member for Johnston makes his case – of, who broke the rules? The member for Johnston is long on assertions, but if he has any to make I would take him back to the former point of how they are policed. I ask the member for Johnston to say, ‘Okay, I had a series of allegations to make; I have one e-mail to print out several times. I can send all of that to the Australian Electoral Commission and it can make whatever investigations of that it sees fit under the rules established in this jurisdiction.’
However, that is not what the member for Johnston is arguing for. He is arguing, ‘Let us have another investigation because it would suit us politically to do so’. The rules exist, they are well established, and anybody who breaks the rules will have to face the consequences. That is the normal process that is in place.
There is an investigate body in place, there is an established set of rules, and if there are any assertions of impropriety to be made I urge members to follow those rules and structures and pursue the matters accordingly.
I hear all sorts of references and quotes from members opposite in relation to the e-mail trail, particularly in regard to Graeme Lewis. All I can see repeatedly in those e-mail trails is Graeme Lewis being quite clear about the fact he has to create and keep boundaries in place between the company of which he is a director, Foundation 51, and the party, which is the CLP.
I have some understanding, as a former director of the party, of how the CLP works. I think I have been to one of Foundation 51’s functions, but it is something that is quite separate. That has been made clear again in correspondence from Graeme Lewis, which has been tabled in this place. If members opposite have any case to make there are appropriate avenues to go down, and I urge members opposite to do so.
This enthusiasm, particularly from the Labor Party, is politically driven. The rules are well established, the systems for policing those rules are well established, and if anybody has any information as to who broke the rules, I advise them to go down the path of referring it to the body that polices the rules. This motion will not be supported by government.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank those who responded to the debate.
The Electoral Commission is investing Foundation 51. I quote from an ABC website:
It goes on to say:
I quote again from Mr Giles:
I heard what the Attorney-General had to say, and I understand what he is about. I hope an inquiry would not only be about Foundation 51. We have one state in Australia which – you might say it is only one state – has obviously seen there are dangers when certain industry groups donate to parties. They have said some of those industry groups should not donate to political parties. The reasons for that are obvious: we know certain businesses will try to persuade governments to make decisions that would favour them. I cannot say whether that is happening in the Territory or not. However, we have similar industries to New South Wales, and it would be good to hold an inquiry into our own books and into whether a system operating in New South Wales is something the government should consider.
The member for Port Darwin said the rules are robust, which is his opinion. I would like to see that tested in an inquiry. It is easy to say the rules are robust, but if I ask the member for Port Darwin to show me whether some of the donations given to the CLP have affected its policies in its time in government – whether it is in the last two years or previous periods.
I would also ask the opposition. They were in government for a good period of time and received some heavy donations from various companies, developers, the AHA and, I think, SKYCITY as well. There is a group of companies that in one jurisdiction in Australia would not be allowed to donate to parties for electoral purposes. As in many cases when people want to try to get around the rules, they have tried to do so by, in this case, handing out cash donations, hoping nobody will see.
Luckily in New South Wales they have a pretty strong ICAC, which has performed some fairly thorough investigations and found where people had received money from. People might say ‘So what?’ but it is interesting. If you know the rules – the rules in New South Wales have been in place since 2009 – why would certain people try to break them? If they knew the rules said you could not donate, why would they try to break the rules? Why would they give a politician a certain amount of money he should not be receiving? It is because they wanted some political influence or commercial favours from that government. If it was not for that, why would they break the law and donate money to particular individuals?
I do not know all the details about Foundation 51. The member for Namatjira has raised some issues in relation to the Blain by-election and whether she was funded by Foundation 51. The member for Johnston has also listed some issues, raised through an e-mail trail.
However, they are not the only issues I am talking about with this inquiry. An inquiry would clear the air, hopefully, on matters those two people are referring to but, at the same time, it would provide an opportunity to see whether our system is working properly. All right, the member for Port Darwin says the rules have been examined several times. But it is not only rules I am looking at, it is whether donations are affecting any government policies.
The public wants some certainty that donations and government policies are not related. I have heard people say the government sometimes looks at itself as being the most important part of being in government, if that makes any sense. The people they represent are the most important part, and you would hope receiving donations from any company did not sway government decisions which sidelined and ignored the trust of the Northern Territory community. They would hope that governments would do the right thing by them, rather than any specific group or body that was in favour.
I relate this to both governments, because I know of policies and actions on both sides which have concerned me. You wonder why a development occurred which seemed to be outside normal guidelines. It has concerned me that perhaps those decisions were influenced by donations. I might be wrong, and the best way to find out is to ask for an inquiry, even if it goes back 20 years, to look for any trends. Some of the documents I have before me – there is an opinion piece dated 4 February 2000 when the CLP was in power and Labor was the opposition. Even that talks about investments. Some of those companies contributing to the CLP are still contributing to the party. I imagine some of the companies are still contributing to the Labor Party as well. The only two I can guarantee would not be contributing to the CLP anymore would be Ansett Airlines and Gove peninsula-based corporation Nabalco.
The other ones here probably still donate some funds; I know they do because I have them on the record, which anyone can obtain, so they are not secret.
I understand this will not receive support from the government. That is disappointing, as it would not be a big inquiry. With the AEC conducting an inquiry at the same time, information in relation to Foundation 51 could have been shared and a simple analysis of donations performed, as well as looking at the structure of our legislation and any improvements that could be made to make sure there is a clear delineation between which funds governments and parties receive and which policies and decisions are being made by government, so it is clear for everyone to see.
If the AEC thinks there should be an inquiry into Foundation 51 it must have some concerns. If we also had an inquiry which did not duplicate the issues the AEC is looking at we could find a good outcome for all Territorians.
This is about transparency, about people in the Northern Territory having faith in their electoral system and donations system, and if you really believe in the democratic process you believe governments will be influenced by the vote, not the dollar. That is one area this inquiry could resolve and tell this parliament whether we have had governments – of both persuasions, because we have had both governments over the last few years – which have done the right thing by the people, not based on the dollar, but on what was good for Territorians.
Motion agreed to.
Bill presented and read a first time.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader) (by leave): Madam Speaker, on behalf of the member for Fannie Bay, I present a bill entitled the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Fire-Fighters) Bill. I move that the bill be now read a second time.
It is with a heavy heart that, with comments from the Treasurer in today’s Question Time, we bring back to this House a bill that provides cover for firefighters and ex-firefighters who develop cancer.
Since the CLP voted against providing firefighters with protection a year ago, three former firefighters have passed away with cancer.
Since the CLP voted against providing firefighters with protection a year ago, Jock McLeod has had to fight cancer and fight the system. Jock still has not been covered by this government in his fight with cancer.
Since the CLP voted against providing firefighters with protection a year ago, Tommy Lawler has had to fight cancer and fight the system. Tommy still has not been covered by this government in his fight with cancer.
In the year since the CLP voted against providing protection, we have seen no action from this government until today, when the government has said it will finally release their review on the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act. Then, to add insult to injury, they have made it clear in their press release that they will not support retrospective legislation.
The government has essentially said, ‘We appreciate you guys bringing this to our attention. We will do this, but not for you’. The government will not cover the men who did the hard yards, the decades of work on the front line, to bring this to the government’s and the public’s attention.
It is the cruellest blow. What a disrespectful thing to do to these brave men who have laid their lives on the line for decades for Territorians and have paid a terrible price – contracted cancer on the job – and this government will not do the decent thing and support them.
The government’s own first review, handed down last year, supports the fact that firefighters are at greater risk of developing cancer while on the job protecting Territorians.
The government’s own review accepts that the medical supports the principle of reversing the assumption, the principle behind our bill. Yet there still has been no action by this government to provide cover for our firefighters and former firefighters.
This is a significant issue for our firefighters, former firefighters and their families. They have, over the last year, organised the largest petition in the Territory’s history to draw attention to their fears and their need for protection.
The lack of action provides us concern for the health of firefighters. There has been no guarantee from the CLP government that they would have retrospective provisions. That is a critical issue for firefighters. Without that provision, a firefighter would only be covered if they discover they have cancer after a bill that reverses the presumption becomes an act.
There are firefighters considering not visiting the doctor for their health checks. They have seen the problems their brother firefighters have faced while fighting cancer and fighting the system; the human and financial cost is significant.
Our firefighters should not have these stresses while they do their job keeping Territorians safe. We encourage all firefighters to look after their health. If you have cancer, the sooner you know the better you are. The CLP’s lack of action should not impact on your healthcare.
The CLP’s lack of action means we have to return to this Chamber to re-introduce a bill that provides protection for firefighters and former firefighters who develop cancer. With this second bill we have listened to the comments from the member for Nelson and made two amendments. The member for Nelson agreed that firefighters and former firefighters who already have cancer should be covered, but was uncomfortable with an open-ended retrospective period.
In our second bill we will provide a grandfathering provision. Firefighters and former firefighters have two years in which to come forward with their claim. We have consulted with firefighters, and we believe this is an adequate time period for people to come forward. As I touched on earlier, all firefighters who develop cancer after this legislation is enacted would be covered by the reversal of presumption.
The member for Nelson’s second concern was about providing a distinction between professional firefighters and volunteer firefighters. Our volunteers do an amazing job, often in difficult circumstances. The nature of their work depends on what the community needs them to respond to. That on-call nature means that the incidents they turn up to truly matter. We know from the medical evidence that professional firefighters, as part of their full-time activities, are exposed in a manner that means they are at greater risk of developing cancer on the job, just by doing their job, just by turning up for their shift.
That means time served, as the schedule in the first bill, and in this bill, sets out, is appropriate for professional firefighters. We have looked at other states and taken from South Australia its provisions for volunteer firefighters and a requirement to attend at least 175 incidents over a period of five years. We believe this is an important threshold to achieve for volunteer firefighters. It gives insurers some comfort that claimants have been active firefighters and recognises those who do serve on the front line during incidents. These two changes are responses to the member for Nelson’s contribution to the second reading debate.
The CLP provided no material response that we could respond to. The minister instead made accusations and false promises. The minister said that our first bill and our firefighters were politically motivated. That is an accusation we reject utterly. That is an accusation firefighters reject utterly. In every jurisdiction that this bill has been introduced it has received bipartisan support, in the Australian parliament and the Tasmanian parliament, and since the CLP voted against our bill, firefighters have received bipartisan support in South Australia and Western Australia.
In the Northern Territory we still have the farcical situation that firefighters at Darwin Airport are covered, but a firefighter working just 10 km away in Stuart Park is not covered. The CLP had an opportunity to be bipartisan and support our bill. The CLP had an opportunity to be bipartisan and introduce its own bill. We would have supported it.
The minister said, ‘Wait on our review’. He said today he will release a review with 58 recommendations and, pending Cabinet approval, accepts most of them, but, again, with no retrospectivity it means there are currently four known firefighters that their legislation does not help.
We do not believe our firefighters should wait, but after the CLP voted down our bill we have had no choice but to wait. The government’s own review supports our bill. The minister has not acted on the need for protection for our firefighters identified in that review. Every other parliament that has provided this protection has just done it. They have brought in bills specifically for firefighters. They have not made excuses like the minister did and has done.
It is a year since the CLP voted down our bill. That was a needless political decision that has abandoned our firefighters. Jock, Tommy – we will not abandon them; we will get legislation passed in this Chamber that protects our firefighters.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to the House.
Debate adjourned.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, whilst there is no question before the Chair I move that so much of standing orders be suspended to enable the …
Ms Lawrie: Madam Speaker, it is general business. He has to seek leave to suspend standing orders.
Mr ELFERINK: No, actually, I do not.
I move that so much of standing orders be suspended as to enable this House to reverse its decision in relation to the inquiry into political donations made earlier this day. The Northern Territory government made it abundantly clear we would not be supporting this matter. The House has made a decision, and I move the motion be put forthwith.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, speaking to the suspension of standing orders, tonight draws clear and stark just how incompetent and dysfunctional the CLP government is. It has to use the powers of the Leader of Government Business, vested in parliament, in an abusive way to ram through a motion that essentially includes a gag order, because he is moving that the motion be put forthwith. The government does not want a debate over whether to reverse a decision the parliament made earlier this evening.
I cannot recall – I will be happy to stand corrected in the summary by the learned member for Port Darwin – any time in the history of this parliament since self-government that a government has stooped to rushing in to General Business to reverse, through a motion that includes a gag, a decision of the Assembly.
Debate was held on the motion, led by the Independent member of parliament, contributed to by the minority party of parliament, the Palmer United Party, by the opposition in parliament and by the government representative, the Leader of Government Business. Appropriately for the debate, it was wrapped by the original mover, the member for Nelson.
We all expressed our views and the motion was put. On the voices it was yes; we did not hear any noes and you did not hear any noes, Madam Speaker. To be clear, even though you did not need to, even though it is not convention to call it a second time, you did so. You called for a second time, on the voices, and you heard the yesses. I heard a few yesses on this side. I did not count them, but I heard a few. You called again for the noes. There was silence. You had no choice and called it on the voices, which said yes.
Government then had the opportunity to call a division to test the call on the voices. There was no division sought. Is this a government so completely missing in action that it is incapable of a basic debate on a motion and basic debate procedures, such as calling it to your view? Are you so inept that you want to crash through on General Business Day and use the weight and power of the standing orders that are given to the Leader of Government Business to gag as well? You are out of control and are setting a new low in this parliament. You are showing arrogance towards procedures of the parliament that has never been shown before.
I note there is chortling from members opposite, because I know you do not care about democracy. That has been writ large.
Whether it is the shame of your Chief Minister and Attorney-General not understanding the separation of powers, or whether it is the contempt with which the Leader of the Government Business contributed to debate on the motion tonight into political party donations, you show that arrogance, contempt and complete disdain for democracy.
What you do in this parliament does not go unnoticed by citizens of the Territory. You will be held accountable for what you do in this parliament. If you have nothing to hide why are you rushing in to reverse a decision to hold an inquiry into political donations? If you have nothing to hide you might have answered some of the questions put by Palmer United Party members as to whether or not Foundation 51 contributed to their campaigns and, if so, how much? If you had nothing to hide you would have answered that. You did not answer and you have too much to hide.
There is no accountability or transparency in this CLP government. Even CLP members of the public know that, and members across the Territory talk about it. You go too far in your race to the bottom. In your desire to crash through democratic processes enshrined in conventions followed in this parliament you go too far. You do not care about every convention that is well held and well established, simple conventions and courtesies like distributing statements the evening before. No, it is only when you feel like it. We at least received a heads-up tonight, but we have not received the statement so far. Why have you not done it previously? Why do you want to drop it at 8 am? What do you have to hide? You should be proud of your work and your words, but you are not.
You are lost in your ineptitude, dysfunction and infighting. The various fractures and factions occurring – you are a disgrace. You go too far in trashing the processes of this parliament. A government that does that shows no integrity or decency, and you will be held to account for every failure and unmitigated, disgusting act and stunt you pull.
Our community has had enough and is well and truly over the CLP government. It is times like tonight, where it is writ large, that you will sink to any depth to get your way, which you may, tenuously, by want of numbers, achieve, but your numbers are thinning. You do not have a pair from 5 pm, so we will test your numbers and hold you to a division when you use your gag motion to not debate the inquiry motion again. You are thinning; by your own actions you have lost three members to a new minority party.
By rumours circulating through the halls of parliament you may yet lose one or two more. We already have a candidate on the ground in Casuarina, while you are still rolling around in your own little pile of issues. Your numbers will be tested and I hope, for democracy, your numbers fail.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, from the point of view of good manners, you would think the person who brought this before parliament would have a chance to speak about this motion. It is a disgrace.
I have said a number of times the problem with this government is that it can give us all the wonderful things it is doing, but it is downright arrogant. Today, it is acting like a spoilt child. It did not get what it wanted, so it is coming back for a second time.
It is kicking and screaming to its mother to say, ‘I want to get this’, and it is expecting this parliament to say, ‘Okay, I am sick of you, it will pass’, and the motion this Legislative Assembly passed, in a proper form, will be thrown out. The government shows its arrogance; this motion was not about the government setting up an inquiry, it was about this parliament acting to set up an inquiry into whether political donations were transparent, in a nutshell. Were they made through the right process, was there any influence on government policies and were there issues relating to so-called associate entities or a government company like Foundation 51?
That is not a terrible thing to hold an inquiry into. In fact, it is a good thing, and the government could show it supports transparency in the electoral process. What the government has done now by saying, ‘Let us look at this vote again’, besides sounding like a spoilt brat, is tell people it has something to hide.
It is saying, ‘We did not like the vote of this Legislative Assembly’, maybe because we would discover something uncomfortable. The CLP is saying, ‘We need to quickly quell this motion, because it is not to our liking. We are the government and we shall rule the kingdom, regardless of the peasants below.’ For a change, the peasants were winning for five minutes, but the king has spoken. ‘We shall not accept the will of the people, we shall tell them, in some other kind words, that this will not happen.’
It is a crying shame the government has had to stoop this low to overturn a mistake it made. That is its problem; it did not have enough members in here to say no and did not call a division. That is the name of the game; if you do not turn up for the football committee and you do not like the coach who is picked, you cannot come back the next week and sack him because you did not turn up for the meeting. That is too bad; you should have attended the meeting. If you did not attend this meeting and vote, that is your problem. You are trying to turn your problem into our problem.
We do not have a problem on this side; a motion was passed by this parliament to say we would like an inquiry. You held an inquiry into Stella Maris, which I supported. I am asking for an inquiry into just as important an issue and you do not want to support it. You were defeated in this House and, because you do not like it, you want to overturn it.
If that does not smell like a rat for the people out there, I do not know what does. The message will get out. I was halfway through issuing a media release; I thought, ‘Wow, we have had a win’, and now I will finish the rest of it: ‘Well, we had a win for 10 or 15 minutes and then what happened? The king made a decision that this would not happen.’ Unfortunately, that is what will happen because we will not have the numbers.
I ask anyone on that side of parliament to not vote on this, and to abstain. The Legislative Assembly is what we are about, not our political parties, not me. This was a decision made by the Legislative Assembly fair and square, the way the rules of this place are set. But we have a government that says, ‘Too bad, we do not care about fair and square, we do not like the decision you have made and we will overturn it’.
That is the height of arrogance, it is unTerritorian for a government to do that, and I will not agree with this decision being overturned.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I am happy to follow the rules of this place; let us do so by testing the numbers. I move that the motion be put.
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: The question is that standing orders be suspended.
The Assembly divided:
There was not an absolute majority, therefore the motion is not carried.
Motion negatived.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I was flicking through the Notice Paper in preparation for contribution to this General Business Day motion, and I saw an Order of the Day called ‘Chaos in the Territory Government’. How appropriate for what we have just witnessed. That Order of the Day was around inflicting power and water price hikes, the cost of living, the ongoing turmoil in the public service, broken election promises, cutting resources to the our schools, disputes with public servants, dodgy deals and jobs for mates. That was in October 2013.
Here we are, almost a year later, and the CLP government has gotten worse. In the year we thought was bad enough, add another 12 months, and it has become worse. This motion is to be a voice to the people who rallied outside parliament today. We saw teachers, representatives of paramedics, firefighters and the parents’ body COGSO, the Council of Government Schools Organisation, who spoke on behalf of parents who put their children through our public school system. We heard from all of those people about their deep concerns with the cuts the government is inflicting across core areas of service delivery.
We have seen a government embroiled in turmoil. We are six days from the halfway point of this government, what I will call the Mills/Giles government. It is an appropriate time to reflect on the shambles and dysfunction which has characterised this administration, led by an unelected, illegitimate Chief Minister. It is a government which, to the shock of many, summarily executed its first leader after just six months in the top job, and then sent him to Indonesia to ensure his silence.
It is a government which, after 18 months, has seen its numbers shrink from 16 to 13. Three members of the Palmer United Party realised they had been sold a pup, with promise after promise to the bush broken. It is a government which the member for Nelson has rated a D-minus. By any stretch, as an Independent, he is a fair and reasonable man. The D-minus is, by any stretch, a fair and reasonable rating. We would have given you an E or an F.
Chief Minister, you preside over the worst government the Territory has ever seen. It is the frontline workers or the public servants of the Northern Territory who have borne the brunt. It is why I am moving that this Legislative Assembly condemn the Chief Minister and government for the 125 teacher cuts from the Department of Education, the $11m cut from the Health budget, failing to keep the promise for 120 new police and the failure to reach a satisfactory enterprise bargaining agreement with paramedics, prison officers, firefighters and teachers.
I know you hide behind St John Ambulance in regard to the paramedics, but we also know that is an abrogation of your responsibility to our community because the government, through the Health department, funds St John Ambulance.
Where are your priorities? In the midst of all this, when the men and women who provide these crucial services to Territorians are seeing their conditions attacked, the Chief Minister ensures his own department receives a $33m budget increase in this financial year alone. It is extraordinary. Where are your priorities?
We know if you cut education funding you cut the number of teachers and crucial support staff, and our students come off second best. Your cuts can only mean worsening learning outcomes for our students and the dismantling of support structures will make it harder to tackle fluctuating attendance levels.
Fewer teachers has meant fewer subject choices. You cannot bring yourself to be honest enough to recognise that. Choose any senior school across the Northern Territory and compare the subject choices today to the subject choices two years ago before these cuts were invoked; there are fewer.
When you take basic subject choices out like you have you attack the future of our children. You have collapsed lines and told students they have to merge into classes because we cannot offer two maths specialties. It is extraordinary. However, stick your head in the sand and pretend it is not happening.
There is less individual attention for children in our classrooms, and there is certainly less opportunity for our young Territorians to take up the challenges our fantastic Territory and their fabulous future will deliver.
Minister for Education, you are so out of touch. You admitted to 50 teachers being cut in 2013 and claimed only 35 teachers were cut in 2014. I will quote what you told the NT News:
That is so out of touch. The 50 teachers were cut as a result of CLP mini-budget cuts in 2012. Yes, we lost 50 teachers in 2013 as a result of the CLP mini-budget cuts in 2012. You are a disgrace. You must be the worst Education minister we have ever witnessed.
Normally, Education ministers stand up in Cabinet and say, ‘There is nothing more important in fundamental government service delivery than delivering the best learning outcomes for our children. I will defend the Education budget, you will not cut there.’ Not this minister, he just rolled over. I know he will provide the fanciful chant, rant and rhetoric around the projected debt, when he sits by and lets the Chief Minister put $33m into a department that provides advice. It does not put teachers in our classrooms, does not put a single nurse in a ward and does not operate any service; it provides advice to the Chief Minister. I get it. The Chief Minister is bereft of capabilities, so he needs all the advice he can get. However, $33m worth of additional advice is a stretch. It pays nonsense to your chest beating about having no choice because of the state of the Labor budget. That is rubbish. Around the Cabinet table you would not have accepted a $33m increase in one financial year alone to the Department of the Chief Minister if you had a budget problem.
You are so out of touch. They want parents to keep quiet. They are not, they and COGSO are speaking up. The estimates hearings and the work of the opposition bell the cat on the Education minister’s claim of 35 fewer teachers; the real number is 125. How could the minister get it so wrong? For months he maintained the number was 35. Minister, you were out by 90 teachers minimum. You chose not to count the contract teachers, and to compound the problem 60 support staff have also been cut. That is 185 fewer people in our schools to educate our young Territorians and provide them with a better future.
It is apparent the Education minister has no idea what is going on. Virtually nowhere in the Department of Education has been spared. Arnhem is down 47 teachers, Darwin 29, Palmerston and the rural area 24, Katherine 19; and Alice Springs is down 7 teachers.
Ten schools have lost more than five teachers, when you publicly proclaimed no school would lose more than five teachers. Minister, ten schools have lost more than five teachers, by your own department’s information provided during estimates. The NAPLAN results out this week show the percentage of students at or above national minimum standards is lower than last year in 13 of 20 assessed areas.
Let us think about this. The mantra of this Minister for Education is that these changes in resourcing are to provide better outcomes for students, and on the first test of that, the first NAPLAN results, you have failed. You have tragically failed our children.
Move out of the way and put someone into the job who will reinstate the funding in Education, who will put the teachers and support staff back into our classrooms and who will do the job you were elected to do. You promised no frontline staff would lose their jobs. You did promise that; it is a breach of trust, but, more abhorrent, it is denying our children the education outcomes they fundamentally deserve.
These cuts are sending our education system backwards. That is why teachers are rallying outside and why they are in a protracted EBA dispute. This is what happens when you cut teachers and the Education budget by $15m and tip $33m into advice for the incompetent Chief Minister.
No area of service delivery has been safe from your harsh budget cuts. The Royal Darwin Hospital is in crisis, and you receive vitriol from the government when you point it out. All you have to do is spend a day in emergency or a couple of days visiting the hospital. Go into the wards and listen to what the nurses and doctors and, importantly, patients are saying.
The hospital is in crisis, and has been for months. For months, staff have been struggling to find a bed for someone who is admitted, not in ED waiting to be admitted, and they have created a new room called the transit lounge. I called it the Tardis, because it seems to take forever to get through it. But you were admitted; it was a reference so they could tick a form and say you are on a ward. You are not on a ward, you are in a chair in a transit lounge adjacent to the ED, but under the forms and processes you are admitted to a ward. Rubbish!
Tell that to staff, struggling and stretched trying to attend to all patients in that situation who are admitted and need acute beds. Doctors and nurses are working in intolerable conditions; they are doing a fantastic job while your government turns its back on them, while your Chief Minister mocks them in Question Time, while you fill – not fill, that is part of the tragedy of it – while you put a handful of alcoholics into a purpose-built 100-bed facility for subacute care.
Part of the tragedy of this crisis is that there was an option. There was an alternative. You stripped it away, ignored the crisis and now everything is imploding and the doctors and nurses are publicly saying there is a crisis, you have said, ‘Oh, let’s find 30 beds’. Where are the other 70? Why are they not coming online?
You hand back funding to the federal government, you do not proceed with emergency upgrades in Nhulunbuy and you hand back funding for a medi-hostel for that region. It is a disgrace. Now is not the time to make cuts in primary healthcare, but you will not be even honest about where the $11m in cuts will occur. You will not be transparent; you will not be honest with Territorians about which primary healthcare services will be cut further, and $11m is a lot of cuts to find.
Instead of getting on with building the Palmerston hospital, work that would be under way if you had not changed the site, because how could you go with a site chosen by Labor? That would be against the grain. How on earth could you go with a serviced site ready to construct on? That is not your way of doing business. Choose a paddock with no services and have a bit of a scrap with a media stunt, bring in the bulldozer, knock over a couple of trees, upset the residents, pull the bulldozer out, whack it on a truck and drive off.
Mr McCarthy: And fly around in a helicopter.
Ms LAWRIE: And fly around in a helicopter for good measure. Are you serious? Do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you pull stupid stunts like that?
Mr Chandler: It just hurts.
Ms LAWRIE: Member for Brennan, four years of not having a Palmerston hospital hurts. You and your Cabinet decision have delayed the delivery of a hospital to the residents of Palmerston and the rural area, who desperately want and need it. You have delayed it for four years and you are feeling okay about that because you are calling it, in your jargon, a real hospital.
Isn’t that funny, because when we hear the detailed clinical descriptions of the real hospital by the real Health minister she talks about exactly the same components as those in Labor’s detailed plans for construction of a hospital on a different site.
Is a real hospital on one site which includes the same clinical services not a real hospital on another site? Are you serious? Is that your argument? You are bizarre, member for Brennan, because you should be, as a representative for Palmerston, saying, ‘It is not good enough. Fast track it! I do not care what you do. Get another bulldozer out there, and the services in.’ You are not, you have delayed it. You are market testing. You still have not decided whether it will be public, private or a mixture. You are confused. I know what the AMA is saying about your confusion, and I know what everyone else is saying about your confusion, but, meanwhile, Territorians are suffering. That is what you do not seem to get.
Any one of you can go to the Royal Darwin Hospital and spend a day there if you want. You do not have to be the Health minister. You are in government and I am sure your Health minister would give you permission to go to the hospital to understand what is occurring with clinical services there. But do not do that, because you would not want to burst your bubble of ignorance, would you?
Instead of getting on with the job, there is delay after delay. Instead of a brand-new paediatric wing at the Royal Darwin Hospital, an election commitment by Labor, all we see is an upgrade to the existing ward funded by the Commonwealth. Instead of delivering funded capital works projects, we have to wait years for new remote clinics to be built, three or four years after the funding was provided. No wonder this has led to a stoush between the member for Solomon and the Chief Minister over the capacity of the CLP to deliver Commonwealth-funded health projects. Instead of improving health services across the board, you prefer to spend $28m in this year alone on propping up your failed mandatory alcohol rehabilitation scheme.
Instead of supporting health staff to get on with their necessary work, there are constant complaints of bullying, yet you turn a cloth ear to that. It is not good enough, Chief Minister.
Our brave Territory firefighters have much to complain about. They said they would accept a 3% EBA outcome as a gesture of good faith. The Territory government has said no; firefighters have dropped their log of claims, but the Territory government has still said no.
The Chief Minister wants to reduce the conditions of our firefighters and remove minimum staffing levels. As you heard the firefighters explain tonight at the rally, they are fighting to ensure there is a crew to cover Palmerston and the rural area. That is with the increase in call-outs and traffic, bearing in mind our firefighters are crucial to traffic accidents. They come with the jaws of life to literally save a life. This government wants to cut back on crews in an area where there is industrial traffic mixing with residential traffic. You must wonder where you are not prepared to go in damaging the lives of Territorians.
When a firefighter goes to a burning building with oxygen masks, minimum staffing means there are also firies outside with oxygen masks in case something goes wrong. That is essential for safety. Minimum staffing levels are there for the safety of our community and our brave firefighters. But, not content with this attack on safety, you also want to take money out of training and not allow overtime for specialists to train recruits. That is a backward step.
The government’s treatment of paramedics has been disgraceful. The Minister for Health refuses to talk to them and their pay dispute has been going on for a year. What on earth do you have against listening to people? These are the Territory’s paramedics; the Territory government pays for the service to St John Ambulance. You, Northern Territory government, are the ones who can solve this crisis.
Compounding things, paramedics are understaffed and sometimes cannot run minimum shifts, as they are contracted to do. We hear sometimes two trainees go out on a crew, instead of one qualified paramedic and one trainee, as ought to be the case. The Territory public has a justifiable expectation that paramedics treating them are fully qualified. Northern Territory government, you are a disgrace.
Our prison officers, we hope, are closer to resolving their EBA. Again, they accepted the 3% offer over four years as a gesture of good faith negotiations. You refused and went on the attack on training. You do not want to offer prison officers an increments package that would help train existing prison officers into jobs – at train-your-own scheme. That would cost an estimated $140 000 a year, or $25 000 a course in some cases.
The prison officers want more flexibility on leave. Currently they must take leave at seven days minimum and, sometimes, put in requests up to 16 months in advance. Be reasonable! These are not unreasonable concerns our frontline workers are putting to the government. However, they hear nothing and witness an arrogant government.
Finally, to our fine men and women of the Northern Territory Police Force: Chief Minister, at the NT Police Association AGM this week you told them you would ‘agree to disagree’ on your promise to employ 120 more police. You have reneged on that promise. During estimates it was clear this was a promise you had no intention of keeping. But it is worse than that. This week, you finally answered a question we have had on notice since estimates; it is no wonder you have been hiding it. There are 61 fewer police officers in the Territory this year compared to last year. That is 181 fewer police than you promised. No wonder we are now experiencing our second year of record violent crime. You have made the thin blue line even thinner, which is a disgrace.
That is a taste of the report card for the first two years of the Mills/Giles government. I have not gone into some of the internal disasters you have had in detail. Territorians have judged you on that and will continue to judge you, just as we will continue to hold you to account.
Territorians are reeling under skyrocketing cost-of-living pressures. They now have fewer essential services being provided by fewer frontline staff. It is little wonder you are described as the worst government ever and are given a D-minus rating. I commend the motion to the House.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, can you smell a by-election in the air? I can. Clearly this is the usual Labor Party – ‘let us rally the unions and get them screaming from the rafters’ – because they want to create as much controversy as they can around the Northern Territory government.
I am sorry we are a responsible government trying to govern responsibly for the people of the Northern Territory. If you were to believe the Leader of the Opposition you would be utterly convinced the Northern Territory has come to a shuddering halt and there is nothing but darkness on the streets and dungeons in which we make public servants work as we flog them every day.
This is the picture the Leader of the Opposition will paint for Territorians simply because there is a by-election in the air.
I point out to the Leader of the Opposition that the general public service has signed up to 3% per year over the four years, as have the sparkies, the waterside workers and any number of other organisations. There are four EBAs left to deal with. With the prison officers, as I said in Question Time today I am hoping to achieve a resolution fairly soon. We are also hoping to continue the positive negotiations with the nurses and reach a resolution soon.
I will pause briefly on the teachers because the member opposite spoke about education results. The education union’s input into policy through the Labor government of the last 11 years saw the increase in staffing expenditure go through the roof. I do not have the numbers in front of me, but it was a very large increase in expenditure, about 33% over the period of the last five or six years. Indeed, the number of people working for the Education department skyrocketed equally so.
NAPLAN results over that time show no appreciable change. If anything, they generally saw a minor contraction. More people and expenditure did not necessarily lead to better results.
The argument from the teachers union, from day one in the EBA environment, was that if you keep doing the same thing you will achieve better results. We do not accept that, and anybody who has watched the expenditure and staffing levels go up, with no appreciable change at all in NAPLAN results, could only come to the conclusion that the former government had gone down the wrong path. That is exactly what it had done.
As a consequence, the new government determined it would do things like look at other models which have shown better success. This is where you have the direct tuition referred to by the Education minister, and it is about reorganising resources. The union responded to the EBA negotiations – the EBA being about pay and entitlements – by trying to factor a bunch of policy issues into EBA negotiations and trying to mix up the two.
That was the approach taken by Messrs Clisby and Cranitch, and they continued to hold that position. Their response was to hold a couple of strikes, lots of noise and demonstrating, expecting the Northern Territory government to capitulate. But, for the interests of better results, the Northern Territory government did not capitulate, and clearly said to both Messrs Cranitch and Clisby, ‘Gentlemen, we are not that interested in your political posturing; we are interested in achieving better results for the students of the Northern Territory. Separate out the EBA; we will always welcome input from professionals, but we will not give you a power of veto over Education department policy.’ Messrs Clisby and Cranitch said ‘No’, we will make sure Education department policy becomes inextricably linked to the EBA’, and so they pressed on to fight it.
When we put the question to teachers in general, the Australian Education Union told its membership to vote no. That happened on a couple of occasions, but on neither occasion was there an absolute majority of people voting, which means teachers did not give a majority view one way or the other. I do not doubt union members were active in voting no, but many other teachers chose not to.
I have spoken to a number of teachers since that time and they have told me they did not vote for various reasons. We have come to a point of stalemate. We remain, quite strongly, of the opinion that the elected government of the day sets education policy in accordance with the principles of responsible government.
We encourage teachers to sign up to the EBA, which would offer them 3% per year over the next three or four years, whatever the case may be. Total entitlements put to the last EBA were worth $27 000 to teachers, when you consider all compounding effects of the 3%.
The teachers, as has been pointed out, did not accept that offer and the union argued it was a noble thing to do not to accept the offer, because it is all about student outcomes.
We agree it is about student outcomes, but if we ask the teachers’ union to point out where their success has been from previous policies – the policies they continue to advocate for – they are unable to point to successes, certainly not on the global scale.
We then heard – going back to Messrs Clisby and Cranitch – them say, ‘We will take it to the people during the Blain by-election. This is an issue that will galvanise the people and make sure we win 22 or 23% of the vote.’ They actually secured 9% of votes.
Clearly there are other issues that govern and drive voters in the Northern Territory. The issue Messrs Clisby and Cranitch refer to was, whilst important, not top of mind for voters, as evidenced through the ballot box.
Consequently, we remain in the same position we were from the outset. We encourage teachers to accept the 3% per year and to have input into education policy. I understand there are some ongoing negotiations about developing some rigour in how they have that input. But we remain implacably of the position that the Northern Territory government must retain education policy, because it is the Northern Territory government’s job to roll out that education policy.
I heard the Leader of the Opposition talk about firies; there are a number of negotiations going on with firies about certain practices, and we will wait for the result of those negotiations as we step through them.
We are anxious to find a peaceful resolution between the firies and the Northern Territory government, but we are also anxious to make sure the Northern Territory government is able to provide an effective fire and rescue service to the people of the Northern Territory. The negotiating position of the Northern Territory government is sound in this area and will continue to provide the services Territorians require.
I could talk at some length about what is happening with all of these negotiations, but we have noise surrounding the by-election at the moment. The by-election is what is really driving members opposite. I refer to the office opposite the Chamber as the departure lounge, currently occupied by the member for Casuarina. He has announced he will be shortly leaving from the departure lounge. He is number three to go through that office in a row.
Ms Fyles: Two
Mr ELFERINK: There have been three: Mr Henderson, Mr Mills and now Mr Vatskalis. I imagine that office would seem quite attractive to a number of people in this House.
Getting back to the matter at hand, this motion is nothing more than politics. It is about politics being driven by, in part, the union movement. I do not doubt the Labor Party wants to win the Casuarina by-election and it will pull out all stops to do so. That is what political parties do, but we expect good, honest public servants, being union members or not, will persevere and do their jobs because they enjoy what they do.
There was no strike action today because apparently many teachers, both union and non-union, simply said to the teachers’ union, ‘We are not going down that path again’. The problem with the teachers’ union was that it was poorly led under Messrs Cranitch and Clisby, and fell apart when questioned. It used union funds to run an election campaign. The Leader of the Opposition was incensed when that occurred and powerless to stop them, which demonstrates it is the unions that run the Labor Party in the Northern Territory and not the Leader of the Opposition.
This motion is about posturing; we do not even accept the assertion of the figures in the motion. It will not be agreed to by government members and, as far as we are concerned, this is a tissue-thin attempt to deal with the matters of a by-election, one in which they want to be seen as the champions of all sorts of things.
However, they certainly do not want to be accountable and they do not want members opposite to remember anything like their role in the Stella Maris deal. I would still like to see whether or not, at any stage, the declaration of interests register will be updated to reflect the in-kind donation they have received in free legal assistance, or if they will stick by the assertion the legal assistance was paid for.
This motion is not supported.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Madam Speaker, I support this motion. What we have seen from this CLP government in the past two years has been appalling. They have attacked those people who proudly serve our community day in and day out. Teachers, nurses, firefighters, the frontline people who are the fabric of our community, this government has attacked them.
The CLP said one thing before the election and did the exact opposite afterwards. We all remember the CLP commitment that frontline workers’ jobs would be safe. They then went on sacking hundreds of public servants.
You had flyers outside public service offices saying jobs would be safe. You have sacked child protection workers and teachers; it is appalling.
You said you had a plan to strengthen the public service and that public service jobs were safe. ‘We will immediately provide secure employment for our teachers. We will immediately support and strengthen the NT public service. If your base salary is $110 000 or less, your job is safe.’ It went on and on. ‘If you are on the front line of police, education or health, regardless of how much you earn, your job is safe.’ We have seen the exact opposite.
It is always interesting that the Minister for Education has a strange look on his face when we repeat those comments. Somehow he thinks these promises should not apply to frontline workers in education, the teachers and teacher assistants. He has never given us a full explanation as to why the promise does not apply to them and why the CLP is sacking teachers. It is your ideology and it is in your DNA. You have never explained to us why you have broken this promise and gotten rid of so many teachers from our Territory schools. I have attended the rallies of teachers, students and parents opposing these cuts. I have spoken to them at the markets, in the shopping centres and when I am doorknocking. They are appalled. It is something they are united about. It does not matter what political persuasion they may have been in the past, they are appalled at your cuts.
Teachers are very clear, but you continue to ignore the message they are sending you. You will not listen. These cuts have affected subject choices, made our class sizes bigger, and teachers, parents and students alike are concerned about the reductions in support staff, teaching assistants and administrative staff, who also play a vital role in schools.
We have seen chaos in our Territory schools with uncertainty about teacher numbers and confusion about individual teachers coming and going. At the end of last year there was chaos with teachers and teacher positions in our schools. Schools did not know if they were to have an allocation for some teachers, and others were pushed out.
Instead of focusing on improving education outcomes, this minister and CLP government have been too busy cutting funding for schools and letting our Territory students down. In a media release dated 18 December 2013, acting Minister for Education, John Elferink, taunted teachers on the enterprise agreement. He said:
After denigrating public education, teachers and their union for months, educators overwhelming rejected the government offer, not once but twice. As well as the cuts, it is the continued talking down of our Territory education system that is upsetting. Attorney-General, you have stood in this House and said we could educate our kids at private schools in Sydney for what it costs to educate them in our schools. You miss the point: Territorians want a public education system they are proud of and that they can send their kids to. They want to educate their kids within their communities.
It is the NT government’s job to provide education in the Territory. It is a fundamental job of a government to provide education. It is time for your mean-spirited CLP government to listen to teachers and the general public when we tell you to stop cutting teacher numbers.
Abusing teachers and public education in the Northern Territory has not been a once-off event by CLP ministers. There has been a long history of the minister and this Chief Minister running down public education in the Territory. In fact, CLP governments of the past – as I said, it is in your DNA. I remember the strikes of 1990s. You shut schools and preschools overnight: Tiwi Primary School, Rapid Creek Primary School, schools that would be great to have now, but you made up excuses and shut them down. Not only will you shut our schools and put our teachers down, you have our Education minister making statements like, ‘Our students are at the bottom of the pile’. How offensive and misleading!
An Education minister and Chief Minister are meant to champion our education system. We are seeing the exact opposite. On 7 November 2013, the Chief Minister told the ABC the Territory had the worst statistics, shown through NAPLAN results and the My School website. He did not tell the ABC what his ministerial colleague, the former Education minister, Robyn Lambley, had said. Your former CLP minister agreed that Labor’s investment in education was paying off when she said in a media release dated 14 September 2012:
How can we ask our kids to do any better than their best? Their personal best is a basic. The current Education minister has even gone as far as implying that teachers are lazy, saying they have too much downtime.
On the fifth floor, minister, people might be telling you that you are doing a good job, but when I visit schools and school councils they tell me you are the most unpopular minister ever. You might be suited up, but you are totally unsuitable to be the Minister for Education. On 14 October 2013 the Minister for Education was quoted in the NT News as saying:
Minister and Chief Minister, you need to start listening to the hundreds of people like those outside today, not just teachers but parents. You need to hear that you cannot keep cutting our education system. You admitted on 8 October last year that they were budget-related cuts.
You are an incompetent minister with no clue about what is happening on the ground. You are a failed minister who pretends only 35 teachers have been lost, when the real number is 125, with 47 in the Arnhem region alone. That is not 35.
Minister, when will you stand up in Cabinet and defend the Territory’s education system? Education cuts affect students and teachers, and that is why teachers are voting no to the CLP’s enterprise agreement. You need to start listening.
The Chief Minister, the Minister for Education and the CLP government have their priorities wrong. The Territory budget this year saw more cuts – a mean-spirited government cutting our education system. As a minister, and as a government, you should be championing our education system, not telling us we are at the bottom of the pile, which is offensive and misleading.
The government is wrong to say our education system is going backwards. Between 2008 and 2010 we had the largest gains in Australia made by Indigenous students in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9 in reading, spelling, grammar and punctuation. These results are now under threat, as we have seen this week. Minister, your cuts are putting at risk our children’s future; we need to be investing in our education system.
Last year’s Territory budget paper showed funding for government schools cut from $685m to $670m, a cut of $15m, and that is not including the Commonwealth contribution. You have not stood up to Canberra and you would not sign up for the Gonski funding because you did not like it. You did not want to be forced to ensure your funding was not cut; you wanted to cut funding and use the federal government’s contribution to top it up.
During the estimates process I asked the minister numerous questions to get to the bottom of the real figures for teachers we know have been cut from our schools. The minister still says 35, yet we know it is far greater. How do we know this? Because our kids have less subject choice in their classrooms, fewer teachers in their schools, they are in large classes and there is less special education and ESL support. The figures tabled after estimates show we lost 125 teaching FTEs between 2013 and 2014. There were 2596 full-time equivalent positions in the Territory in 2013, and then 2471 – 125 fewer teachers in our classrooms. It is basic maths. One-hundred-and twenty-five teachers is a lot of experience to lose from our education system and directly contradicts, minister, your assertion we would only lose 35 teachers. That is last year to this year. You claim we lost 50 in 2012, and we have lost 125.
Minister, you maintained for months that your new ratio would only mean 35 job cuts, yet these figures show it is far higher. Is the correct figure 35 or 125? It is a 300% difference that you are unable to explain, and your department’s figures show us the opposite. Across the regions there have been big cuts, with seven in Alice Springs, 47 in Arnhem, 29 in Darwin, 19 in Katherine and 24 in Palmerston and the rural area.
You keep saying it is only 35, but these figures show it is far higher. In fact, on 12 June this year minister Chandler was maintaining the number was only 35:
I have put the figures on the record from your own department. Numerous times in the media you claimed it was only 35. You need to come clean, explain these figures and why there is a 300% variation.
You claimed we would be investing in our early years’ education and that changes to the formula cut teachers from middle schools and put them into the early years. I reviewed the primary school figures for FTEs in 2013 and 2014 provided in answers to estimates questions, and there are 24 primary schools which have lost teachers, including the following: Bradshaw; Ross Park; Nhulunbuy; Anula; Jingili; Karama; Ludmilla; Manunda Terrace; Millner; Nightcliff; Parap; Stuart Park; Casuarina Street in Katherine; Clyde Fenton in Katherine; Katherine South; MacFarlane; Adelaide River; Bakewell; Berry Springs; Driver; Gray; Howard Springs; Humpty Doo; Moulden; and Woodroffe – all primary schools that have lost teachers. You claimed this formulation change would invest in early years’ education. It has done the exact opposite.
In addition to saying no primary schools or early education providers would lose teachers you said no school would lose more than five teachers per year; you said that numerous times. Ten schools lost more than five FTEs, including the following: Angurugu; Maningrida; Milingimbi; Shepherdson College; Yirrkala; Darwin Middle; Nightcliff Middle; Sanderson Middle; Palmerston Senior College; and Rosebery Middle School.
In your advertising campaign late last year, it was claimed that the application of the new ratio from 2014 would see an additional 63 teacher positions created across transition to Year 2. At estimates, you confirmed that you had spent $26 090 on that advertising. Where are those alleged 63 positions you claimed in your advertising campaign? We are well into the school year, halfway through it, and we have not seen the positions evidenced. Are they funded in the 2014-15 budget? Can you show us where the budget provision is for those alleged positions? Which schools have these positions? Again, this is not backed up by facts.
Across the range, you have cut from all of our schools. You claim subjects have not been hit; that is wrong. While average class enrolments have gone up, we have also seen a reduction in subject offerings in our middle schools. Answers to estimates questions showed significantly reduced subject choices in this year, with 1116 classes and subjects offered in 2014, compared to 1150 in 2013. Your decisions and budget cuts are restricting future offerings for our young people. This is why teachers will not accept your attacks on frontline workers. It is directly affecting our students; we should be investing in their future. It is extraordinary that, as a government, you continue to cut support for kids in the classroom after a year of cuts that have hurt our students dramatically.
Following on from teacher cuts, we have also seen significant cuts to the number of administrative assistants. Working in a classroom is hard work, not like you imply, with a lot of downtime. Teachers have busy days, and we have more children with special needs coming into our classrooms. We have larger class sizes under your government, with less individual support for our students. We need teacher assistants, but you have cut those roles too, with 60 support positions gone from our schools. It means we have less support for our teachers, putting more pressure on them. Our kids are not receiving the individual attention they deserve.
Class sizes are not what you say they are. At primary schools in your electorate, class sizes are at 28. You get away with this because teachers are approached and given more release time, but that is wrong; kids cannot learn in classes of that size.
Another program you have cut, which is having a real impact on the ground, is GEMS. It was an excellent way of getting kids to school and keeping them interested, and was a proven way of engaging and maintaining attendance. GEMS was used to build upon the successful work of the Clontarf program for boys.
The GEMS program was cut because of your government’s decisions to cut support positions within the Education department. Across our middle schools students are missing out on the program. This is having a real impact this year in our schools.
Some girls in Years 8 and 9 are no longer going to school like they were. They feel you have given up on them as a government, so they will give up on themselves. That is wrong; you are not investing in them. It was not a huge spend for what it was achieving.
A Smith Family report, along with OECD data, shows we need to invest in education. I quote from its June 2014 research report, Improving educational outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander girls, which refers to the OECD saying:
It goes on to say:
The same report says:
At age 13 and 14, you are shaping their whole life. Your government, by defunding that program, is impacting on those girls, 200 across the Territory right now. You cut that program last year. I know, from speaking to teachers and students at our schools, that they are missing that program. They need and deserve it.
The World Health Organisation argues that women are often instrumental in bringing about social change through their role in the family and the wider community. That is what it said in 2014.
We know investment in our girls, ensuring they receive an education, as the leaders in our community and particularly in families, will pay off. However, you are not giving them a chance. You have cut the program, and I urge you to reverse that decision immediately
You have cut support workers from schools running the program and you are not investing in our students. Girls are not attending school because important programs like GEMS have been cut by your government. It does not make sense. You need to invest in our children. It is not an economic decision; it is about the future and it is an investment.
You did not stand up for our CSIRO science program. During estimates you said you would do that. However, that program is gone. Now if children want a hands-on science program, they have to go to the CSIRO Discovery Centre in Canberra. How ridiculous!
You are out of touch if you think cutting support positions, teachers and programs will improve educational outcomes. You just do not get it.
In October 2013 you said we need to target further teacher positions in the early years, but this year you have cut the early years education budget by an astonishing 44% in real terms. Tertiary education has received a real terms cut of 9.9%, including a real cut in the operational grant for Charles Darwin University.
You have been spruiking international education, and that you want the Territory to be …
Ms MANISON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Ms FYLES: Minister, and Chief Minister particularly, you talk about investing in international education, but that has received a budget cut of 2.7% in real terms. You just do not get it and you have no idea about education. This is the government that has dropped the ball.
In the very early 1990s we saw horrendous cuts to our education system, and we are seeing that again. This will have a lasting impact. We will not be able to rebuild this quickly, as a result of cuts you are making.
This budget supposedly addresses outcomes for the Territory government’s Indigenous education review, but forecasts a drop in Year 9 non-Indigenous students achieving the national minimum standard in writing and numeracy, and forecasts no improvement in the number of Indigenous students attaining the NTCET. That is in your own budget papers.
The Indigenous education review’s recommendations are an all or nothing approach to education for Indigenous children in the regions. It recommends a shift of students from community schooling to urban boarding schools in Darwin, Palmerston, Alice Springs, Katherine, Nhulunbuy and Tennant Creek, but offers nothing for those students who do not want to leave their family for cultural reasons.
How ignorant as a government that you will not provide education within communities. Students do best when they are with their families, supported by their communities. It is appalling that you are treating members of the Territory community like this.
You talk about consultation. Turning up in Nhulunbuy – I think it was on a Friday afternoon – to consult on Indigenous education – how appalling.
You have said nothing about what will happen to students left behind. It is important that a government offers education across the Territory. It is disappointing that the CLP government is planning to force future generations off their country if they want an education. More worrying is the apparent lack of alternatives for those young people who do not wish to seek further formal education. What will they be offered, given the lack of options such as trade training opportunities in the bush?
We remain deeply disappointed that the Education minister is brushing aside the views of respected Indigenous educators and is determined to remove parents from the decision-making process on the education of their children. You should be listening to and bringing the community with you, and talking to parents. Only yesterday, respected educator, Yalmay Yunupingu from Yirrkala School, said on ABC radio that some Indigenous educators have said they are not ready to change current teaching methods and want to retain the bilingual model. Any expansion of the Cape York model of Direct Instruction ignores the Australian Council of Educational Research report into the trial in 2013, which found there is no solid evidence that it had improved results.
You have not been talking about this, minister, have you? You kept this one hidden in the cupboard. A 2013 report said there is no solid evidence it has improved results. The ACER evaluation on the Cape York Aboriginal Australian Academy trial in 2013 found it was impossible to conclude, except in limited cases, that the academy had a positive impact on student learning due to lack of information. The report said:
Members interjecting.
Ms FYLES: It found there was no increase in the proportion of students achieving natural literacy – you might want to listen to this, Dave, because he is fooling you with Direct Instruction. It is a waste of money.
It found there was no increase in the proportion of students achieving national literacy standards at two out of three campuses in the trial. It also found there was a decline in attendance rates at schools between 2010 and 2012. The ACER report found no evidence the Direct Instruction method improved results, only that students who came to school were likely to have better results. The Education minister is a strong supporter of Direct Instruction, but there is no evidence to support it. The ACER report contradicts assertions made by the minister about the Direct Instruction model, yet he appears convinced without any evidence of its benefit.
On the face of it, the minister is willing to gamble with our children’s future on a method which has not been shown to significantly improve student learning outcomes. We have significant community concern, Indigenous leaders raising their concern and we do not have conclusive evidence, but you want our children to be taught through that learning method. There was concern raised outside today about the Direct Instruction model. I urge you, minister, before it is too late, to reconsider before you gamble away our kids’ future.
The most recent NAPLAN summary report for 2014 shows the percentage of Territory students at or above the national minimal standard is lower in 13 of the 20 assessed areas, including all test categories for Year 3 students, four out of five for Year 5 students and three out of five for Year 9 students. These latest NAPLAN results show the CLP’s cuts are taking our students backwards.
The CLP is relying on spin to cover up Education budget cuts. The facts do not add up. We have seen the facts and we have the figures.
Previous NAPLAN results showed the Territory’s rate of improvement was above the national average. This was acknowledged by former CLP Education minister, Robyn Lambley. Territory students were improving at a faster rate than the rest of the country, but this is now at risk. It is wrong to say students went backwards under the previous government. Teacher cuts are not a way to raise the Territory’s educational standards to the national average.
The NAPLAN summary report for 2014 shows education outcomes are not improved by cutting funding for our schools. Another shift your government is taking, which is most concerning, is towards school autonomy, with global budgets. You released a discussion paper and the consultation period for submissions has now closed.
Your government has indicated it is working to introduce amendments to the Education Act later in the year, but it all seems so rushed. It is clear that moves to introduce global budgets and independent public schools are not driven by a desire to improve educational outcomes, but by a minister and government that want to cut even further.
Territory public schools already have a high level of autonomy. School councils play an important role in planning and the development of the school’s vision. School councils are responsible for approving the school’s budget and they receive updated financial reports each month. You would have us believe there is no autonomy at the moment, yet there is.
School councils assist with the broad focus of a school within Department of Education’s guidelines on curriculum and can develop policy in areas not set by the department. School councils are responsible for employing a number of non-teaching staff and are responsible for identifying and approving infrastructure needs at schools.
In fact, COGSO has raised concerns around global budgets and the independent public schools model. Today at the rally we heard its representatives say they feel schools already have a large degree of autonomy. Combined with global budgeting, it is clear the CLP’s plans for school autonomy are nothing more than an excuse for more cost-cutting. There is no evidence to support the minister’s contention that his plans for independent public schools or global budgeting are justified or, most importantly, will result in improved educational outcomes for our students.
That is what we should be focused on. These cuts will see a further erosion of NAPLAN results, which are going backwards under this CLP government. These are results from reports. If you cut education funding and teachers, students come off second best. Teachers and parents are saying that and you need to listen.
Your government’s cuts mean poorer learning outcomes for students, and dismantling sport structures makes the job of tackling fluctuating attendance and helping our kids even harder. We have fewer teachers in our schools, less subject choice, less individual attention for our students in their classrooms and fewer opportunities for young Territorians to take up the challenge for the future.
Minister, you need to stop the cuts, reverse the decisions that have been made and stand up in Cabinet. My colleagues will speak about other frontline workers your government has attacked, but what you have done to education – people are shocked. They are unhappy and have expressed that numerous times. Teachers want to see investment in our classrooms and our children. They want to be supported. You promised no frontline workers would lose their positions, yet we have seen hundreds of teachers and teacher assistants lose their jobs under this government. That will not improve our education system.
You need to start listening to parents and teachers. Minister for Public Employment, I urge you to do more than encourage. Encouragement will not sign up to the pay offer. It is not about that, it is about your government’s policies and investment in education. As a government, you need to listen.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this important motion condemning the Chief Minister and the government for their appalling treatment of key Territory workers. Feedback received from public servants and key workers is certainly consistent when you are on the doors or chatting to people around the office.
They feel this government has shown them no respect. Their workloads are bigger than ever before. There are fewer of them and they cannot wait to see this government gone.
This evening I will focus on, particularly, the hard-working paramedics and emergency medical dispatchers across the Territory. From the Top End, to the regions and Central Australia, there is no doubt we have an amazing workforce in the St John Ambulance Service. They do a job not many people could handle, where they take actions day-to-day that could be the difference between life and death for the people they care for. They do an extraordinary job in what we all know to be one of the most challenging jurisdictions in the nation. Day-to-day they are on the road working to save lives in some of the most remote and challenging conditions. They are dealing with citizens and issues far more profound than their southern counterparts would ever see. We are talking about people with the highest levels of chronic disease, and they see the most horrific numbers of alcohol-affected and impacted patients in the nation. They also see some of the most shameful and disgusting rates of domestic and alcohol-fuelled violence in the nation.
Despite the horrors they see each and every time they go out on shift, they keep doing their job and continue to have a strong passion and desire to serve the community and save those they meet on the road. Despite the amazing and courageous work of our paramedics every day, when they need help it seems their requests fall on the deaf ears of the government.
This evening I make another plea to the government to sit with the paramedics and hear from them, firsthand, the challenges they face every day trying to do their jobs so, at the very least, they have some understanding of what is happening on the ground.
Instead, the government has failed to meet with the paramedics, despite their numerous requests. I first sat down with the paramedics earlier this year to hear about the issues and challenges they face. In that time, the government has made no attempt to hear them and has simply brushed off the issues they continue to raise as an industrial matter. The government says it has no place to be involved and it should be left in the hands of the St John Ambulance Service.
We have seen the old sticking your head in the sand approach, pretending there is no problem and ignoring it will not solve this issue. As a government, you should at least have the decency to sit with paramedics and hear them out. You have not done this yet, and I urge you to do so immediately.
In a recent media report, I heard the Health minister say she has nothing to do with the dispute with paramedics. Again today in parliament we heard the Minister for Public Employment say the government does not directly employ paramedics, so it is not an issue for them. However, this is not the case. The Territory government, through the Health department, funds St John to provide ambulance services. As someone responsible for procuring and delivering services from your agency you should be concerned about how those services are going and why there is an ongoing dispute.
If a contract arrangement you have to provide services is not going to plan, most people would think it fair to intervene to ensure you are receiving value for money and the quality of services you expect, but the CLP government has demonstrated no interest in this area.
At the very least, paramedics want to be heard. They want to know they have an informed Health minister who is aware of what they face day to day, so she is better placed to fight for them at the Cabinet table, to meet their needs, to ensure the government is meeting the needs of people St John tries to help, and making it a priority.
If government listens to paramedics and the emergency medical dispatchers, it will hear the realities of what it is like to do their jobs in challenging conditions every day. It will hear paramedics are flat out from the moment their 12-hour shifts start until they end; paramedics are tired, and there is no shortage of opportunities for overtime, as people get sick or there are not enough staff to fill shifts. It will hear the use of ambulance services in the Territory is amongst some of the highest in the nation.
The government would hear that fatigue management is a real issue amongst paramedics. It would be told workloads are increasing, while resources are not. It would hear that paramedics are starting to burn out. It would also hear the alarming fact that it is still not uncommon practice for student paramedics, still not fully qualified, to be working together as crews on the road.
These students are very highly educated, but they still require the support of a fully-qualified paramedic on the job.
I have said before in this Chamber that we know our paramedics are extremely professional and do a great job. If you end up in a situation where you need their care, most people would think it reasonable to assume that when a crew is sent to you, at least one paramedic is fully qualified, rather than it being two students.
The government would also hear there is sometimes only one emergency medical dispatcher working on shift. They have seen a high turnover amongst their staff. These positions are extremely important, as these dispatchers are equally under high pressure to make the right calls on where to allocate ambulance resources.
They would hear that relations between management and paramedics remain tense; this is an ongoing issue. The latest EBA offer was voted on by paramedics recently, and came back with 67 voting no and three voting yes. That is an overwhelming result. It is a huge rejection of what was on the table and not even a sign-on bonus could get the paramedics over the line.
Throughout negotiations there has been a loss of trust between management and paramedics. One unresolved issue, aside from conditions, is that of roster allowance when paramedics go on annual leave. They want an acknowledgement that they are shift workers, and this allowance does help recognise this.
There are also important questions regarding back pay for paramedics. They do not want to go through this dispute any longer than needed. They want to get on with their jobs with conditions to help them work to the best of their abilities, and pay to ensure they can afford to live in the Territory. Paramedics are now left with little choice but to take protected action in this dispute. Their actions will not compromise the health and safety of the Territorians they serve, but their issues need to be heard. This will help ensure people have a better understanding of the challenges they face day to day on their jobs.
There are also questions about whether St John will seek to deduct pay from paramedics who participate in these actions; this will only further strain relations. Yet, despite the fact this dispute rolls on and paramedics are calling for help because they are unable to resolve these important issues they continue to raise, the government will not seek to mediate or work through this.
The government has dropped the ball and walked away from its responsibility to Territorians to deliver the best ambulance services it can.
Mr Tollner interjecting.
Ms MANISON: I urge the government to take action and start supporting paramedics. Meet them, just once, Treasurer. There is nothing wrong with listening to people. This is the problem with your government, you are so damn arrogant that you will not talk to people delivering frontline services that make the difference between life and death for Territorians. You do not have the decency to talk with paramedics. It is not that hard to find half-an-hour in your diary to listen.
Do you not want to know what is happening on the ground? This is what people think of you lot, seriously. Have the decency to listen. It is very clear the Treasurer is not interested in helping paramedics and wanting better ambulance services in the Territory.
Mr Tollner: It is not our role to help paramedics in EBA negotiations, that is a matter for the federal parliament and Fair Work Australia. Work out whose responsibility it is …
Ms MANISON: The Department of Health pays the contract for St John Ambulance services, Treasurer. You do not care what is happening on the ground.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Can we have a bit of order, please! I only want one person speaking at a time and the member for Wanguri has the floor, thank you.
Ms MANISON: In some ways I am glad the Treasurer has been able to put his views on the record, because he has demonstrated again what a caring fellow he is, that he cares to listen to what is happening on the ground and that he cares about good service delivery in the health sector.
Territory paramedics and emergency dispatchers do an amazing job under some of the toughest circumstances every day and deserve our support. I hope the government will have the decency to meet with them to find out what is happening.
I now turn to the area of Health, where we are receiving strong feedback, particularly from RDH about the amount of pressure on staff working in the hospital. However, the consistent message that always comes through from people who have experienced the ED or the wards is that they are so impressed with the professionalism of staff and how hard they work under what they see as extremely trying circumstances.
It seems the government has the wrong priorities when it comes to Health. I have spoken to ED nurses and staff; they call me every now and then to talk about what they see every day, and double-bunking is certainly happening. They become very concerned about the privacy they can offer patients in the ED, generally under stressful circumstances; nobody wants to be in the ED in the first place.
They feel having to consistently move patients around to correctly double-bunk them exposes them to some risk. I was sitting in the canteen at the hospital the other day, and I do not know if they were speaking loudly to make sure I heard or not, but staff were talking about how disgusted they had been with some government comments they had heard that day about the issue of double-bunking and the ED, and that the government has no clue about what is happening there.
It is wonderful we finally have an acknowledgement that the medi-hotel has been used for the wrong purpose from day one, and we will finally have 30 beds restored for that purpose in the next six to eight weeks. We will be keeping an eye on that time line and on the full restoration of the 100 beds for that facility to help ease the pressure on staff trying to do the best job they can within RDH.
I still receive calls from staff regarding the parking system, which is driving them batty trying to find a space and constantly being fined. That has been an issue.
I also receive calls about bullying. The Chief Executive of the Health department has encouraged people to speak to him personally about bullying allegations and claims, but people are still hesitant to go through that process because, once again, they are going directly to the chief executive and are nervous and worried. It seems to be an issue within the Health department.
There is also much concern and worry about money allocated and cuts within the Health budget, how Health will function, how it will meet those costs and which programs and staff will go. You often hear the words ‘natural attrition’ used. Natural attrition ultimately leads to ensuring people left behind will carry bigger workloads, whether they are frontline or backroom. It makes things very tough for them.
We also have Power and Water staff coming into their EBA process next year, which will be an interesting process. Our Power and Water staff are very important; they keep the power on. We have seen recently what happens when the power goes out for an entire day and the disaster that can be. In the last EBA staff went through, the government was very quick to roll over existing conditions, but for a shorter period of time. It turned out they wanted to split Power and Water, so it was apparent why they were happy to roll over conditions for a shorter period to gain the agreement of staff. Staff at the Power and Water Corporation, Territory Generation and Jacana Energy will enter that process next year, not knowing what is on offer and how the structural separation will impact them. That is something we will keep an eye on.
I turn my thoughts to the treatment of firefighters, and what we have seen today with the government finally agreeing to presumptive legislation for those firefighters battling cancer due to their careers serving people in the Territory. I cannot get over that. One year ago you had an opportunity to deal with this. One year ago there was legislation brought to this House where you could have given those firefighters the help, reassurance and support they wanted. Instead, you have dragged your heels on that promise ...
Mr Tollner: In isolation.
Ms MANISON: One thing I hope you listen to now, Treasurer, is that we need to see this legislation passed. To not acknowledge the four firefighters battling cancer, so they cannot access the support they need is a disgrace …
Mr Chandler: You have not seen the new legislation.
Ms MANISON: I have seen the media release, and you say it only goes back for 12 months to 28 December last year. You must consider that; show some heart and make a difference in these people’s lives. Show them support for the years of service they have given to the Territory, serving people. I hope I am wrong, Treasurer, and that you will support those firefighters.
Ms Fyles: You can clarify it tonight.
Ms MANISON: Please do clarify or support, because they deserve support. We have taken a year to get to this point and I am very glad we are finally here. However, I hope you ensure those four firefighters are part of this and they get the support they deserve.
I will raise the fact, again, that we are still waiting to see if the government will hear the views of the public sector and how our key workers across the Territory feel about life under this government, their work positions and their workplaces.
Usually, we have been able to obtain a bit of data on how people are feeling in the workplace through the Northern Territory public sector staff survey. The last one was conducted in 2011. The government failed to conduct one last year. We are well into 2014 and still waiting to hear if you will conduct the Northern Territory public sector staff survey, so you can gauge how public servants are feeling about the workplace to make sure you have good policies to work with staff we should be trying to develop in their career so they stay in the Territory for a long time. They have a huge amount to offer.
I am keen to know if the government will be venturing down that track to find out how the public sector feels things are going, through this survey.
Our key Territory workers deserve our support. They deliver essential services and are wonderful members of our community. However, we continue to see a government that will not listen to the issues to try to resolve them. I hope you start treating those workers with the respect they deserve.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer): Mr Deputy Speaker, I cannot help myself and must respond to some of these things. I am thrilled to live in the Northern Territory; this might stun a few people, but this is the best part of the best country in the world to live in. This is a fabulous place and I am so proud to be a Territorian and call this place home.
I have to scratch my head at times, as I thought this would be a sentiment shared by most people in this House, but it seems not. There seems to be one or two individuals, particularly on that side of the Chamber, who do not like the Northern Territory at all. There is never a positive word about the Northern Territory from these people’s mouths, and I do not know what it has done to offend them so badly.
We are in a political arena and we will fight on policy, etcetera, but the last thing we expect is for members of this parliament to talk the Territory down. We see it all the time with the opposition. They do not talk the place up, they do not tell people what a wonderful place the Northern Territory is to live in and they do not sing its praises.
I look around the Territory and I see all sorts of things I like, admire and that keep me living here. There is the beautiful clean air; the wide open spaces, the ability to shoot a pig or buffalo or catch a fish; or the opportunity to go camping with the kids. These things keep me here. We also have first-class sporting facilities, a modern health system and education which extends across the Northern Territory.
When I went to school in Queensland we did not have a school full of classrooms. In the Northern Territory every school has classrooms. I attended many classes outside, under a tree, and I remember going to school – I often tell this story – with the sandflies. We were inundated by sandflies and would take Milo tins, fill them with cow dung, punch holes in the bottom, put handles on them like a billy, light the top, create some ash and walk around swinging these things around our heads, watching the smoke come out to keep the sandflies away. There would be 44 gallon drums of smouldering cow dung all around the school to keep the sandflies away. I do not see that in the Northern Territory. Everybody is operating in a classroom and we have teachers ready to go.
I was in a class of 45 students of mixed grades, in a remote school with one teacher. There were various grades – imagine if you tried to do that in the Northern Territory. The opposition would fire up if we said there were only 45 kids at a school and sent one teacher
The member for Barkly is secretly sitting there nodding along.
Mr McCarthy: There were forty-six when I opened Epenarra – in a caravan.
Mr TOLLNER: He had 46 in his class in a caravan. The member for Barkly understands hardship, but you would swear we were living in hell when you listen to the opposition talk about the Northern Territory.
I love the member for Wanguri – she is a lovely lady with a very nice, bubbly personality – but when she talks about paramedics and how the Northern Territory government should intervene in their EBA negotiations, I scratch my head and wonder whether she has the slightest understanding of the industrial relations system in the Northern Territory. St John is a non-government organisation. I do not know where you think it fits into government ranks and we should be paying its wages and conditions. We do not. That is a job for St John; it negotiates with its employees. I am sure you are not suggesting the Northern Territory should intervene in the EBA negotiations of St John or similar.
Perhaps the member for Nhulunbuy wants us to dive in and take a position on Rio Tinto’s EBA negotiations, or maybe the member for Arnhem wants us to dive in with BHP.
Ms WALKER: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. This would be so much more relevant if the Deputy Chief Minister had listened to the rally this afternoon and the brilliant contribution from a paramedic about why it is a government responsibility.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I do not see that as a point of order.
Mr TOLLNER: The member for Nhulunbuy is a lovely lady, when you strip away all that hardness on the exterior. She is a nice person, and I know she does not really believe the Northern Territory government should be intervening in the St John EBA, the same way she would only want us to intervene in Rio Tinto’s EBA at Nhulunbuy because it employs people in the Northern Territory, or at BHP, Westpac or the Commonwealth Bank. Are there any other companies or NGOs you think the Northern Territory government should throw its weight around with and dictate how they negotiate EBAs? I do not think so.
I cannot recall, in the time I have lived in the Territory – maybe there has been one – a suggestion that we take on IR powers.
Ms Walker: I hope you and your family members never require the services of St John Ambulance.
Mr TOLLNER: That is a low blow member for Nhulunbuy. My family has had much to do with the ambulance service over the years. My father was a chief ambulance officer in country Queensland. I have the highest regard and intimate knowledge of how ambulance services operate. To suggest you hope my family falls into some problem where we need to dial an ambulance – I do not know that is what you really want.
Ms Walker: I did not suggest that, I said I hope you never need the service.
Mr TOLLNER: You hope I never need the service; I hope I never need the service either. The point is, I do not hope to intervene in their EBA negotiations. I cannot see a role for government intervening in the EBA negotiations of St John, but Labor seems to think that is appropriate. A disaffected member obviously told the member for Nhulunbuy we should be intervening in the EBA negotiations.
Ms Fyles: He told a public rally outside – hundreds of people.
Mr TOLLNER: Hundreds of people were outside, urging us to involve ourselves in the EBA negotiations of St John. Do they also want us to involve ourselves in EBA negotiations of NGOs and corporations around the Territory? I do not think so.
People want the best deal they can get, which is fine. They should negotiate that with their employers, but I do not see any role for the Northern Territory government to start wading into these things, throwing our weight around. That would be inappropriate.
The issue with firefighters – I thought the opposition would welcome the decision announced today. Do you want to know why it was made retrospective to that date? Because that is the date Labor brought the legislation forward. We thought, in a spirit of bipartisanship, we might support you, not that we get any thanks from you mob. You belittle us for it. You cannot even associate the date we are backdating it to with the date you brought your legislation forward. Goodness me, how pathetic.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 67: digression. Could the Deputy Chief Minister please outline whether the four firefighters are included?
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: He is responding to your question, so I do not accept that as a point of order. Treasurer, please try to stay in the general direction of debate. Thank you.
Mr TOLLNER: I thought we were having a debate on EBA negotiations with all of these people
Ms Fyles. Are they covered? It is a simple yes or no.
Mr TOLLNER: Did I say we would introduce presumptive legislation for career firefighters for 12 types of cancer?
Members interjecting.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Please stop conversing across the Chamber. The Treasurer has the floor and I want only the Treasurer speaking. The next person who speaks will be out.
Mr TOLLNER: I fail to understand what their argument is. We backdated to the date they brought the legislation in; we thought that was done in a good bipartisan spirit. We did not signal it. We thought the penny might drop with the member for Fannie Bay, or somebody else who actually cared about firefighters, to understand that was the date you waltzed in here with your legislation, but clearly you are not up to it. You do not even know the date you brought your legislation into this place.
We are looking after firefighters and are keen to see paramedics get a good deal. Does that mean we should wade into the St John EBA negotiations? No. It is not our job to prove whether firefighters developed cancer fighting fires or not. That will be assessed by the employer and the insurer. It is not a job for the government to intervene in these matters.
In relation to Health, our Health minister is doing a fantastic job in tough circumstances. It is easy to say, ‘You spend $1.3bn on Health; that is a third of the budget. You should be doing more.’ That was always the Labor way, to keep pushing more in. We are spending $1.3bn and we have to deliver health services across the Northern Territory.
It is amazing how short a way that money goes. Can we afford more? Not really, as it is already eating up a third of our budget. I know Labor would say it does not matter and we should borrow the money. You borrowed money to pay teachers, nurses and doctors. The member for Casuarina outlined that in the last budget; you were happy to borrow money to pay the operational costs of what you saw as important in government.
When you borrow money, somewhere down the track it has to be paid back. Labor never had a plan to pay any money back, so that job has fallen to this government. We do not want to clean up your mess. Unfortunately, that is something we have to do. Whacking a lot more money into the Health budget is something we cannot do at the moment. The Health minister is doing a splendid job of finding efficiencies in the system, providing critical services to Territorians across an incredibly vast jurisdiction, supplying doctors, nurses, support staff, etcetera, to five hospitals, 64 or 65 remote …
Mrs Lambley: There are about 80, including community clinics.
Mr TOLLNER: There are about 80 remote clinics, plus a myriad of other services. Our Health minister is doing a fantastic job keeping the Health department operating under a dreadful situation bequeathed to us by the former government.
Do we get any accolades for any of this? We do not expect to receive accolades from the opposition, but we also do not expect to hear the opposition constantly talking the Territory down. That is what you are doing. You raise these concerns and your concerns are talking the Territory down. Any independent, objective person from outside the Northern Territory listening to you guys would not consider coming to the Northern Territory if all they heard was your talk.
The Opposition Leader thinks she is funny every time she talks about CPI, the cost of living, etcetera. You mix up CPI and the cost of living to the point nobody can understand the difference. There is a real difference between the CPI and the cost of living. CPI is worked out on the calculation of a basket of goods to see how much it will cost into the future. The cost of living is a range of other things outside the basket of goods. A basket of goods does not pick up the contribution government puts into people’s pockets through sports vouchers, childcare subsidies, the Back to School Payment Scheme, and it does not count toll roads people have to go through and pay a fee for. There is a range of things CPI does not include. However, the mob on the other side is very happy to try to confuse people and suggest CPI is a cost of living indicator. It is not.
It is interesting when you listen to those on the other side, because they never take into account any of these external issues. When they see a southerner, they say, ‘Oh, do not come and live here, it is too expensive. It is a dreadful place to live, this Northern Territory. We pay too much.’ They do not say, ‘Come and live in the Northern Territory. It is the best place in the the best country in the world to live.’ A basket of goods may cost a little more, but you do not have to worry about traffic jams or toll booths. The government will kick a bit of money into your back pocket to help you through your childcare years, education expenses and make sure the kids can have a game of cricket or footy …
Mr VOWLES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! As much as I am enjoying the Deputy Chief Minister’s speech, which clock are we working off?
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: We are working off the Internet. The Treasurer has two minutes to go.
Mr TOLLNER: I might wind up there. It is a shame the opposition is so keen to talk down the Northern Territory. It is a sad thing when you lose your focus on what really matters. You seem to think all that matters is being on government benches, rather than relishing the fact you live in the best part of the best country in the world.
Debate adjourned.
Continued from earlier this day.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Health): Mr Deputy Speaker, two years ago the Country Liberals government promised to make headway in improving access to health services for all Territorians. I am proud to say we have delivered on that promise. We have delivered on our promises with a focus on investment, reform and innovation in our health services for Territorians.
We have seen improved access and will continue to see progress in Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and across our vast Territory, including our 35 remote health clinics across 41 Central Australian communities and 26 remote health clinics in the Top End.
This year we developed a Health budget that contained the largest ever Territory government investment in the health sector. The $1.352bn budget includes an increase of $36.8m in Northern Territory government funding compared to 2013-14. We have also delivered the highest Territory government investment in the disability sector. We delivered this despite the $5.5bn debt legacy left by the Labor government. We have been working hard to reduce this debt so funding is better spent on improving services for Territorians by reducing waste and staying focused on outcomes.
When it comes to investing in health, I am pleased to say we have been delivering expanded and improved health services which are producing results for all Territorians. One of the Country Liberal government’s biggest investments has been in alcohol mandatory treatment. Alcohol mandatory treatment or rehabilitation is finally helping Territorians afflicted by chronic alcohol abuse to get the treatment they need to turn their lives around. It is just over 12 months since the Country Liberals government introduced the Australia-first program. More than 400 hundred people have already been referred for mandatory treatment; that is 400 people who have had the chance to reform their lives free of the scourge of alcohol, 400 people who have had the opportunity to become real contributors to their lives, their families and the Northern Territory.
CAAAPU has run a 20-bed treatment facility in Alice Springs which has had great results, with dozens of positive reports of people being rehabilitated, getting healthy, accessing job training and reconnecting with their families and communities. As CAAAPU Chair, Eileen Hoosan said, ‘The facility is helping to turn the tide of damage caused by alcohol abuse to individuals, families and the Territory community. Simply, the CAAAPU alcohol mandatory treatment service is saving lives and changing lives for the better. CAAAPU is a place of health, hope and healing.’
There are now plans for CAAAPU to expand to eight assessment beds and a further 36 treatment beds. This will allow the service to treat more people in need of this important program. Alcohol mandatory treatment is a valuable part of the suite of measures introduced by the Country Liberals government to tackle chronic alcohol abuse and alcohol-fuelled violence and crime. The rate of alcohol-related admissions to the emergency department of Alice Springs Hospital has reduced thanks to these measures. Alcohol-related emergency department presentations have hit a five-year low in Tennant Creek under the Giles government’s tough new alcohol polices. The proportion of all emergency presentations that are alcohol-related and go on to be admitted has dropped from as high as 37% under Labor’s watch in 2009, down to less than 10% in April 2014. That is a success story in anyone’s book. It shows the government’s measures are protecting the community from harm.
I will soon officially open the 12-bed facility to deliver alcohol mandatory treatment to Tennant Creek, a facility the community has been calling for. Late next month the Darwin alcohol mandatory treatment program will also move from its accommodation centre, also known as the medi-hotel, to its new home at Berrimah. It was important that AMT was rolled out quickly in 2013 to tackle the extreme alcohol abuse which afflicts some Territorians. The burden of alcohol abuse and alcohol-related violence on our hospitals is huge. It has, in the past, used up a significant proportion of resources.
That move means by the start of 2015 we will have permanent and secure alcohol mandatory treatment facilities at Berrimah, Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, with construction to start on the new Katherine facility later in the New Year. This will bring the total number of beds to 150. We will continue to expand alcohol mandatory treatment to keep producing positive results for Territorians, their families and communities.
To give one recent example, in Alice Springs a 43-year old women has almost completed her treatment order. She is proactive in managing her own healthcare after being informed of her medication requirements. This client has identified she has alcohol issues and has actively made decisions to remain sober and not drink anymore.
The client has indicated she would like to remain in a community treatment program post-completion of her alcohol mandatory treatment order. She wishes to obtain employment and has been given approval to gain experience in the CAAAPU kitchen. She is doing extremely well and has been discussing seeking an apprenticeship with GTNT with a view to obtaining a certificate in commercial cookery.
Staff have assisted the client to apply online and have worked with her to develop a resume. This client is also undertaking English and writing skills tests to ascertain what help she may require to successfully complete the apprenticeship.
As you can hear, we are changing people’s lives, and this has a significant impact not only on their family, but their community. We would not have been able to roll out such an important program without the help of police, nurses and hospital staff, assessment clinicians, tribunal members and the treatment service providers. I thank all of them for their hard work and dedication.
Another project that will help to change the way people access health services is the Palmerston Regional Hospital. This is another project where Labor failed to deliver for Territorians, and when I say failed, I mean failed miserably. Eleven years produced a fence, two volumes of discussion and one brochure. I am proud to say early site works have started on what is one of the Northern Territory government’s biggest infrastructure projects. The project is on track to begin construction in 2016, and I am pleased the Country Liberals government is delivering on its promise to build a new public hospital.
Contractors have cleared a 1 km section of land to enable construction access to the site. A site office has been installed to support the construction works, which are part of the $5m in-program funding from the 2014 budget for the preliminary planning and construction of the Palmerston Regional Hospital.
Next on the program of works is the construction of the major upgrade of the Temple Terrace and Stuart Highway intersection to accommodate increased traffic demand to this area. Designs for the new intersection are being finalised, with preparations under way for commencing construction at the intersection soon. We are continuing to develop the master plan for the Palmerston Regional Hospital and a health precinct across the 45 ha area. This will guide the development of stage one of the hospital and outline the future expansion of a health precinct.
Some of the early ideas for the health precinct include opportunities for a new ambulance facility, childcare, retail space and low-care accommodation for remote patients. Once finalised, the master plan will be released to the public.
The development of the hospital will go through several stages of public comment and review. We are releasing another round of public information, as we did in June, to keep everyone in the Palmerston and rural area informed of the exciting developments around the hospital project. In July, the expression of market interest was advertised nationally and has resulted in responses from several companies interested in the development of the Palmerston Regional Hospital, including a number of major healthcare consortiums.
We have made arrangements to meet interested parties as part of the market-sounding process. This is real progress in the development of the bigger and better Palmerston Regional Hospital when compared with the 11-year delay under the former Labor government.
The Palmerston Regional Hospital will provide medical and surgical services, including cardiology; renal services; cancer services; and maternal and child health, including antenatal and postnatal care, with birthing services to be delivered as part of stage two.
The Palmerston Regional Hospital will relieve pressure placed on the Royal Darwin Hospital and will respond to the growing healthcare needs of residents in Darwin, Palmerston and the rural areas. The Country Liberals government has invested substantially in the Territory’s hospitals over the last two years. Budget 2014-15 presented the biggest injection of Northern Territory government funding, $36.8m, into our hospitals.
Work on the Royal Darwin Hospital’s $22.2m expansion of the emergency department and operating theatres is now 60% complete. Building works for the two new operating theatres began in May, with the extended emergency medical unit for the emergency department starting this month. The upgrade is expected to be completed by early next year and will greatly improve RDH’s capacity to provide elective surgery and reduce congestion and waiting times in the emergency department for Territorians.
On Monday I was pleased to announce the Royal Darwin Hospital will be able to treat patients in the short-term accommodation centre from September, immediately relieving pressure on the hospital. Known as the medi-hotel, the facility will be opened as a short-term accommodation centre at the end of September. It will open in stages, with the first 30 beds from next month. This will accommodate a range of Royal Darwin Hospital patients not requiring significant nursing care.
To give a few examples, this may include patients who require complex assessments prior to surgery and those who require wound management or post-surgery care. These types of patients are often using beds within the Royal Darwin Hospital, affecting patient flow. They can now be appropriately cared for in the accommodation centre, freeing up resources in the Royal Darwin Hospital. The centre will immediately relieve the pressure on the Royal Darwin Hospital that has been growing over the last decade.
The short-term accommodation centre will require some minor fitting works before patients can be moved in. This work is only expected to take several days. It is planned that the centre will expand the number of beds, with more beds to come online during the first quarter of next year.
It is important that the Royal Darwin Hospital takes a staged approach to this transition to ensure the needs of the hospital, its staff and patients are appropriately addressed.
The facility must also accommodate carers and/or family members who may need to stay with patients and, therefore, must be flexible with its bed numbers as the demand presents itself.
The budget also continues to provide funding of $4.46m to deliver on our election commitment for an additional 400 elective surgeries per year. In Central Australia we have gone above and beyond what we promised, and I am pleased to say we have achieved an additional 186 cases. That is 10.5% in increased activity.
It was also an election commitment to expand cardiac services in the Territory and we have made some exciting achievements in this area. In December the Country Liberals government committed $6.5m per annum for the roll-out of enhanced cardiac services, including the establishment of a stenting service at the Royal Darwin Hospital.
For the first time, low-risk angioplasty procedures are being performed in the Northern Territory. That is fantastic news, as Territorians have previously had to leave the convenience of home, and the support of family and friends for interstate hospitals.
The service started on 19 February this year. Since then, 38 low-risk angioplasty procedures have been performed at RDH. Angioplasty is a specialised procedure for arteries narrowed by cholesterol build-up and can lead to significant improvements in a patient’s health and quality of life.
It is expected at least 600 Territorians over four years will have the procedure locally rather than having to travel interstate. This is expected to meet about 90% of estimated demand. Senior staff at RDH and Flinders Medical Centre have been integral in providing the service.
RDH is also undergoing $22.8m in other new upgrades. This includes the first stage of the $11.9m refurbishment of the hospital’s paediatric ward, so it can be amalgamated on the same level to provide excellent paediatric care.
Nearly $7m has been allocated to upgrade negative pressure rooms, and a further $4.2m to improve fire control measures at RDH.
The Alice Springs Hospital community recently celebrated the first anniversary of the new emergency department, which has cut waiting times for patients and created an efficient working environment for staff. The emergency department has recorded more than 43 000 attendances since the Country Liberals government built the larger facility in mid-June last year.
That is over 3000 patients more than the older facility was able to treat in the previous 12 months. The new $25m emergency department has 18 treatment bays and has employed more staff, with more than 70 nurses and eight ward clerks now working in the emergency department.
Waiting times are already showing a great improvement. The ED has been equipped with state-of-the-art technology, and hospital staff say they feel in control and have the room and facilities to treat patients in a personalised manner. This is a far cry from the previous emergency department, where overcrowding made treatment difficult.
The new ED also held up well during the very busy time of the Finke Desert Race and a recent spike in flu cases. The Country Liberals government has committed an extra $160 000 to the emergency department in 2014, bringing the total additional funding of the ED to $5.7m in 2014-15.
People requiring special heart scans in Alice Springs now have access to CT coronary angiograms, thanks to a fly-in service that started last year. This is another election commitment to expand cardiac services that we have delivered on. This joint Department of Health and NT Cardiac Services program has successfully delivered this service to the town. A visiting cardiologist visits once a month for a full day of appointments. This will soon increase.
I also recently toured the newly-constructed Ochre and Olive Wings at Flynn Lodge, which will provide a much-needed boost to the aged care community. The $4.4m wings will expand the facility to include an additional 20 high-care residents. In addition, front offices, an activity room, a chapel and nurses’ stations are being built at the front of Old Timers. The extension works will add to the two existing wings at Flynn Lodge, Mountain View and Riverview, which accommodate 20 low-care residents in single rooms. To improve the facilities further, these older wings are undergoing refurbishments to each of the ensuite bathrooms. The 20 additional residential places will soon become available following the completion of these refurbishments. Flynn Lodge will then provide 24-hour care for 40 Alice Springs residents.
This government has also spent $391 000 in extra funding to support palliative care respite care services. Last year I opened the $2m respite care facility in Araluen. Alice Springs Respite Day Care House provides daytime care for residents in the wider Central Australian community. This service has provided much-needed assistance to people who are aged and frail or who require palliative care, as well as assistance and support for their families and carers.
The Alice Springs Hospital is also set to receive $5.2m in Commonwealth funding to create a multidisciplinary teaching and training facility. Alice Springs Hospital will become a significant contributor to a clinical teaching and training hub in Central Australia, delivering high-quality training to multidisciplinary hospital staff and our remote workforce. The teaching and training facility will include a 100-seat lecture theatre with advanced audio visual capability, two simulation labs, four conference rooms with videoconference capability and student work areas. The hospital will also receive $29.9m for continued fire protection, air conditioning and remediation works, including upgrades to emergency power and water systems
...
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move that the member for Araluen be granted an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Mrs LAMBLEY: The Northern Territory government continues its commitment to providing quality healthcare at Tennant Creek Hospital, with the opening of the upgraded emergency department in 2013. It includes five new trauma beds which are more sophisticated than ordinary trolley beds; these allow for X-rays to be taken at the bedside. The upgrade has also resulted in two resuscitation bays, a secure pharmacy, a secure mental health facility and three separate waiting areas to respond to cultural needs. Four full-time medical training positions have also been established at the Tennant Creek Hospital and a GP clinic was established in September.
A new midwifery group practice was also established in collaboration with the Anyinginyi Health Aboriginal Corporation. This will provide women and families of the Barkly region with access to a streamlined model of maternity care based in Tennant Creek.
At Gove District Hospital we are working on plans for the refurbishment of the emergency department. Population modelling and clinical planning has been undertaken based on the Gove population growing into the future, and shows there is still available capacity in both the ED and in-patient services. A refurbishment of the old layout of the emergency department is urgently needed to ensure an improved work plan for staff and an appropriate level of privacy for patients. In addition, there is an opportunity to put in place infrastructure to better support improved infection control practices. It is expected that design work will be under way in late 2014.
In May 2014 a month-long extensive refurbishment of the Gove District Hospital central sterilised services department was also undertaken. Refurbishment included installation of floor-to-ceiling vinyl, new shelving and the installation of filters. Gove hospital also achieved a further three-year reaccreditation for the baby-friendly hospital initiative in April 2014. Ward 1, which serves as the combined adult-paediatric unit, saw the construction and completion of three new ensuite bathrooms to adjoin the three paediatric rooms.
In early 2014, Gove hospital trialled taking the specialist orthopaedic outpatient service to Alyangula, Groote Eylandt. This first visit was successful in attendance and cost-saving.
Gove District Hospital has partnered with Flinders University to establish an onsite learning centre for doctors and medical students. The centre facilitates clinical learning through active simulation scenarios. Included in the centre is a four bay simulation lab with state-of-the-art teleconference facilities.
This government is also investing in a new unit at Katherine Hospital that will be dedicated to caring for chemotherapy patients closer to home. Patients from Katherine and the surrounding region currently have to go to Royal Darwin Hospital’s Alan Walker Cancer Care Centre for treatment. In the last two years about 60 patients from the Katherine region have been diagnosed with cancer and treated in Darwin. Having a service in Katherine means patients have easy access to high-quality services and can go home after their treatment.
Completion of the Flinders University simulation learning centre on the Katherine Hospital campus, to provide ongoing support for medical and allied health students while they gain experience and treatment in the hospital centre, has also been completed. This centre also includes simulation services. The hospital has also worked with Fresenius Medical Care in planning for the transition of the renal unit in Katherine Hospital to the new private off-campus facility in the Katherine community.
We are investing in our hospitals in our major centres and, similarly, are investing heavily in building new remote health clinics, as well as extensive upgrades in the bush. The $50m program will improve healthcare delivery for Territorians in rural and remote areas. Workers have been onsite at Ntaria since September 2013 to construct the community’s brand-new $6m health centre. The project has been delivered on budget and on schedule, and I am looking forward to visiting Hermannsburg soon to inspect the clinic. It provides a bigger, better and more culturally appropriate health centre with dedicated spaces for a range of health services.
Tenders for the clinics in Docker River and Elliott will be released next month, with Galiwinku and Umbakumba tenders to follow in October, and Titjikala in November. This equates to more than $20m in investment in the bush.
The Territory government has substantially increased funding to the Patient Assistance Travel Scheme for remote Territorians. PATS is an integral part of providing access to health services for remote Territorians, and the Country Liberals government has worked very hard to improve this since 2012. The government committed to a full review of PATS and has put forward an additional $7.5m per annum for three years to fund any recommendations.
Improving health services is not about investment alone; you must provide innovation. Last month I launched the BreastScreenNT bus at Barunga that will give remote women the opportunity to have breast screens closer to home. The BreastScreenNT bus will make a big difference to the lives of women living in the bush. Remote women have always had to travel hundreds and sometimes thousands of kilometres for breast screening and some did not access the service at all.
Last month I also officially opened a new mental health accommodation facility to support Territorians and their families. This is another great idea from the Department of Health’s mental health team to provide Darwin’s first community-based rehabilitation centre of this type.
This year the Country Liberals government also held the first dedicated conference on suicide prevention. More than 100 experts and Territory stakeholders attended the conference. Feedback from local stakeholders will help to shape the Territory’s first strategic reform of the way we approach suicide prevention in the Northern Territory.
Reforming health policies to improve access for Territorians and correct the mistakes of the previous Labor government is also a big part of our commitment to Territorians. We have banned smoking in cars carrying children under 16, an initiative which was well overdue. All other jurisdictions have introduced legislation to protect children from the harms of second-hand smoke whilst travelling in a motor vehicle. It was time the Northern Territory strengthened measures to protect children from the harm of second-hand smoke.
Another one of our landmark reforms this year has been to introduce legislation that will, once again, allow private midwives to practice in the Northern Territory.
In another significant move to reform the health sector, the Country Liberals government is also delivering an eight-fold increase in the number of nurse practitioners throughout the Northern Territory.
I could spend half the night talking about the reforms we have made throughout the Northern Territory in Health. The list is extensive.
One of the most significant reforms has been the Territory’s new health services framework. This has meant the establishment of two health services, the Top End Health Service and the Central Australian Health Service, and local people making local decisions about healthcare in their community. Decision-making is devolved to these two health services and their boards, and we have many more reforms in health policy planned. We are looking at furthering community control of health clinics across the Territory. We are working very hard to bring the declining numbers of Aboriginal Health Practitioners across the Territory back on track through new initiatives.
We created a portfolio of Disability Services earlier this year, the first time it has had its own, separate portfolio. We are also developing a strategic plan for Disability Services, which I am very proud of.
I conclude tonight by stating that we are meeting our commitments within the Health portfolio. It is a huge portfolio, with the largest amount of funding allocated to it. It is a big responsibility, but we have kicked goals over the last two years, compared to 11 years of Labor. We are making significant changes which will ultimately improve the health and quality of all Territorians’ lives.
Mr KURRUPUWU (Arafura): Mr Deputy Speaker, in response to the Chief Minister’s statement, he said his government has actioned 98% of CLP election commitments.
People in my electorate believe he must have his percentages mixed up, because there are 98% of election promises yet to be actioned in Arafura. Before the Country Liberal Party came to power, it signed a contract with bush seats, including the electorate of Arafura.
Those contracts held promises Aboriginal people believed. There were promises to increase jobs for Aboriginal people, for infrastructure, economic development, to improve education and health and housing outcomes.
It is a very sad indictment of the current government that most of the problems with Aboriginal communities have, in some cases, gotten worse.
There have been incidents where major projects have been stalled and no jobs are being created for local Aboriginal people.
Our people remain very poor. We are often criticised for not working and wasting our money. We tried very hard to partner with the government and businesses to increase job opportunities for our people, so they can come off welfare and work in real jobs for wages. There are many examples of where we have given our most valuable asset, our land, over to Commonwealth and Territory governments to show we are trying hard to improve our standard of living. Many are now asking what the point of this is, when those who are major partners, such as the government or banks, are not prepared to contribute finance as part of the partnership.
I emphasise that we have shown we are prepared to give what we have to ensure a better life for our young people. However, we cannot have our land in leasing arrangements with the government when nothing happens and we receive no benefit through real jobs.
The fact we have no jobs for our people leaves us facing poverty. This, in turn, leads to the problem of poor health and poor outcomes in education. What is the point of Senator Scullion trying to make sure young people attend schools when the major root of problems is clearly one of poverty?
There is no evidence the Northern Territory government has improved the standard of living of people in my electorate, nor did I see any evidence the current government was prepared to spend even a minor amount on improving infrastructure. We have lost confidence in the value of contracts and memoranda of understanding with the government. They are only pieces of paper which are not being honoured by the government. My electorate wants real action on the ground. That is why I decided to leave the Country Liberals and join the Palmer United Party with my other brave and concerned colleagues, the members for Arnhem and Namatjira.
Minister Price talked about how governments help us with sport; my electorate is very interested in real jobs.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Mr Deputy Speaker, I am delighted, as are all members on this side of the House, to support of the Chief Minister’s statement on the Country Liberal government’s achievements over the past two years and our plans for the coming two years, because there are more very exciting times ahead.
Halfway through this government’s first term of office we can confidently say work is well under way on meeting our promises. We have delivered on most and, in many instances, we have achieved more then we committed to. Right now is an exciting time to be involved in the Northern Territory’s mining and resources industry, with major projects under way to explore and extract gas, minerals and metals.
This government has made the most significant investment in growing the minerals and petroleum exploration industry ever undertaken by a Territory government through CORE, the Creating Opportunities Resource Exploration initiative. This $23.8m commitment over the next four years, including an investment of $8m to undertake a major assessment of the Territory’s shale gas potential, will stimulate and grow the minerals and onshore petroleum exploration industry.
Since this government came to power in 2012 we have been setting a range of policies and initiatives to support exploration and attract investment into the minerals and energy sector. There are currently 19 mining projects in construction or approval processes in the Territory. These projects have the potential capital investment of around $4bn; it is estimated there will be about 3000 jobs created for the construction phase and more than 2000 jobs for operations.
Although commodity prices and issues with raising finance present challenges that must be overcome before a number of these projects can move into production, the Territory government is committed to doing whatever it can to assist these companies in getting their projects across the line. This includes targeted pre-competitive geoscience programs undertaken by the Northern Territory Geological Survey, which are designed to increase the Territory’s competitiveness in attracting exploration investment, with a particular focus on onshore petroleum.
The department is also developing policies around strategic development zones in the McArthur and Central Australian regions. In these areas there is a case for stimulating activity to facilitate a critical mass of developing projects that can support infrastructure development and the growth of regional economies. These zones are a focus for the NT Geological Survey’s current geoscience programs. Work is under way on developing protocols for tenement management in these regions. These initiatives will ultimately ensure we encourage aggressive exploration whilst not applying onerous or uncompetitive conditions on the exploration industry.
My department is also developing strategies to work with land councils, traditional owners and industry on mechanisms to facilitate improved processes for land access for exploration. By the end of the year the industry development strategy will be in place, and I expect to see parts of my department restructured to better reflect this strong economic development focus.
Following the establishment of the Energy Directorate in 2013, the energy team has already met a number of milestones. These include introducing amendments to the Petroleum Act in support of government policy to encourage aggressive exploration. The amendments enable multiple applications over the same vacant land, creating an environment for competitive processes.
In February this year I signed off on a production licence for Central Petroleum’s Surprise Field oil project in Central Australia. This is the first time the Northern Territory government has issued a production licence for a new oil field in over 32 years.
In consultation with industry on current and future energy needs in the NT, we are in the final stages of establishing a policy that will focus on delivering secure, affordable, reliable and sustainable energy. The NT energy policy will recognise gas, solar energy and emerging technologies play a key role in driving economic development, including investment in regions and employment.
The Territory’s onshore petroleum industry is undergoing record expansion, largely driven by our substantial potential for shale gas and oil. In the past few years, some of the largest onshore seismic surveys ever held in Australia have been undertaken in the Territory, and up to 25 wells are planned over the coming year.
Exploration for unconventional gas and oil continues to gain momentum, particularly in the McArthur Basin and Beetaloo sub-basin, with a number of major investments and farm-ins announced over the past year.
The discovery of large-scale onshore gas reserves in the Territory will provide major flow-on benefits for the minerals sector in new energy supplies for mining projects, and further impetus for the development of infrastructure in regional and remote parts of the Territory.
While this government has a strong focus on economic development, we also take our environmental responsibilities seriously. The Legacy Mines Unit within the Department of Mines and Energy became fully operational at the beginning of this year, and has commenced compiling an inventory of legacy components of mine sites. In addition, the unit has commenced projects on three sites. The largest of these projects involves an assessment program, with the expenditure of some $500 000 at Redbank Mine, which includes the installation of new bores and pumps.
The Northern Territory government has worked hard to improve the regulatory environment and reduce red and green tape for the minerals sector. This includes simplifying the process of submitting mining management plans, introducing multiyear cycles of mining management plans and transitioning to a compliance program that has an increasingly field-based focus, with a stronger concentration on risk-based assessment. It is our aim to streamline approvals, shorten time frames, and improve the industry’s ability to lodge documents and track approvals online.
In the coming months we will launch a new website mapping system to replace the department’s TIS and STRIKE systems. This will deliver spatial, geological and titles information online. This is the first step in a complete overhaul and modernisation of the IT systems that support the regulation of the resources industry in the Territory.
The Country Liberals government is determined to capitalise on increasing food demand from overseas and within Australia to drive economic growth within our agricultural, horticultural, pastoral and fisheries sectors. In order to better support Northern Territory food producers we have implemented policy changes and restructures within the two key departments that oversee these sectors, namely Primary Industry and Fisheries and Land Resource Management.
My Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries has been restructured to better focus on market-driven activities and implement measures to strengthen food industries. Indeed, the restructure will add to this government’s ability to deliver on the priorities set by the Framing the Future strategic plan, with a focus on north Australian development.
There is now a clear focus on building enterprise resilience in our industry sectors through diversification by creating closer alignment between our plant and animal research. This includes aquaculture opportunities. The restructure will ultimately ensure alignment to the government’s economic development priorities and the industry development plan, allow for the most effective provision of services and strengthen industry.
Importantly, the restructure includes a new Food Industry Development Group that contains our existing research functions, as well as adding market enterprise and major economic development to those. This government is committed to investing in quality research for new crops and products, and existing mango and banana industries. Indeed, there is a variety of research under way on these crops, as well as for rambutans, passionfruit, dates, tropical flowers, rice and melons.
Work is also progressing on development of an NT biosecurity strategy which will guide where investment in biosecurity is needed.
The election commitment to review export yards in relation to industry growth has been conducted. To ensure capacity can keep up with industry growth, my department is working closely with the NT Live Export Association to consider future requirements.
This government committed to improving cattle production on Aboriginal-owned pastoral land. To this end, the department provides property planning, training and advice to 14 Aboriginal properties; to date, this program has seen about 24 000 km2 of additional land brought into pastoral production, and an increase in cattle on Indigenous land of about 100 000 head.
We recognise access to good land and water resources is necessary for future growth and development of these industries. This government supports the use of the Northern Territory’s water resources to drive economic development. My Department of Land Resource Management is undertaking land and water assessment services to determine new agricultural precincts in the Territory as part of the northern development program.
Extensive field-based assessment is under way on Bathurst Island to identify potential areas for agricultural development. This project is part of the government’s commitment to identify up to 10 000 ha of arable land suitable for investment and local development on the Tiwi Islands.
Additional work to identify potential new agricultural areas will focus on the southern Katherine region, Ali Curung and Ti Tree.
The Ord Development Unit continues to work to progress the important Ord project. A cross-border legislation study has been completed, which is an important step in understanding how this development would operate across the border, to protect the environment and biosecurity, regulate water and maintain roads. Consultation with native title estate groups through the Northern Land Council has also commenced; this is another important step in ascertaining how the Ord development will occur.
Changes introduced last year to the Pastoral Land Act now enable pastoralists to diversify land use and develop new income streams without having to change the tenure of their lease. Pastoral leaseholders now have a unique opportunity to diversify their income stream and contribute further to the economic growth of the Northern Territory. The Department of Land Resource Management has already received a number of applications and inquiries for proposed non-pastoral operations, including tourism, aquaculture, sandalwood forestry and palm oil plantations. One such opportunity which will bring economic benefits to the Northern Territory is for the cultivation of poppies on a pastoral property. Legislation to allow the cultivation of poppies in the Northern Territory has been passed by this parliament and the first application for a licence to cultivate poppies has been received and is being reviewed.
Sensible water policy, long-term strategies and legislative reform are essential for the growth of the Northern Territory’s economy. Good science and adaptive management is essential to ensure our water resources are used sustainably and that water is available to support our natural ecosystems, as well as our livelihoods.
The development of the water policy will consider the different legislation and administrative arrangements across government in relation to water use, protection of water quality and the role of water in public health.
Considerations in developing the water policy will include the best model for the efficient and effective regulation of public water supplies and sewerage services and, where there are benefits in the integrated regulation of water extraction, the protection of water resources and service provision.
The Northern Territory government is committed, through the Framing the Future strategy, to developing a 50-year water plan to provide a long-term proposal for water planning and economic development approaches. We are the only government that has the vision to attempt such a significant plan.
The Northern Territory Catchments Advisory Committee will also enable community input into water policy development, as well as provide the opportunity for focused attention on emerging issues affecting economic development in river catchments throughout the Territory.
Fishing is near and dear to many Territorians. Whether recreational or commercial, fishing is an integral part of the Top End lifestyle and brings many economic benefits to the Territory through tourism, jobs and commerce. In recognition of the importance of fishing to Territorians, this government has established the Recreational Fishing Advisory Committee; implemented the recreational fishing development plan; established a recreational fishing data survey program to properly understand recreational fishing patterns in the Territory; reached six agreements with traditional landowners around the Territory for ongoing access for commercial and recreational fishers to waters affected by the Blue Mud Bay decision; and implemented a comprehensive safety and recreational fishing education program in conjunction with marine safety. These were all Country Liberals election promises in 2012 that we have lived up to.
We committed to establishing new self-launch boat ramps. Work on these projects is in progress and there is a $4.5m budget to be rolled out, with work expected to start during this financial year.
I could go on for a very long time listing the many achievements within my portfolio areas. However, I do not want to spoil the opportunity to raise them at a later time for discussion.
This parliament and the people of the Northern Territory can be assured the Country Liberals government is well on track to meeting many of its targets set prior to the 2012 election.
Here we are, halfway through the first term of government, and we have already met and, as I said, in many cases exceeded what we set out to do. We are driving economic development in the Territory hard and it is starting to bear fruit.
When I was at the Mining the Territory Conference this morning, which combines with SEAAOC and the inaugural Building the Territory Conference, it was heartening to see so many people turning up for a conference based around the mining sector, whereas in other states numbers at many of these regional mining conferences are starting to fall away.
That is reflective of a number of things. First of all, in other states there is no doubt the resources sector is coming off the boil. The reduction in exploration and mining occurring across other jurisdictions is reflected in the numbers turning up to conferences similar to the one we are hosting here over the next few days.
The other strong indicator is quite the opposite to that, and that is the positive effect we are seeing in the Territory. As I said before, we have 19 projects under way or in approvals processes. There is an inordinate, almost unprecedented excitement about the minerals and energy sector in the Northern Territory, being driven by what was described to me today by people who work in the industry as a can-do government. That is why the eyes of Australia and the resources sector are turning to the Northern Territory. There is no doubt about it.
The attitude is positive. Everywhere I turn major companies are happy to look in the Northern Territory, not just because it is prospective for minerals, metals, and, of course, oil and gas, but because they feel there is a government here that is welcoming, open for business and prepared to work very hard to have their dollar committed to Northern Territory operations. You can see that. The amount of effort going into our Asian investment strategy, for example, the number of trips I have …
Mr BARRETT: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the minister to complete his speech.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: The attitude coming from industry is – they see what we are doing. The overseas investment strategy – China has certainly been a focus in the past and we are continuing to work in that space, but over the last 12 months I have made two trips to Korea and Japan. That is the first time the Northern Territory Mining minister has visited those jurisdictions to take industry delegations to secure investment and firm up relations between us and those countries.
The work will not stop there, which is noted by industry. They look to us and see a government that has the political courage and will to make things happen across the resources sector. That is why you could be forgiven for thinking operations within the mining, oil and gas sectors in the Northern Territory are running counter cyclical to the rest of the country. While they are going down we are still going up, and that is a testament to the work this government is doing, not the tired old Labor government that was in power for 11 years and allowed some degree of sovereign risk to creep into its policy-making. It is a new government, one with a great deal of energy and, as I said, a great deal of political will and courage to make things happen.
Similar things can be said about the agricultural sector. Not only have I and others in this government spent a lot of time in Indonesia repairing relationships after 2011, but we are also punching into new markets. Last financial year some 130 000 head of cattle went to Vietnam. Previously only a couple of hundred head went across. We have built and strengthened that relationship to such a point where it is now becoming a major trading partner. We need to diversify.
We now have buffalo going to Vietnam. The first ever shipment was sent seven or eight months ago now. The demand is so high that we do not know where we will fill it. There are probably not enough buffalo in the Territory to do that sustainably in the long term. But, nonetheless, we are giving it a crack and helping industry to develop its business models so it can participate in that new trade with Vietnam.
It will not stop there. There are other countries we are eyeing off. We are working hard on China, not only as a place for minerals investment, but also in the agriculture sector. China is very keen to look at the Northern Territory; it also recognises a government open for business and willing to facilitate investment and better trade relations between our great jurisdiction and their great country of China.
We hope to soon have import protocols in place that will allow live cattle to go into China as well. Great work is being being done at the Australian government level to establish health protocols to allow that to occur. That is ably assisted by the efforts of the Northern Territory government in a number of sectors.
When I was there on my most recent trip – which was now almost 12 months ago – I met with senior officials within some of the government departments who have vested responsibility for decision-making around allowing livestock to enter that country.
We are also talking about the opportunity for Chinese to invest in the Northern Territory’s agriculture sector. Some might view foreign investment as concerning, but where there is a lack of investment from within the country, foreign investment holds a very important place to stimulate those industries and get them moving again. It is about getting the balance right.
I will quickly talk about the water story, which I like to do. It causes a lot of consternation in some quarters. However, water is critical to the growth and development of agriculture, generally, anywhere. We are releasing water, at sustainable limits, as quickly as possible.
We understand, and what the Labor opposition did not understand when it was in government, is that putting arable land together with a bit of water brings real opportunity. That is something we never saw from Labor, and that is a fact. When we won government in 2012 we were left with 75 water licences that were never dealt with and were sitting in an in-tray somewhere. It was a huge backlog of work that had to be undertaken by my department to clear those licence applications.
I look at some of the statistics that have been provided to me. In the 18 months before the 2012 election, the Labor government issued just three water licences. I do not know what the Agriculture minister – or the minister for Primary Industry, who was in charge of NRETAS at the time – was thinking. Obviously they did not want to upset anybody and did not want anything to happen. They were completely paralysed by fear.
Since coming to government, we have issued 103 licences, or it might be 102, at the last statistical milestone reported to me. That is new licences, additional water added onto existing licences and renewals. That is testament to a government willing to put its nose to the grindstone and make some sometimes controversial decisions. We are using that to grow the economy; water is essential for that and we will continue to do it within sustainable limits. We have good guidelines and professional people working within the Water Resources Division of the Department of Land Resource Management who keep those matters under control. I am very proud to say the Country Liberals government is driving economic development through the agricultural sector hard.
I agree wholeheartedly with some comments the Deputy Chief Minister made earlier that if you only listened to the comments made by the Labor opposition no one in their right mind would ever want to come to the Northern Territory. They constantly talk the Territory down.
If you want to criticise policy we are up for that, but be grown up and sensible enough not to talk the Territory down. The last thing we want is for people to hear what you are saying. God forbid they do, because they might not come. People living here will hear what you are saying and, God forbid they do, might decide to leave the Territory. That is not what we want to see. We want to see the Northern Territory grow, become strong and vibrant and have multiple economies, including those which exist within remote Aboriginal communities and remote parts of the Territory.
I am incredibly proud of the achievements of this government just two years into the first term, particularly given the horrible mess left behind for us to deal with.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Katherine for his contribution. I may disagree with the government on some issues, but the member for Katherine is one of the most hard-working members of this parliament. I do not always agree with everything he says, and that is not putting the Territory down, because the job of people on this side is to criticise, hopefully fairly, because that keeps you on your toes. I appreciate the amount of work you put into your portfolio. It is a considerably large portfolio and it should be recognised where people like you have the Territory at heart. I do not agree with everything, and I might raise those tonight, but in general you are doing a fantastic job.
You raised the issue of water. Hold your horses before you jump down my throat, because I would like to congratulate – I received a top book recently from Power and Water on future plans for water in the Darwin region. If you want to look at proposals for the future water supply of the Darwin region, which is a very important thing to deal with, the book it released showing the possible new dams – the idea of the off-water dam from the Adelaide River – is one of the best documents I have seen in relation to the future of water supplies for the Darwin region. It is excellent, as well as the little book that comes with it and your concept of living water smart.
The book talks about growing natives to reduce reliance on water. I will probably raise a question about a certain area of landscaping in Darwin which is very water hungry and goes against what your department is promoting. Be that as it may, and you know my concerns about water – it is not about having many water licences, it is about making sure each person who receives a licence only gets what is needed, not an ambit claim for water. My concern at the beginning was that a certain person who had a water licence did not use it, was given a lot more water and, as far as I know, has still not used that water. It is more about how the water is given out, rather than – I do not have a problem with giving out lots of water licences, but it is the amount of water and how it is done. Minister, you understand that.
It is great to hear about things like rice, which I have always been interested in. Believe it or not, I used to grow small amounts of rice on Bathurst Island. It is good to see there is still work being done on rice. The poppy industry and horticulture need to expand and there must be new varieties ongoing. I noticed that Woolworths has been promoting Northern Territory produce this year. As someone who used to supply produce, mainly capsicums and eggs, to places like Woolies, it was always difficult to get local produce into some of our big supermarkets. But this year I notice Woolworths displayed local produce at the Garden Spectacular and at the Coolalinga Woolworths, as well as in Katherine. They are the sorts of things we need.
There has been an expansion in cattle numbers. It is great to hear about cattle and buffalo going to Vietnam. You would hope we could get more buffalo because that seems to be an industry that could be a real positive, especially for Aboriginal communities. I presume the Bulman Gulin Gulin group is still going, with Markus Rathsmann. They were involved with buffalo for a long time.
I need to get back to water, regarding catchment committees. You have scrapped the Howard East bore field committee and have said there will be advertisements released for a new version. I have not seen a new version yet, so I will be waiting, because even though I am a politician, I am also a local with a bore and am interested in what happens to the water table in my area.
You spoke about minerals. There are a few areas missing in the debate, one being the direction of geothermal and the other being gas. I will not say too much at the moment about the issue of fracking and gas, the inquiry into it and how that all fits together. There should be more emphasis on renewables and you are talking to a fan of nuclear. Do not get too excited. It is an option; nuclear power is a carbon-free energy. There are issues about how you build it, as well as with the waste. There are other options for energy; in the Territory, we will probably not go down the nuclear path unless someone comes up with a little reactor that is economic.
We should look at renewables for many of our remote communities. In Europe I learned there are options starting to develop; renewable energies do not always give us 24 hours a day power, but that renewable energy source can be the way to produce other forms of energy like hydrogen. If you can produce hydrogen, which you can do from solar thermal and wind, you can then produce energy for use 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Those are the sorts of things on which I hope the Territory is starting to take a lead role in research and development. We can be left behind in this great dream of gas. Gas is dirty. It might be relatively easy to remove and ship down south or overseas, but we need to be proactive in the renewables area. It is not a silly area, we know Tenix Energy is looking at tidal power in the Clarence Strait. I understand from my discussions today with the Planning Commissioner that there is an EIS being developed for that plant. That is an option which may lead to several turbines down the coast of the Kimberley, so you can offset tidal changes and produce a reliable form of renewable energy that does not need to rely on wind or sunlight, which are both variable. The tides are not variable, they will be there every day and you can measure and time them. There are great opportunities to encourage organisations like Tenix Energy to go down this path.
There are issues with the gas supply for our power station in Darwin. What would you do if it was not burning up all the gas it is required to use? That is a difficult energy, but if you could produce something off the coast near Gunn Point, which is also very close to transmission lines, what a great opportunity. What a great thing for the Territory to show we are thinking outside the square.
People do not have to agree with my thoughts on energy, but we have the opportunity to look at other options.
We have wind turbines at Alpururrulam; wind in some of our small communities is certainly an option, especially coastal communities. There needs to be a bit more discussion about the Territory going forward, so it does not only sit on the gas issue as the only option.
The Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment raised some points about land. Sometimes when you have a different point of view you are accused of being anti-development, which gripes me sometimes. One of the problems I have with the Darwin Regional Land Use Plan is that we have one plan. That plan is being sold and is the only one that will come back for the government to look at.
The big mistake in the government saying it is consulting is that it does not really consult. It has information days. There is nothing wrong with information days, but I have held six meetings in the rural area, whilst the Planning Commission and the Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment have held none.
Six public meetings – they were not violent. No one got up and belted me over the head. I told people many times that I did not mind if they had a different point of view. We are not challenging people like the planning commissioner or the department about other options. They are expecting us to write a letter to say what we think. For all I know they dropped my submissions in the bin last time, because I did not see any differences that I put forward in the new draft.
A fundamental problem with so-called consultation is that the government is not facing up to its responsibility to do it properly. It is more about informing, and when people come to see what you have to say you convince them that what you have in front of them is the best option.
If you really want to consult, you have to put several options up for people. If you are to have a plan for Darwin, one might be the Elizabeth River and Weddell, or it might be rural. Another plan might have no Elizabeth River, no Weddell and cover the entire rural area and suburbs. Another plan might be a mix so people can see there are options. What I see now is a plan the government will pick up. There is one option. Consultation is with various groups. If you have various groups, where do I, as a person who perhaps believes this plan is not a good one, get the chance to say to those people, ‘How about this option?’
I do not have a chance, the money or government backing. I go out as much as I can, I have postcards, petitions and pamphlets going out and I have held six meetings. This was only for a small part of the huge development plan the government wants to put forward.
I cannot look at Glyde Point, I cannot deal with everything at the bottom of the shire and I cannot deal with all of the issues with Weddell. I am trying to deal with issues around Howard Springs. All of a sudden, I had a plan. It did not have anything to do with an activity centre; I am not sure what an activity centre is, except I think it is a suburb. Just in my area, which is rural, along came a plan to say it will be suburban. I do not know where it came from, but it came up all of a sudden. Four square kilometres of land – that is a big change to the area I come from.
There is not enough real consultation. It is consultation with various groups to look good. What you need for good consultation is debate. That debate does not have to be outrageous or rude, it must be a chance for people to look at the options.
In this document the Chief Minister talks about growth, industry and those things. I have nothing against the government promoting the development of the north and being open for business, but I noticed one very clear gap in this document: small- and medium-sized business.
I do not see anything in here about small- and medium-sized business, which are struggling. I heard recently that two local steel companies have folded and one is only hanging in there because the people they supply asked them to.
For a government that says it supports business it needs to knock on a few doors. Yes, some people are doing well. I spoke to one of the housing companies the other day, which is flat out. However, I speak to other companies – I get this information back from middle builders – and hear that they are not doing all that well. If they were doing well, would they be in here? I hope so. But there is no mention of small business. Small business is the heart of our development in the Northern Territory. We cannot only look at INPEX. That is a one-off big project. We need to ensure those people who have invested their life savings, who have lived in the Territory for a long time and are the blood and guts of our economy are being looked after as well. If you lose them then, when INPEX goes, we will have holes in the economy. There is nothing about small business in this document.
That is one of the problems when the government becomes all worked up about oil and gas. I saw those people in the hall last night and I did not know any of them. There were about two Territorians there. I gather they are high-falutin people. What can happen is when you start talking to those people you forget those below. It is good to be promoting business, but if you do not bring the people who live in the Territory along with you, you will lose them. When I say the government is arrogant, it is in the sense it has great plans and big ideas, but it is not bringing the people with it. That is the bit it misses.
Minister, I make an exception for you. I know you get your feet dirty with smelly cattle, you know what a mango tree looks like and you know what a buffalo looks like, but, in general, the government is not in touch with many people, especially those I meet.
As I said on TV the other day, I met an 80-year-old, long-time CLP person who shook his head and said, ‘It is the worst government I have ever known’. I did not ask him to say it; I only said hello to him.
The government needs to be aware you can have all of this good stuff, and it sounds good, but if you are losing the people you are supposed to be supporting, you will not be around for the next election, no matter how hard you work. That is where there is an issue.
I do not intend to always be negative; I am trying to make some points I do not always have a chance to talk about.
I raise the issue of mandatory alcohol rehabilitation facilities that we learned about during the FASD committee hearings. It is mentioned in here that by the start of 2015 we will have a permanent secure AMT facility – I presume that is the mandatory alcohol rehabilitation centre and not ATM spelled backwards – at Berrimah in Darwin, Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, with construction to start on a new Katherine facility later in the year.
I discovered the Katherine facility will be built next to Mitre 10. I am not against Mitre 10 as I used to work for it ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: It is not next to it.
Mr WOOD: It is in the industrial area. I look at Venndale – I know it is out of town, but I always thought if you were to rehabilitate people, bush, blue sky, clean air, and a little quiet is far more conducive to fixing people than sitting in an industrial block. I do not see that as the right spot. I am not a Katherine person, but I have taken an interest in this. I have been to Venndale and CAYLUS in Alice Springs.
I am told the Tennant Creek facility will take the place of something else …
Mr McCarthy: The sobering-up shelter.
Mr WOOD: Surely the sobering-up shelter is important. Talk to the traditional owners because most of these people will be Aboriginal, let us be blunt. Put it somewhere where there is peace and quiet, with a little space. To me, that is part of having compassion for people. Take them to a place where they have a chance not only to dry out and be looked after, but also a chance to breathe. Putting these rehabilitation places in town is not the option. That is not a good decision.
There are plenty of good news stories here. Obviously there are many things happening in the Northern Territory, but there is also the cost of living.
Unfortunately, whoever made the statement two years ago that they would reduce the cost of living – it was a silly statement. I have not seen any ministers bring the price of fuel down to be the same as southern states. If you could you might be able to argue you have made a real effort to reduce the cost of living. If you have to pay 17c to 25c a litre more here and the government cannot do anything about it, people should not have said they could reduce the cost of living.
The government introduced the Sport Voucher Scheme. I do not have anything against the sports vouchers, but does the government have its priorities right? It has increased the sports vouchers from $75 to $200 per child, yet it cuts out concessions for seniors who have worked here all their life. It has the wrong balance. It builds a road for $3.5m so people can go around the corner fast and miss a buffalo. By the way, I travelled that road and wondered why it was not fenced all the way. If you are promoting people driving at full speed surely you would make sure the road is fenced.
The Tiwi Land Council economic development issue is one area I am a bit concerned about. I know that …
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request an extension of time for the member to complete his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: I will be as quick as I can, but there are many issues in this statement. In regard to Tiwi Islands development, water on those islands is difficult to extract. I had to deal with water on Bathurst Island, and a lot comes from sand bores which did not last long. They had to drill new bores because they eventually became choked with sand. I do not know if it is the same on Melville Island, but I expect there would be similar patterns there.
I am concerned that with money – $1m was given to the Tiwi Land Council – it should be explained why they received that money because there is no lease yet. Money has just been given to them.
There are issues about local government and the future, which will be an ongoing discussion.
The statement says the Territory government is actively encouraging continued growth in Defence in the NT. That could have had more teeth to it so we knew what the minister was talking about. As I have Robertson Barracks in my electorate I would like to know what plans are afoot. I have heard one of the battalions or squadrons from Robertson Barracks might be moving to Townsville, but I am not 100% sure.
It talks about Festivals NT, which is supposed to replace the Arafura Games. It is a mistake; the Arafura Games were mentioned the other night when we talked about multiculturalism. It was something special. I loved going to the boxing where you had people from all over the place, for example, an Irishman fighting a Malaysian. The mix was great. It is a festival on its own and we should not mix it up with other things.
We have been talking about the hospital, and I support the concept of a Palmerston Regional Hospital. I have disagreed with this side of parliament because I did not think the piece of land they had was big enough. I spoke to the architects of the hospital and they had concerns as well. They wanted to have car parking underneath the building because that is a very important issue.
I am concerned that even though the government has picked this site, we have not had a chance to challenge whether it is suitable. The land there – you can look at it on Google – is not all flat. I put it to the Planning Commission today that there is another piece of land which is much flatter, just as close to Palmerston as this one, it is not near any residents and all infrastructure is there. That is the corner of Howard Springs Road and the Stuart Highway, opposite the Lambrick Avenue intersection. That land was scraped many years ago. It is rock hard, has sewerage and the new water pipe going past, electricity, and it is on a major road. It is close and has a lot of land. The bus depot is not permanent, and most of it has already been cleared. Before we throw millions of dollars into a block of land, I want to check it will be suitable. That is why I am concerned about bulldozing roads. I am not against having the hospital and I am not knocking the government for having it. I want to be sure you will not throw money down the drain. If you put it in another place 4 km down the road, you would not have as many issues.
When I see land being cleared I ask where the rezoning is, as well as the development plan. Where is the plan for the Stuart Highway and Temple Terrace intersection? You already have an intersection there so you do not need to build one.
There is a big cost involved in building that Temple Terrace/Stuart Highway intersection. I do not know if we have the plans to duplicate Temple Terrace; anyone who travels up there in the morning knows there is a lot of traffic from the rural area to Palmerston and from Palmerston to Robertson Barracks. It is a very busy two-lane road.
What are the plans and the costs? I say with constructive criticism that you could have a hospital right next to Palmerston, on a piece of land that may not be as expensive, but can still provide you with what you are after, on the corner of Howard Springs Road and the Stuart Highway. I put this as a positive view about the facility.
The Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment was talking about developing housing in Aboriginal communities, which would create an economy. Ministers sometimes do not have their feet on the ground. Of course we want jobs in the rural area and in remote areas, but have you been to some of these communities? It is pie in the sky if you believe there are lots of jobs there. When I say lots of jobs, I mean jobs created by an economy, not jobs created by government. We can create those jobs; I have argued many times that where there are no jobs the role of government is to provide money to the local government to ensure people have work.
If you are talking about standalone jobs based on producing an economy of their own, please show me the communities where that can happen.
Most people in communities live off the public purse, in some way or another. Without government putting money into those communities people simply do not have work. Some communities have tourism, mining and pastoral work, but if you start to count the number of communities in rural areas within the Northern Territory and tell me where there are real jobs – I wonder why the Commonwealth has all of these programs. It spends millions on companies or consultants whose job is to make people job-ready. Job-ready for what? I am not sure, and this is one of the areas not picked up in the statement. It is a statement that says, ‘Wow, look at us, two years in the job!’ I would say, ‘Wow, have you been out and looked at the unemployment rates in some of the remote communities? Wow, have you seen how many kids, for instance, are not going to school?’
The Minister for Education knows a lot about people not going to school, but I will say ‘wow’ when we have some good news about the future for youth who live in those areas. As I said the other night, a friend of mine teaches a course, the kids turn up and they are not interested. They have no vision for their future. It is throwing rocks through car windows in some cases, just sitting still and doing nothing – bored.
One of the areas I have always felt we can get lost in, up and down the main highway and a few larger communities in the Northern Territory – we do not focus on some of the real issues that need addressing and do not need glossing over with the idea we can create economies that are not there.
When the government releases these statements – it has been in power for two years and wants to tell us how wonderfully it is all going – it should not gloss over the fact we have some communities with very high unemployment and very low literacy and numeracy skills. The minister said he is working hard to overturn that, which is fair enough, but we should not lose sight of what we are doing in the Northern Territory by bringing out statements like today’s. We should make sure we are not glossing over those important issues for the long-term future of all Territorians, not just those who will benefit directly from some of this growth.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I will respond to the Chief Minister’s midterm statement. I too am proud of what this government has been able to achieve and what we have achieved in my portfolios.
It is remarkable when you listen to the Health minister and other ministers speak about what has been done in the last couple of years. I am proud of what the CLP government has done and continues to do in spite of the difficulties we have inherited from the former government, particularly in relation to our fiscal position. We continue, as a jurisdiction, to punch above our weight and provide good governance for the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory.
In my portfolios, the indefinite detention of sex offenders who pose a high risk to the community, through serious sexual offenders legislation, has already contained a person known as EE in the court list, whose sexual victims range from the ages of 80 to six, and who would have otherwise been released into the community unfettered. He now has at least strong restraints upon his liberty.
Whilst that matter did not see him incarcerated absolutely into the future, at least it is a restraint that has genuinely gone towards protecting people in his community. I am proud of that result and we will continue to make certain those who pose a high risk of offending through sexual violence will be restrained into the future.
We promised mandatory sentencing for assaults on workers, carrying a maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment where the victim suffers harm, and we have stuck by that. Whilst members opposite resisted it, it is something the community had expectations about. Despite predictions of increasing imprisonment rates as a result, that has not become manifest and we are substantially below the prison numbers the former government predicted it would have, which were used to justify building the prison Mahal.
We also introduced mandatory sentencing for violent offenders, where there was a three-month gaol sentence for the first offence.
It was earlier claimed that domestic violence is out of control. No, it is not; it has always been there. We are making sure the people who beat their wives, as a general rule, are charged with the crimes they commit. I am proud of that. Whilst it has a deleterious effect on the statistics, we knew full well when we embarked upon this that we would find a point where that started reducing, and now the message seems to be getting through. The last six months have seen sharp reductions in violent offences across the Northern Territory, something acknowledged by the Leader of the Opposition, although churlishly, earlier during debate.
One punch legislation closed a gap in the environment between serious assaults and manslaughter, which some argued did not even exist. I understood that argument, and when we discussed the legislation in the House, I pointed out that I believed the gap existed. We have already had a person convicted of homicide in relation to the one punch legislation because the DPP determined there was insufficient evidence to secure a manslaughter conviction, but clearly they proceeded with the one punch homicide legislation instead, rather than having the extraordinary thing occur where a person is charged with a serious assault leading to death, but the court cannot hear evidence of the death, only evidence of the injuries.
It appears we have closed that loophole in the law. Whilst I said at the time I was never sure this would be used in the Northern Territory, it turns out that within a couple of years of it being passed into law, a person has been convicted. Therefore, it has justified the choice to go down that path.
Methamphetamines move to Schedule 2. We are determined to make methamphetamines a drug the equivalent of heroin in our community, supported by members opposite, for which I am grateful. We continue to fight the war on drugs, which I suspect will be perpetual. We are prepared, through our efforts in the Northern Territory, to continue fighting that war.
The Emerson case which was recently fought in the High Court, and won, means we can now take drug offenders’ houses off them and keep them, despite the fact the property itself was not used or derived from drug crime. It costs a lot of money to police drugs in our community, and when we find somebody who is declared to be a drug trafficker, that person will have their house and other property taken off them. We make no apologies for that.
The destruction of child abuse material – once again supported by the members opposite – was an important thing to do. We had the ridiculous situation of police having to hang on to child abuse material indefinitely. It should be destroyed rather than returned to the original owner because the mere possession of that would, of course, be an offence.
Independent psychiatric and medical testing: courts have been granted additional powers to order psychiatric and medical assessments for independent experts where a defence is based on a mental impairment and medical conditions. This means the element of entrapment, for a lack of better words – in cases where medical evidence is led we have now made certain trials in which medical and psychiatric evidence is led are carried out in a fashion that is now fair to the prosecutor, the defence and the community.
Hit and run legislation was introduced after an incident in the rural area around Darwin. Once again, we now have hit and run legislation which compares and is at a level expected by the community.
Identity theft: when I was younger my mother said I could be anybody I wanted to be. That apparently is not true, because under the CLP that is now called identity theft and you must be yourself. Thank you, member for Johnston, for at least smiling at that lame attempt at humour.
Match fixing: we have introduced offences for match fixing as part of the uniform legislation that operates nationally.
Drugs supplies to Indigenous communities: the former government worked in this area and we have expanded that to create tougher charges.
I referred earlier to the Emerson assets property forfeiture through the High Court challenge. That was something we won; the High Court ruled 6:1 in our favour. There are more cases flowing from this matter and we, as a jurisdiction, will be intervening when the High Court sits in Brisbane in the not-so-distant future. We will be doing that in an effort to support Queensland’s fight against the various forces it is trying to deal with under legislation dealing with bikies.
Today I made public comments about the new police pursuit offence. Legislation has gone through parliament to make it an offence to run away from a police officer – it is a crime. Even today we were debating part of the Northern Territory government’s legislative reforms.
There is also the presumption of joint trials, the procedural provisions to make it more likely multiple sex offence charges against an accused person will be heard together, rather than severed and separate trials ordered. This is a fair and just approach. One of the first reports I read upon becoming Attorney-General was a Tasmanian Law Reform Commission document. Whilst I was reading it this issue arose, and I thought whilst Tasmania may or may not move down this path, we should, as a jurisdiction. We have done so, making certain that where there are multiple victims in sex offender matters, the same jury and the same court can hear evidence, or there is a presumption in favour of the same jury and the same court hearing that evidence. That is an important amendment to the law.
I do not think it is inherently unfair that a jury hears multiple victims make allegations against a person. We have seen trials like that in other jurisdictions, not least of which most recently was the Rolf Harris matter, which led to a successful prosecution. Mr Harris, quite rightly, now languishes in a British gaol for the crimes he committed against British citizens. I wonder how much more difficult it would have been to secure that prosecution if offenders were not able to make their allegations in the same courtroom in front of the same jury.
A single person making an allegation without the support of other victims holds a much weaker prospect of securing a conviction. A trial is supposed to be fair, and joint evidence being heard by juries is not unfair.
The name escapes me of the Hey Dad star, but I understand he also went through a process where the prosecution had to battle for victims to be allowed to give evidence jointly, not separately, against that gentleman.
We have increased the levy to support victims. That has increased the contribution from offenders for the victims assistance levy. Of course, Sentenced to a Job prisoners also make their contribution with their 5% income allowance, which goes into a victims assistance fund.
Advance personal planning was a policy we went to the last election with; it was a CLP policy in opposition. I know the Health minister is working on adult guardianship legislation which will encompass advance personal planning into the future, and I look forward to that legislation coming forward.
The Pillars of Justice reform has introduced a number of important reforms, with more legislation to come. I am looking quite closely at the defence disclosure provisions of Victoria and other jurisdictions to make certain we end up with a fairer and more efficient judicial system in the Northern Territory.
I acknowledge the chief magistrate’s adjustment to the practice directions in his court, and there is already a requirement for pre-trial disclosure in the Darwin Magistrates Court. I have spoken to Professor Hempel, a man of eminent quality formerly sitting on the bench of very senior courts. I think he is now 81 years of age, and he continues to be very active in teaching jurisprudence. He is still a professor out of Victoria and has been kind enough to give me some assistance and advice as to how we can continue to advance pre-trial disclosure in the Northern Territory.
Tomorrow, I hope we will be debating the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Appeals Tribunal Bill and passing it into law. This was something I mentioned in opposition and I now find myself in the privileged position, as Attorney-General, to be establishing a civil and administrative appeals tribunal. People are only just starting to realise the enormous change that will make to our tribunal system.
Some 117 acts and about 250 sections will be amended to enable this tribunal to cast its net wide. It will create a system of more affordable justice for Territorians, including carriage of the small claims jurisdiction. Few people understand yet how big this change will be, but it will mean the courts and the judicial process will be accessible to average Territorians in a way it has never been. If I leave a legacy as Attorney-General, it will be a legacy I will be proud to bequeath to the people of the Northern Territory and will consider myself blessed to have been in a position to drive it.
The domestic violence reduction strategy is complete and we will be making some announcements very shortly about the roll-out. That is another thing I am proud of because it is very difficult to go into this space and feel confident you will make a difference. We are awaiting one or two more things to fall into line before this policy is announced. We will have one of the finest domestic violence policies, if not the finest domestic violence reduction strategy and policy, in this nation, and I look forward, with excitement, to rolling that out.
The Alice Springs Justice Precinct: the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory will find itself with new digs in Alice Springs. We have finally managed to get through the process of making sure kids will no longer be in cells at the bottom of the magistrates court in Darwin; that has been surprisingly difficult to achieve. But, having made that observation, we have gotten through the process and continue to get through it.
We have built the new cells for juveniles in the Alice Springs court house, and once the Supreme Court is out of there in a couple of years’ time, we will spend a few shekels bringing that up to standard. It will become the Alice Springs Court of Summary Jurisdiction, as the Supreme Court will be in the justice precinct – which we promised as government – in Parsons Street in Alice Springs. Alice Springs will have, in the new Supreme Court building, the tallest building constructed in the town to date. That will be a welcome injection into the Alice Springs economy in the intermediate future.
In the Corrections environment, youth boot camps are up and running. I am pleased to report that Operation Flinders continues to plan for its expansion into the Northern Territory and provision is being made for it to start operating in a very useful fashion.
I am also pleased to report – and I will not dwell on it – that Sentenced to a Job continues to go from strength to strength. I remain ambitious, particularly regarding some of the projects we are putting together now. The number of jobs available for prisoners will expand substantially over the next 12 to 18 months.
We now have the permanent work camp at Nhulunbuy, and whilst I understand there is some controversy as far as the member for Nhulunbuy is concerned, it means 18 of the 100 or so Sentenced to a Job prisoners who go to work every day are going to work in Nhulunbuy with other prisoners supporting them. Now we have found permanent digs we are looking at other areas where we could expand the mobile prison camp, because of the equipment that will become available once permanent digs have been moved into Nhulunbuy.
We have expanded prison work parties by $500 000 to create two additional prisoner work gangs; the member for Barkly knows how much demand sits on those work gangs and we will continue to support them.
I made some comments about electronic monitoring today. There will be a capacity to monitor prisoners. We have held a number of trials, which have led to a successful trial program, and we are now prepared to expand the process.
Don Dale will move into the old medium section once we get into the new prison, opening next month, and we continue to have lower projected prisoner numbers.
The substantially lower projected prisoner numbers between what the projection is and what we have, if calculated over a 12-month period, represent a $17m saving – more to the point, $17m we will not be spending – in the prison environment.
The former government announced it would introduce the total ban on smoking in prisons. The difference is that we did it and we are proud it has now set the benchmark for the rest of this country.
The increase of members to the Parole Board – we had to expand the Parole Board from 10 to 18 members because of the workload. I would love to keep going, but I shall not, because it is late. When I sit down I will be adjourning the House so we can pack it in.
I am proud of what we have done, and the list goes on and on. We are a government that does stuff and achieves. We are a government that soldiers on and we are a government proud of what we are doing.
I listen to the naysayers opposite, and I understand they have a job to do in being critical, but just once I would like to hear them acknowledge this government is capable of doing good and does so on a regular basis.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
Mrs FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, the Palmerston Crocs rugby union club is one of the oldest sporting clubs in Palmerston. The Crocs first moved to Palmerston in 1984, a good year – the year I was born – and since that time they have developed a large, family-orientated club with a strong club culture.
The Palmerston Crocs have participated in the Good Sports program over the last few years. It recently achieved Level 3 accreditation, which is the highest level of accreditation you can receive.
Good Sports is an initiative of the Australian Drug Foundation and is proudly sponsored by the Northern Territory government. Good Sports NT works with 12 clubs in Palmerston to ensure they all have a healthy and non-alcohol reliant culture that respects the responsible service of alcohol. The scheme requires club rooms to be smoke-free and that club environments promote safe travel and are family friendly.
The Palmerston Crocs have instituted meals after senior training and often serve food after games, prior to any alcohol consumption.
I was at the Palmerston Crocs clubhouse last month during senior training to present a $5000 Community Benefit Grant cheque. The second I walked through the doors I was immediately struck by the family friendly culture of the club. There was an army of mums busily preparing meals in the kitchen and serving hungry mouths. There was no shortage of children running, scrumming and playing in the yard, enjoying the safe environment and another beautiful Dry Season evening. It was an impressive club with an impressive feel. Ben Blyton is the president of Palmerston Crocs and is well known to me through his advocacy of the club. Recently, Sharron Noske, the Good Sports NT manager, spoke with Ben to seek his comment on the club’s achievement of reaching Level 3 accreditation. Ben commented:
It is wonderful that 12 Palmerston clubs, including the Palmerston Crocs, are committed to making their contribution to disassociating binge drinking from sport. Congratulations, Palmerston Crocs.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I will share a letter forwarded to me from Madam President Barb Shaw of the Barkly Regional Council. The letter is addressed attention Gerry McCarthy MLA, member for Barkly, 114 Paterson Street, Tennant Creek NT 0860.
It was written on 28 July 2014 and received on 31 July 2014. It is a call to restore financial assistance grants in line with CPI and population growth. I read from the letter:
It is not only about very important revenue that comes into the Northern Territory; it is also extremely important for the continued development of the local government sector, local government reform we all share in after it was initiated by the previous Labor government and continued by the CLP. To benefit our regional and remote communities, it is something we need to be both cognisant and supportive of, in a tripartite sense.
I thank our Madam President Barb Shaw of the Barkly Regional Council for this letter. I will start the lobbying campaign immediately in the House, with the Treasurer and Minister for Local Government and Regions hopefully leading it. I request he immediately contact his counterparts in Canberra and lend his weight and support on behalf of all Territorians living in local government areas.
I also take this opportunity to bring to the attention of all MLAs that this is a very serious issue for the Northern Territory and one that we all need to get behind and lobby.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, not so long ago I had cause to telephone Russell Goldflam of CLANT – the Criminal Lawyers Association of the Northern Territory – about an article he had produced for the Balance magazine, which I had taken umbrage to because of the way my name was superimposed upon a photograph of a group of people in 1930s Germany performing a Nazi salute.
Whilst I acknowledge that in that article he was at pains to say the reference was not to me personally, he was very kind in extending an apology to me for the umbrage I took. I place on the record my gratitude to him.
Equally, I also want to recognise he is a man who is temperate and balanced in his approach to the work he does. Mr Goldflam is a fine lawyer who tries to offer a considered opinion to the people of the Northern Territory from time to time.
I refer to an item he drafted during Question Time the other day. Mr Goldflam will understand the three minutes you have to answer a question does not allow for the expansive construction of an argument so, from time to time, you are forced to condense references. I received an irritable e-mail from Mr Goldflam today suggesting he had been misrepresented. I place on the record that there was no attempt to misrepresent Mr Goldflam. Indeed, in his measured fashion, what he was describing in the letter he had written was his usual balanced approach to things. He had pointed out in his letter that whilst he agreed with the position of Mr Lawrence et al from the Bar Association, he made several references to Mr Maley:
These were references I used in relation to the answer I gave.
I also used several other quotes in which he described the argument and he came down on a particular side. I agree with Mr Goldflam’s assertion that Mr Maley is able, astute, affable, efficient, sensitive and fair. I also agree with his assertion that there is no suggestion Mr Maley has not been true to his oath of office. The only point of separation I take is that I do not agree with Mr Goldflam on his conclusion that an independent inquiry is needed.
Mr Goldflam has not demanded an apology. He merely, by the e-mail I quickly saw today, wished to make the record straight. In deference to the good relationship I have enjoyed with him, I do not think he should have to demand an apology from me. I will happily correct the record for Mr Goldflam because of the way he extended himself to me when there was a previous point of difference. I place on the record, in the time I have, that Mr Goldflam has made his difference of opinion with me clear.
Having said that, he has also acknowledged all of the issues where there are other people with another opinion, even in the Criminal Lawyers Association of the Northern Territory. Once again, I place on the record this clarification. It is an important clarification to make and I remain grateful to Mr Goldflam for his measured approach, which is something I wish many other people would show in this debate. It is an approach I have been trying to maintain from day one. I will continue to assert that the courts have vehicles available to deal with the issues raised by the Bar Association.
That is for the record. I hope that is sufficient for Mr Goldflam’s purposes and I will speak with him tomorrow to let him know the record has been appropriately corrected.
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Madam Speaker, I wish to correct some of the things said about Russell Goldflam. I spoke to Russell on the phone and offered to put all of what he wanted into the Hansard. This is what he sent to me, ‘I have posted this response headed ‘postscript’ on the CLANT website to comments attributed to me, made in Question Time yesterday.’
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I wish to pay my respects to a great Territorian and long-term resident, Mr George Brown, who passed away on 21 October 2013, aged 84. George is survived by his wife, Mrs Shirley Brown, who lives in the Araluen electorate in Alice Springs. George Brown made a profound contribution to the development of the arts industry in Central Australia and the social fabric of Alice Springs, spanning over 60 years.
His dear friend, Dr Bruce Walker, has given me permission to read an abbreviated version of the eulogy he gave at George’s funeral in October 2013:
My deepest sympathy goes to Shirley and the family for the loss of George, a great man and a great Territorian.
Mr KURRUPUWU (Arafura): Madam Speaker, I wish to highlight some of the key issues I have been faced with in my electorate, with a focus on infrastructure and economic development on the Tiwi Islands under the CLP government.
Many Tiwi people are very disappointed that there seems to have been no progress in economic development on the Tiwi Islands. The Country Liberal government promised the Tiwi people employment, but they have not done anything about it. This government has provided false hope to the Tiwi people. There must be far more work on economic and infrastructure development than simply talking about it. The government has signed an agreement and a memorandum of understanding that do little more than provide false hope to the Tiwi people.
It is tragic to be let down by the government once again. The Tiwi people want to know why the government is not prepared to spend money on infrastructure, such as roads, and to assist with expenditure and project development that would create more jobs and better lives for our young people. Not only will the government not assist with real expenditure on the ground, it is not doing enough to ensure the banks undertake their economic development responsibilities by lending money to viable businesses. It is the responsibility of the government to ensure main organisations in an economy, such as banks, operate in a responsible manner for the benefit of all Territorians. Currently the banks will not even lend to secure development backed by the Territory government. What does that say about confidence in the current government?
The Tiwi people want to know why the port project has not gone ahead and when it will happen. What is the point of government attempting to have traditional owners sign over their land through leases when it cannot guarantee essential funds for development? The Tiwi people are worried they will lose their land to the government land bank with no prospect of any development occurring and no benefit to them.
I left the CLP with my colleagues, the members for Namatjira and Arnhem, because there was no real plan and no follow-through to achieve outcomes for the bush.
The Palmer United Party would like to ensure money is spent properly and fairly in regional and remote communities in the Territory, as it is currently untied. I have been talking directly to Clive Palmer and our Palmer United Party senators to highlight the key issue of funding that is not reaching areas within my electorate.
Clive Palmer has offered his full support to me and is standing up for the people of my electorate and the Territory bush by ensuring funds are spent as intended. We will deliver real economic development, employment outcomes and improve the quality of life for the Tiwi people and other rural and remote communities in the Territory.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I place on the record some of the great events that have happened in my electorate, as well as some of the achievements of my constituents.
I had the privilege of being invited to a very special graduation ceremony at Galiwinku on Monday 28 May. It was held in the afternoon on the church lawns with a welcome from traditional owners and an introduction by the Master of Ceremonies for the afternoon, the lovely Mavis Danganbarr, a terrific lady, an incredibly hard worker, elected regional councillor and Deputy Chair of East Arnhem Regional Council, as well as being employed full-time as the Indigenous engagement officer.
As is always the case at such important occasions, graduates are escorted into the ceremony surrounded by proud family members in clan groups, with Manikay and Bunggul. In total, 21 graduates received a new qualification that day. These qualifications will provide the graduates with improved opportunities to secure employment in positions that have the potential to greatly benefit their community and families.
I offer my sincere congratulations to the graduates and acknowledge the incredibly hard djama – hard work – they did to complete their qualifications. They study while also working and looking after their families and are wonderful role models for not only their peers but also the younger generation; there are certainly a lot of young people on Elcho Island.
I would now like to place the names of the graduates on record. In the Certificate IV in Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander Primary Healthcare (Practice) – they study through Batchelor Institute, and gaining a Certificate IV is a considerable achievement. Congratulations to:
Leandra Natini Bukulatjpi
Sarah Mariyalawuy Bukulatjpi
Gwen Gaykungu Dhamarrandji
Noreen Leti Dhamarrandji
Stephanie Yikaniwuy Dhamarrandji
Elizabeth Rrapa Dhurrkay
Karen Manala Gondarra
Stella Mintjapuyugu Gondarra
Wanamula Dorothy Gondarra
Yvonne Latati Bukulatjpi,
Caroline Djinnganbuy
Susan Malpunhdharr Ganambarr.
One young woman achieved her Certificate II and III in Business, also through Batchelor Institute. I offer congratulations to Rachel Baker; it is quite an achievement to attain Certificate II and III.
For achieving Certificate IV in Community Services Work, studying through Charles Darwin University, congratulations to:
Dorothy Yurngirrna Bukulatjpi
Helen Guyupul Wunungurra
For attaining Certificate III in Community Services Work, also through Charles Darwin University – there were four graduates in this area – I congratulate:
Dorothy Yurngirna Bukulatjpi
Elizabeth Gurimangu Bukulatjpi
Glen Dhalirri Gurruwiwi
Helen Guyupul Wunungurra
For attaining Certificate II in Community Services Work through Charles Darwin University, congratulations to Beth Djarupi.
The final graduate of the evening was very special; an Honorary Doctorate, a Doctorate of Letters, Honoris Causa, through Charles Darwin University was bestowed upon Dr Elaine Lawurrpa Maypilama, an incredible woman who has given years of devoted service to her community.
On a final note on the graduation I acknowledge Belinda Wethers, who worked tirelessly to pull the event together and made sure everything ran smoothly. Belinda is employed as a tutor to support health students, and I know she is admired and valued by her students. Well done, Belinda.
On 7 August I attended the 31st Telstra National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Art Award at the Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory, representing the Leader of the Opposition. I was accompanied by my colleague, the member for Nightcliff, who is the shadow minister for the Arts.
It was certainly a great honour to attend the preview evening to see the 65 exquisite pieces in a range of mediums on display from around the nation, noting this was the first time a photographic work – by artist Tony Albert – took out the main prize and $50 000 with it. Of the 65 pieces that made it through to the finals, several were from my electorate and represented by Buku Larrngay Gallery at Yirrkala. Arguably – I might be biased – it is the best art centre in the Northern Territory.
I offer special congratulations to Garawan Wanambi from Gangan, whose work, Marrangu, a depiction of country near the homeland of Raymangirr near Gapuwiyak, won the bark painting award – a fantastic achievement.
Other artists who made it through to the finals from the Buku Larrngay Gallery were Burrthi Marika with the work Ngarripya; Mr Djambawa Marawili, the traditional owner from Blue Mud Bay, and his work entitled Tsunami; and Gunybi Ganambarr with his work Ngalkan, an incredible piece of work. Gunybi is a very innovative and talented artist and his work was most impressive. There was also the work Lightning and the Rock, by Nonggirrnga Marawili.
There was a new youth art section introduced to the Telstra art awards this year, and I was delighted to see that Ruby Djikarra Alderton had a piece in the exhibition, a beautiful print titled Rulyapa. She is an outstanding young artist and to get through to the finals of this new section was quite an achievement. I congratulate Kieran McTaggart from the Merrepen Arts Centre, who was the winner of this new youth art award with his beautiful textile design called Yerrgi – well done to Kieran.
Gove Country Golf Club is an important club and hub in our community; it is doing it tough at the moment, as many of our clubs are, with losing so many members; when we lose members we lose volunteers and the membership base, which is part of the financial base, so it is quite tough. That said, the Gove Country Golf Club Championships, held in June, were very successful and it was positive to have 44 competitors register and compete in the event.
I have sponsored the Gove Country Golf Club for a number of years, as have a number of our businesses and individuals who continue to support the club as best they can. On the championships weekend the following people were champion or runner up in their divisions on the day, so congratulations to the following:
A-Grade Men’s Champion – Wayne Jago, a young man I used to teach many years ago
A-Grade Men’s Runner Up – Gus Gomez
B-Grade Men’s Champion – Paul Kearney
B-Grade Men’s Runner Up – Errol Boyd
C-Grade Men’s Champion – Steven Spears
C-Grade Men’s Runner Up – Bob Small
D-Grade Men’s Champion – Morgan Chrzanowski
Morgan is turning out to be quite a talented young golfer. He is only in his teenage years. Congratulations also to:
D-Grade Men’s Runner Up – Shannon Moyle
A-Grade Women’s Champion – Katelyn Rika
A-Grade Women’s Runner Up – Liz Pickett
B-Grade Women’s Champion – Serema Jackson
B-Grade Women’s Runner Up – Ripeka Dargaville.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of two Year 5/6 classes from Moil Primary School accompanied by Brenda Kellam and Mr J Nim Jayawardhana. On behalf of honourable members, I extend a warm welcome to you and I hope you enjoy your time at Parliament House.
Members: Hear, hear!
STATEMENT BY SPEAKER
Photography in the Chamber
Photography in the Chamber
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have given permission for Mr Shane Eecen to take photographs in the Chamber today. He will be compiling ‘A Day in the Life of the Assembly’, a photo essay which will form part of the 40th celebrations of the Legislative Assembly.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Member for Arnhem
Member for Arnhem
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Madam Speaker, I seek leave of absence for the member for Arnhem, for personal reasons.
Leave granted.
MOTION
Postpone Introduction of Bill
Postpone Introduction of Bill
Mrs LAMBLEY (Health): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that, pursuant to Standing Order 123 Notice No 2, introduction of the Tobacco Control Legislation Amendment Bill 2014 (Serial 89) be postponed until 26 August 2014.
Motion agreed to.
NORTHERN TERRITORY CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
(CONFERRAL OF JURISDICTION AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 81)
(CONFERRAL OF JURISDICTION AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 81)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal Bill 2014 seeks to establish in the Northern Territory a new tribunal with jurisdiction to hear and determine a broad range of matters. The bill creates the tribunal, it contains the membership provisions and sets out the tribunal’s generic functions and powers.
The bill does not, however, confer any jurisdiction on the tribunal. Conferral of jurisdiction will be the subject of a series of separate bills.
It is with great pleasure that I present the first of these conferral of jurisdiction bills related to my own portfolio of Attorney-General and Justice.
The Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Conferral of Jurisdiction Amendments) Bill 2014 is the first step in providing the new Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal with its initial jurisdiction. This bill consequentially amends legislation to transfer jurisdiction from the courts to the tribunal where the courts have original or review jurisdiction under the following legislation: the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act; the Fences Act; and the Victims of Crime Act.
Turning now to the specific changes to legislation which will result from this bill.
The Births Deaths and Marriages Registration Act: the act currently provides that a person aggrieved by a decision of the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages may apply to the Local Court for a review. The act is being amended to transfer this review jurisdiction from the Local Court to the tribunal.
The Fences Act: the Local Court has original jurisdiction to hear and determine applications made under this act. The act is being amended to transfer this original jurisdiction from the Local Court to the tribunal.
The Interpretation Act: the act is being amended to include a new definition. This will mean that the term ‘Civil and Administrative Tribunal’ in any act passed by the Legislative Assembly must be interpreted to mean the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal established under the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act.
The Victims of Crime Assistance Act: the act currently provides that a person aggrieved by certain decisions of the Director of the Crime Victims Services Unit or an assessor appointed under the act may apply to the Local Court for a review. The act is being amended to transfer this review jurisdiction from the Local Court to the tribunal. Consequential amendments are also required to the Victims of Crime Assistance Regulations to reflect the changes made to the act.
This bill is a small but symbolic step in establishing the new Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal and I look forward to presenting further bills over time to continue the process of jurisdictional transfers to this new tribunal.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
SUPERANNUATION LEGISLATION AMENDMENT AND REPEAL BILL
(Serial 89)
(Serial 89)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
This bill puts in place a wide-ranging package of measures by proposing amendments to the Superannuation Act, Superannuation Regulations, Northern Territory Government and Public Authorities’ Superannuation Scheme Rules, Northern Territory Supplementary Superannuation Scheme, the Legislative Assembly Members’ Superannuation Fund Act, the Administrators Pensions Act; and the repeal of the Unclaimed Superannuation Benefits Act.
The bill continues the reforms to modernise the Territory’s defined benefit framework to achieve sustainable and cost-effective administration of the schemes without affecting member entitlements. Another key objective of the reforms is to pursue flexibility within the legislative framework to respond more readily to ongoing changes to Commonwealth superannuation-related law and policy. Without action the cumulative effect will see the Territory schemes become outdated and out of step with industry best practice and become increasingly complex and costly to administer.
In summary, the bill proposes 13 separate reforms to:
repeal the Unclaimed Superannuation Benefits Act and allow the transfer of unclaimed and lost member superannuation benefits to the Commonwealth
allow the Superannuation Trustee Board (STB) to form committees incorporating all the relevant scheme funds it administers
ensure STB-related costs can be proportionately levied across the relevant scheme funds it administers
ensure Northern Territory Government and Public Authority Superannuation Scheme (NTGPASS) members working for ‘public authorities’ are adequately captured for membership purposes
remove the Northern Territory Government Death and Invalidity Scheme (NTGDIS) Anticipatory Payment
remove the NTGPASS entrant medical declaration provisions
broaden the interpretation of ‘dependant’ to include ‘interdependency of relationship’
increase the payment threshold without the grant of probate
convert penalty offences across the superannuation legislative framework to be compliant with Part IIAA of the Criminal Code and update and apply confidentiality provisions
replace the current Superannuation Review Board with an external administrative tribunal process
introduce time limits for review of decisions
allow the release of superannuation money in compliance with Commonwealth legislation for the payment of a relevant tax liability or refund of excess contributions
the ability to cease offering the NTGPASS account-based pension and transfer remaining pension accounts under a successor fund transfer.
I will now address the changes proposed in the bill in more detail.
The first proposal is to repeal the Unclaimed Superannuation Benefits Act and allow the transfer of unclaimed and lost member superannuation benefits to the Commonwealth. Unclaimed superannuation arises when a member turns 65 years of age and the superannuation provider is unable to contact the member entitled to a benefit after a prescribed period, or there has been inactivity in their account for a period of time.
There has been a push in recent years by the Commonwealth, in consultation with all jurisdictions, to centralise the administration and payment of lost and unclaimed superannuation with the Australian Taxation Office (ATO). Most other jurisdictions have already opted into the Commonwealth regime or are in the process of doing so.
The Territory has in the past resisted moving to this arrangement on the basis that we were better able to identify and locate our lost members, especially those living in remote areas or from an Indigenous background. It is now accepted that the ATO capabilities have improved significantly in terms of data matching and personal identification technologies since this earlier view.
Further, from 1 July 2013, the ATO pays interest, equivalent to the Consumer Price Index on lost and unclaimed superannuation accounts under their control. There is no longer a logical reason for the Territory to not opt in to the centralised Commonwealth regime.
The transitional arrangements in the bill allow the opting in to the Commonwealth upon the relevant Territory schemes being prescribed in the Commonwealth Superannuation (Unclaimed Money and Lost Members) Regulations.
Unclaimed money totalling approximately $0.5m currently held by the Territory in the Central Holding Authority will be transferred to the ATO along with the account details of those unclaimed members. As future lost and unclaimed accounts are identified these will also be transferred in line with ATO reporting requirements.
It is also proposed to allow the Superannuation Trustee Board (the STB) the ability to form committees which overarch the relevant scheme funds under the board’s control. The STB currently has $1bn under management, and oversees the funds of three of the Territory’s public sector schemes, namely the Northern Territory Government and Public Authorities’ Superannuation Scheme (NTGPASS); the Legislative Assembly Members’ Superannuation Scheme (LAMS); and the Northern Territory Police Supplementary Benefit Scheme (NTPSBS).
The use of the committee structure allows greater governance and oversight, and is a way of bringing board members closer to the day-to-day operation of the schemes and their respective fund. The committee structure is a common feature across the jurisdictions that have public sector schemes under management. The proposed reforms will also be in line with the recent Commonwealth StrongerSuper reforms and align with industry best practice.
Further, it is proposed in the bill to allow the STB to apportion costs as it considers appropriate for the management of the funds under its control. The current STB governance arrangements were only finalised in 2012 and did not adequately address the ability to apportion board-related costs. It is the intention in the bill to do so now.
It is also proposed in the bill to streamline NTGPASS and the Northern Territory Government Death and Disability Scheme (NTGDIS) to achieve equality of membership and to realise administrative efficiencies where possible.
NTGPASS and NTGDIS are both established as separate schemes under the Superannuation Act and provide equivalent total and permanent disability and death benefits to their respective members. They have very similar features; however, the formulas used to calculate a financial benefit are different.
NTGDIS covers most Territory public sector employees who are in ‘choice of fund’ superannuation arrangements upon meeting certain conditions of employment. NTGPASS has been closed to new members since 1999.
Mandatory medical classification provisions were repealed from NTGDIS as part of the legislative amendments undertaken in 2010. A medical classification was an assessment to determine if a new Territory public sector employee had a high risk of dying or becoming an invalid in their first 10 years of service. Those deemed at high risk were issued a ‘reduced benefit certificate’ and their benefit entitlement was reduced until the 10-year period had elapsed.
It was determined through actuarial advice that removing the medical requirements for new NTGDIS members would not materially increase the Territory’s liability. Further, the assessment process was very costly to administer. As such it is proposed to also remove the medical classification provisions for NTGPASS members, allowing the same equality of membership that applies to NTGDIS members. As NTGPASS closed in 1999, some 15 years ago, any ‘reduced benefit certificates’ on record will have expired.
It is also proposed in the bill to realise a number of administrative efficiency measures as part of the modernisation process to simplify, improve or remove complex and redundant provisions. One such measure is to remove the NTGDIS anticipatory benefit payment. Anticipatory payments are made to alleviate financial hardship if a member’s salary is suspended or reduced due to a member’s incapacity whilst undergoing an assessment for invalidity retirement.
Only one such payment has been made to date, meaning that from an administrative perspective the benefit is both inefficient and redundant. These situations are better addressed through employment measures such as the granting of additional sick leave by the relevant agency. Additionally, NTGDIS members belong to superannuation funds such as AustralianSuper. These funds provide a default level of benefit to their members, meaning there is no strong reason to continue offering an anticipatory benefit.
Another proposed measure is to raise the payment threshold that the Commissioner of Superannuation can make without receiving grant of probate or letters of administration.
The release of money is to help meet funeral expenses of a deceased member, or to dependants of the member. The current threshold of $20 000 was last updated in 2007 and has eroded over time due to the effects of inflation. It is now proposed to raise this to $30 000.
It is also proposed to broaden the current interpretation of a ‘dependant’ in the Superannuation Act to align with the definition of ‘dependant’ in the Commonwealth Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (or SISA) to reflect how people interact and support each other in modern times. The current interpretation of ‘dependant’ is considered too narrow and by no means gives a definitive guide in helping the commissioner make a transparent and informed decision, especially with regard to partial or whole dependency.
For example, two elderly siblings with adult children of their own, living together in a mutual care arrangement illustrates the potential for a member, or a person in society, to have more than one ‘interdependent’ relationship. The broadening of the term ‘dependant’ will allow these kinds of arrangements to be captured and considered. Further, aligning with the SISA definition will allow the steps set out in the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations to be considered when determining what is an ‘interdependency’ relationship.
It is also proposed in the bill to amend the Superannuation Act to make it easier to identify and prescribe a ‘public authority’ in the Superannuation Regulations for NTGPASS membership purposes. A ‘public authority’ can either be attached to an agency or be another type of body or agency classification. For example, a public authority can be a commission, a corporatised entity such as the Darwin Port Corporation, or a quasi-government organisation such as the Menzies School of Health.
The need to prescribe these authorities in the regulations is to, essentially, allow NTGPASS members to continue their membership when taking up positions with such authorities. To simplify the process it is proposed that a public authority will only be required to be prescribed in the regulations if it is not already in the Administrative Arrangements Orders (AAO) for the purposes of the Public Sector Employment and Management Act, the Financial Management Act or both.
It is further proposed in the bill to convert penalty provisions in the Superannuation Act to comply with the principles of criminal responsibility in Part IIAA of the Criminal Code, and to extend across the superannuation legislative framework updated confidentiality of information provisions. This is to afford better protection to members of all schemes with regard to the use of their confidential superannuation information. It is also proposed in the bill to ensure further protection to members of the Territory’s defined benefit superannuation schemes by extending better pathways to take action against bureaucratic decision-making or action.
It is proposed to replace the Superannuation Review Board and ‘opt in’ to the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal when it is fully operational; the Attorney-General has just spoken on that subject. The NTCAT will provide a one stop shop and transparent expertise to assess the merits of bureaucratic decision-making or their actions. A centralised tribunal approach will allow aggrieved members wishing to challenge an administrative decision a simple, transparent and direct avenue. As such, the right of review against bureaucratic decision-making or action will be extended across the superannuation legislative framework to cover members of other schemes, with the exception of the Supreme Court Judges Pension Scheme.
Not only is this in line with industry best practice across jurisdictions, but it is also this government’s intention to ensure citizens of the Northern Territory have greater transparency in dealing with the departments they interact with.
Further, time lines for seeking a review of decisions have also been added. Transitional arrangements in the bill ensure that members who may have a matter on foot or a grievance they wish to bring forward will not be excluded as a result of these very important changes. It is also proposed in the bill to close the NTGPASS pension product and facilitate the transfer of members to a successor fund equivalent or superior to the NTGPASS pension.
The closure of the NTGPASS pension product has become necessary due to the modest take-up of around 220 pensions. The low membership base means it does not have the economies of scale needed to offer a cost-effective product. No new pensions have been offered since 1 April 2014.
A due diligence process has been followed to select a successor fund that is equivalent or superior to the pension product to ensure that no member will be worse off as a result of the closure. There is, however, a degree of urgency for this to occur before 1 January 2015. This is when the Commonwealth’s new aged pension deeming rules come into effect. Income streams from pensions starting after this date will be assessed for social security purposes in the same way that applies to income derived from other financial assets.
Finally, it is proposed in the bill to facilitate a framework across the relevant schemes to allow for the release of superannuation money from a member’s account to meet a Commonwealth superannuation tax liability. Certain taxes are to be prescribed in the Superannuation Regulations, where the Commonwealth legislation allows a superannuation tax liability to be paid by the individual or by the superannuation fund on request from either the member or the ATO. The first to be prescribed in the regulations is the new Division 293 tax, where an additional 15% tax is applied to an individual’s superannuation contribution when their total income threshold, including their superannuation contributions, exceeds $300 000.
The Division 293 tax is designed to capture everyone over this threshold, except if the taxpayer belongs to a constitutionally protected superannuation fund. None of the Territory defined benefits schemes are constitutionally protected or exempt from this requirement. As such, members who exceed this threshold may be assessed as having a superannuation tax liability.
Finally, from 1 July 2013, Commonwealth legislation allows excess superannuation contributions that exceed the concessional contribution caps to be refunded to the individual taxpayer. Concessional contributions are before-tax contributions, such as salary sacrifice, made by members on top of their employer contributions.
In the past, excess contributions were subject to a high tax rate plus additional tax penalties. The framework to allow this is proposed in the bill with the ability to release any excess concessional contribution amount also prescribed in the Superannuation Regulations.
I commend this bill to honourable members, and table the explanatory statement to accompany the bill.
Debate adjourned.
CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT (DANGEROUS DRIVING DURING PURSUIT) BILL
(Serial 84)
(Serial 84)
Continued from 15 May 2014.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Mr Deputy Speaker, the opposition supports this bill.
As the Attorney-General mentioned in his second reading speech, this bill implements the recommendation made by the Northern Territory Coroner, arising from the inquest into the deaths of Mr Clifford Norman and Ms Kwementyaye Taylor.
This was a tragic case involving a high-speed chase and alcohol. The police involved used their judgment and chose not to continue pursuit as it was their belief it was a dangerous situation and that the driver, Mr Norman, was intoxicated.
Sadly, their concerns were justified. Mr Norman and Ms Taylor died in the resulting car crash and two more passengers were seriously injured. Miraculously, the true innocent in this, a four-year-old – unrestrained – managed to survive with only minor injuries.
The coroner said in his findings that he believed the Northern Territory police had taken the correct course of action and appropriate steps to call off their pursuit in trying to ensure a safer outcome. The coroner also said that people knew of the police’s policy and, as such, were exploiting it, to the danger of themselves and the general public.
As a result – this is why we are here – the coroner recommended introducing tougher penalties for offenders who speed or drive recklessly or dangerously when evading police. The opposition supports this recommendation.
It is important that people understand that when asked to stop by police they must do so, and that failure to do so will result in very harsh penalties. Driving dangerously puts people’s lives at risk.
The Attorney-General mentioned in his speech that there is a gap between the Traffic Act, the Criminal Code Act and the Motor Vehicles Act in regard to offences when a driver fails to stop for police and situations which contain offences that may be charged when dangerous driving occurs.
The Attorney-General is correct in identifying that the proof needed to pursue these charges can be difficult for police to obtain. The bill we are speaking to today was drafted to address this.
The Attorney-General has clarified that this bill does not give police more powers – or the discretion to direct a driver to stop a vehicle – than they already have. The bill is targeted at behaviour that puts the public in danger when people flee police and high-speed chases occur, and the opposition supports the new maximum penalty for this.
Our roads and workplaces need to be safe. Our roads, used by all in the community, need to be safe. We are satisfied the Attorney-General and government have ensured their definition of ‘pursuit’ is adequate to close any loopholes which may exist, but expect it is something that will need to be monitored.
The Territory road toll currently sits at 27. Every life lost on Territory roads is one too many, and having laws enacted to punish those who speed recklessly or drink and drive is good.
We respect the fact that government has acted on advice from the coroner and experts regarding actions it needs to take in law. We only wish the government would take more advice from experts; especially in this debate, my mind is cast to open speed limits. As was articulated by serving police officers again this week at the Northern Territory Police Association AGM, they do not support the return of open speed limits. Their president said he ‘did not believe a responsible organisation representing operational police officers could support any government reintroducing unrestricted speed limits on a trial or permanent basis’. He also said, ‘Dealing with the carnage on our roads is one of the most personally and professionally damaging elements of police work for our members – how could we possibly support (open speed limits)?’
It is incongruous and inconsistent for the CLP to support open speed limits and this bill. The Attorney-General is capable of speaking to and taking up the cause of serving police officers. They are asking this government to not support open speed limits in the Northern Territory.
We, as well as the government, support this bill, but I call on the CLP to reconsider its approach to open speed limits.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I also support the bill the Attorney-General has brought forward.
It is straightforward. Its intent can be summarised by reading the last part of the second reading speech, which says:
- All drivers have a duty and responsibility to stop for the police when requested. Failing to stop and driving in a dangerous manner, often at grossly excessive speeds and often whilst intoxicated, endangers not only the lives of other road users, police and pedestrians, but also the passengers of the offending vehicle. The current fail to stop offences and the applicable maximum penalties do not adequately reflect the criminal conduct in a police pursuit.
As the member for Fannie Bay has noted, this deficiency was noted by the Northern Territory Coroner, and is remedied by this bill.
When the Northern Territory Coroner makes recommendations it would be a very unwise government that did not do follow them. In Litchfield there were two fatal accidents on a bend, and the coroner recommended that lighting be improved there; subsequently, that is what the local council did. I do not recall any major accidents on that section of road since those recommendations were put in place.
Sometimes we introduce legislation to this parliament that looks good and looks like it could solve a problem, but, like many laws that are introduced with good intent, we do not revisit them to see whether they have made a difference. We create a law because we want to reduce a type of behaviour. It would be wise sometime in the future, perhaps a couple of years’ time after, to look at whether – I do not know whether figures would be available for you to do this in a purposeful manner, but it would be good to see, whether by the introduction of these changes to the law, there has been a reduction in the number of pursuits.
Again, I am not sure whether the police would record these matters and whether there would be any statistical record kept of them so you could say whether this type of behaviour had been reduced after the introduction of this legislation, after X number of incidents had occurred over the previous few years.
The government says we should not be overregulated, and I am not putting this in that bracket, but one of the reasons we say we do not want to be overregulated is that we do not want legislation that is not doing what it was intended to do. In the future, I hope the government says, ‘Since the introduction of stiffer penalties there has been a reduction in the number of cases of pursuit by police, and the introduction of this bill is actually working’. That would be a good thing for the parliament to hear.
I fully support what the Attorney-General has brought forward. I fully support what the coroner has stated, that we need to discourage drivers from failing to stop or attempting to evade police, because if we can reduce the number of people killed, either in the vehicle being chased or other innocent people on the road, that would be a good thing.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, predictably and sensibly, it would appear all members of this House are supportive of this legislation, for which I am grateful to them. However, it is merely an extension of common sense.
Nothing in this legislation prevents or stilts the operation of those offences in the Motor Vehicles Act and Traffic Act relating to failure to stop; I cannot quite remember which act that is in. However, having made that observation, this creates an offence which is substantially different to the existing legislation for a number of reasons, not least of which is that other offences that pertain to it can be heard on complaint. They are, essentially, matters for the lower courts without any real redress or direction to the superior courts, which means they are dealt with as summary offences.
This offence is an insertion into the Criminal Code Act. There are only one or two offences in the Criminal Code Act that are automatically heard summarily; I think common assault is one of them. This offence is an indictable offence, so the matter proceeded with is heard on information and is dealt with as a crime by the courts. Conceivably, it is not beyond the realm of reality that these matters could end up being heard in the Supreme Court, and the sentencing capacity of the superior court outweighs the sentencing capacities, in a general discussion, of the inferior courts.
Essentially, the message is a very important one: to run away from a police officer when you are instructed to stop is no longer a simple offence; it is now a crime. We are anxious to impress upon Territorians that if they choose to do this they are engaging in conduct which will be taken very seriously indeed; it will be heard upon indictment and will be dealt with as a crime against the Criminal Code Act, not only an offence against the Traffic Act.
The second component is that summary offences are, essentially, still within the domain – I could stand corrected on this – of the Traffic Act and Motor Vehicles Act as matters that have all excuse provisions available to them under the operation of the Griffith model Criminal Code.
The Territory is transitioning to the model Criminal Code, and has created the Part IIAA excuse provisions which apply to offences that are Part IIAA compliant. This is one of those offences. In fact, the Northern Territory government has decided that all offences advanced through this Chamber from today will be Part IIAA compliant and, as a consequence of that, will be subject to Part IIAA of the Criminal Code Act.
That includes this particular offence. Therefore, you will find terminology describing this offence as one of strict liability, set apart from absolute liability which are, essentially, regulatory offences. Offences of strict liability have inherent in them a structure that makes it easier to prosecute.
The second component of this legislation – it will be subject to a minor committee stage amendment – is that we will make certain the burden of proof demonstrating a person was not running away from police does not lie with the police, but with the perpetrator. As a consequence of that, the strict liability offences that apply to this offence are in section 43AN of the Criminal Code Act. Essentially, it still attracts all defences other than the mistake of fact, and creates a framework of default elements – what used to be known as mens rea as a general principle – within the framework of a strict liability offence. That means there will be limited excuses available for a person who stands accused of this conduct, whereas under general principles of the current offences the scope for making excuses is broader. What we are doing, essentially, is making the offence more serious and the get out clauses much more difficult for a person to maintain.
Without going into too much further detail I will send this matter to the committee stage. Hopefully we can move through the committee stage quickly to make certain this becomes an important law in the Northern Territory, which will hopefully not only protect the motoring and pedestrian public of the Northern Territory in a much more effective way, but where a person chooses to drive away from a police officer they then suffer the full consequences of the law, not merely dealing with an issue of this nature as a summary offence.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Clauses 1 to 4 taken together and agreed to.
Clause 5:
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Chair, I move the amendment to Clause 5, standing in my name. This amendment came out of a discussion subsequent to the original bill coming before the House. The Office of Parliamentary Counsel and the Department of the Attorney-General and Justice met to discuss the legal and evidentiary burden associated with that and, as a result, it became apparent the intent indicated in the second reading speech about the placement of the burden of proof with regard to section 174FB(4) was not as clear as it should be. This is a straightforward tidy up to make certain we have the intent of the legislation captured in the legislation itself.
Whilst a court may, for the purposes of interpretation, turn its mind to the second reading speech, it is better to have it in a situation where it does not have to interpret a bill because there is doubt or possible doubt in it. For the sake of clarity and ensuring we do not need to give the courts anything other than the legislation, this House produces a touchstone for proper interpretation. This proposed amendment does nothing more than make certain the intent of this House and this parliament in relation to the evidentiary burden provisions, should a prosecution against this legislation be commenced.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.
Remainder of the bill, by leave, taken as a whole and agreed to.
Bill reported; report adopted.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
DARWIN RATES AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 72)
(Serial 72)
Continued from 26 March 2014.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, the formal description of the Darwin Rates Amendment Bill before us today reads as follows:
- A bill for an act to amend the Darwin Rates Act, and for related purposes.
Those last three words, ‘for related purposes’, tell the real story of this bill. The explanatory memorandum accompanying the bill says the main purpose is to modernise the act and allow for flexibility into the future.
The real intent of the legislation, or the opportunity being seized by the minister, lies in the sting in the tail of this bill. We have before us a bill that would amend the Darwin Rates Act and broaden its scope to potentially apply across the Territory, not only the 52 km2 of land in Darwin where it currently applies. The bill aims to rename the Darwin Rates Act, for a special and limited purpose, as a new Northern Territory rates act to broaden the scope of the existing act to allow for the future rating of unincorporated land in the Northern Territory outside of existing local government areas. For instance, this includes Dundee Beach and Marrakai.
The purpose of this bill is also to update the Darwin Rates Act and align terminology and exemptions from rating with the reformed Local Government Act. It is also to enable the rating of unincorporated land to include rating and or a flat rate, as well as the current rate based on the unimproved capital value of land. This bill will also enable the minister to set an interest rate for overdue rates.
If passed today, legislative amendments in this bill will provide a mechanism for the minister for Local Government to amend, by regulation, the area in which this legislation applies, and give him capacity to introduce a new tax on landholders in those parts of the Territory not within an existing local government area.
Examples that come to mind include Dundee Beach, Marrakai, small parcels of land in the Cox Peninsula – outside of the Wagait council area – and Aboriginal outstations or homelands such as Bulgul. I use the word ‘tax’ because that is what it is. The Local Government Association of the Northern Territory is very clear about the purpose of rates, and describes it as follows on its website:
- Rates are a tax that is usually based on the values of properties … Rates are not reflective of the services used by any particular property but contribute to the whole communities’ use of council services just like the taxes paid to the Australian Government contribute to a range of government activities.
The opposition will not support this bill because it paves the way for this government to apply rates to unincorporated areas of the Northern Territory, those areas which lie outside of a local government area. In effect, it paves the way for taxation without representation and the application of land tax without a local elected or representative body that can be held to account for the rates being levied on property owners.
In his second reading speech the minister for Local Government said:
- While it will be possible to declare additional prescribed areas in the future, the current prescribed area is not being expanded and no new areas are being declared by this legislation.
That may be true enough for the moment, but it is timely to remind members and Territorians that this is what the same minister said in this Assembly on 4 December 2013:
- I have been prepared to stick my head above the turret and suggest that maybe we should look at imposing rates on Aboriginal land, pastoral leases, and maybe some of these unincorporated areas that still exist in the Northern Territory.
A few minutes later, the minister for Local Government was much clearer when he said:
- I have talked to people in Dundee about paying rates. We will invoke the Darwin Rates Act on them and charge them rates.
This bill has been presented as a long overdue update of old legislation. We are told the focus is on a refresh of the Darwin Rates Act and better aligning it with the Local Government Act. As the minister explained in his second reading speech, the bill focuses on refreshing the legislation as it relates to the current area where it applies: the East Arm Logistics precinct in Darwin’s East Arm Port area, as well as some adjacent areas of Berrimah, Tivendale and Wishart.
These are areas of land that fall between the gazetted boundaries of the City of Darwin council and that of the City of Palmerston council, land set aside many years ago to help grow and develop new industry associated with the growing Port of Darwin. The arrangement is that the Darwin Rates Act allows the government to apply a rate on properties as a local government body might do if the land was incorporated as part of a local government area, with rates set in line with rates charged for light industrial areas by the City of Darwin or City of Palmerston councils.
The land of areas where the Darwin Rates Act applies is defined in Schedule 2 of the regulations of the Darwin Rates Act. I understand there are about 260 ratepayers currently paying rates set under that act, generating around $1.4m in revenue which goes to the Department of Local Government and Regions, with no direct link to the provision of local government services in that area. Let us be very clear, it is a tax on land.
Tellingly, the department’s annual report provides no information on what happens with that revenue and whether $1.4m is applied or not applied for the benefit of landowners and occupiers in the Darwin rates area. The current Darwin Rates Act allows the Minister for Local Government and Regions to declare a rate on the unimproved capital value of all rateable land within the prescribed area, and to declare a minimum rate for a parcel of land within a prescribed area.
As expected, the act outlines the arrangements for a penalty to apply for the late payment of rates, currently specified as 1.5% for each month or part of a month during which any part of a rate remains unpaid, and mechanisms available to recover unpaid rates. The current act also outlines land that is not rateable, for example, that which may be used for a school, library, a public reserve, sports grounds and churches.
Amendments include introducing the capacity to use different kinds of rating in the Darwin rates area and any expanded rates area outside of Darwin. These options include a flat rate, a differential rate where the rating differs according to the type of land that is being rated, and rating based on the value of land, whether that be a percentage of the unincorporated value, improved value, or some other form of valuation employed by the minister in setting these rates.
Further, the bill provides for a change in the interest penalty applied for overdue rates. The current act sets this at 1.5% for each month, or part of a month, when the rate remains unpaid. The bill before us proposes a change to the penalty rate more in line with those set by a municipal council. For example, the penalty rate set by the City of Darwin council is currently 18% per annum, accrued daily.
If this was only a bill, as the minister said in his second reading speech, to update old legislation and align definitions and rating exemptions with the Local Government Act, we could be more inclined to support for it. However, this bill before us opens the door for the minister, at any time, to expand the prescribed area by regulation and to unilaterally apply rates to landowners and occupiers of land outside of an existing local government area across the Territory.
Importantly, the bill includes a significant expansion of options for rating, meaning the minister will have a raft of options available to him to rate properties included in the prescribed areas. As the minister said in his second reading speech, the bill introduces ‘maximum flexibility’ for him as the minister, maximum flexibility to rate landholders in places like Dundee Beach, Marrakai and Channel Point. I understand, following a briefing from the department of Local Government’s CEO, there is something like 4000 lots of land in unincorporated areas across the Territory. The government’s own website lists these as including my home town of Nhulunbuy – the Nhulunbuy town site – Alyangula and over 19 000 km of land outside the Litchfield, Coomalie, Wagait, Belyuen, West Arnhem and Victoria Daly council areas. I understand there are about 2000 lots which could be rated in the 19 000 km of land I have just described. If that course of events was followed, as seems to be the clear intent of the minister, given his comments in the past, what happens with the revenue from this form of rate collection?
Debate suspended.
DARWIN RATES AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 72)
(Serial 72)
Continued from earlier this day.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, as I said prior to the lunchtime suspension, the opposition does not support this bill. At the time we suspended the House I was asking the minister what would happen with revenue raised from this collection.
Most Territorians would expect that before they were charged rates for their land they would have the opportunity to vote for a local council, entrusting elected councillors to represent them, make rating decisions and be accountable for council revenue.
Despite the argument that the bill seeks to align the Darwin Rates Act with the existing Local Government Act, the Darwin Rates Amendment Bill does not use exactly the same definition of land exempt from rates as that applied in the Local Government Act.
The bill proposes that on Aboriginal land or Aboriginal community living areas rates will apply if that land prescribed as rateable in the regulations is subject to a lease or licence for occupancy, or is used for commercial purposes.
‘Occupier’ in this context means a person who either jointly or alone has actual possession of the allotment, to the substantial exclusion of others.
This bill proposes that if this form of land is to be used for a commercial purpose it is only rateable if the person using it is someone other than the land trust or Aboriginal community living area association.
Thought has gone into this – an exemption from rates for land trust and Indigenous landowners’ commercial operations on Aboriginal land or Aboriginal community living areas. The Local Government Act definition does not exempt commercial operations conducted by a land trust or community living area associations from rates.
This may be a desirable device to help foster commercial activities on this land, but this is not explained, so perhaps when the minister speaks during this debate he could do so. If this principle has enough merit to be included in this bill, why was a like amendment not proposed in the Local Government Amendment Bill, particularly given the opportunity to do so when debated in earlier sittings? What does this bill mean for the potential rating of Aboriginal outstations like Bulgul, which I referred to earlier? Will it be argued at some future time that Bulgul is occupied to the substantial exclusion of others and that residents are potentially liable for rates?
I also note that while this bill provides for the rating of pastoral properties and mining tenements outside a local government area, it does not propose the same arrangements relating to this kind of land set out in the Local Government Act. For example, there is no specific reference to conditional rating that applies to this land in gazetted local government areas, and no requirement for consultation on the level of rate applying to these properties.
How will rates be struck? What valuation methodology will the minister use as the basis for rates linked to the value of land, remembering many of the residents of unincorporated land in the greater Darwin region are cash poor. Many of these residents are pensioners or retirees deliberately choosing, often out of necessity, a cheaper lifestyle living in the bush.
The Minister for Local Government and Regions has previously spoken in the Assembly about looking at rating some of the unincorporated areas which still exist in the Northern Territory. The departmental briefing on the bill was clear that this legislation was an opportunity to make this possible for future government decision-making. Word in local government circles is that the minister is actively looking at the mechanism of a flat rate that can be applied to landowners and occupiers of unincorporated areas, at least in the short term.
I query the level of consultation this bill has been through. The legislation was to come back on 15 May, but, clearly, the minister was not interested in staying late that night, so it was deferred. We could have had it before the House at the end of the parliamentary sitting day in June, but the minister wanted to get home early that night as well, so here we are, three months after it was scheduled.
That is plenty of time to consult with people. The member for Nelson will probably raise this in his contribution, but he asked a question of the minister in February, before the bill had been brought before the House. He said:
- Could you please say if it is your intention to expand the Darwin Rates Act to cover unincorporated lands such as Marrakai, or, perhaps Dundee and the Douglas Daly? If so, have you told the residents, or even discussed it with them?
The minister’s answer included:
What we are doing, member for Nelson, is consulting with stakeholders.
He then went on to say:
- We are not doing anything without talking to all stakeholders.
Madam Speaker, I am sure you are familiar with some of the stakeholders out that way, as the member for Daly is also. I know for a fact that members of the Dundee Progress Association, as of yesterday, had not been consulted about the proposed changes.
I should not be surprised; it is typical of this government that it goes ahead and does things without consulting people, letting them learn and cop it after the fact. We have seen it time and time again. We heard it during Question Time this morning in regard to planning and bulldozing trees in the rural area ahead of the new hospital. There was no consultation whatsoever. I would be interested to hear the minister detail and table dates and times of meetings he has had with stakeholders, including the Dundee Progress Association.
For all of the reasons I have outlined during this contribution to debate, we on this side cannot support this bill. We cannot support taxation without representation, which is what the amendments in this bill mean. We will not support a mechanism for the minister to apply rating across unincorporated areas of the Northern Territory, at least not without a comprehensive program of consultation with potential ratepayers and clear arrangements in relation to the link between any rates, local government services and local government representation.
The opposition opposes this bill.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I do not support this bill either, and I have not supported the Darwin rates area from day one. People may or may not know there is an area between Darwin and Palmerston; it is basically the East Arm area, including Berrimah Farm, the prison, the Tivendale Road industrial area and most of what you see when you go to the railway station and the East Arm Port. Most of that area is the East Arm development area and it comes under the Darwin Rates Act.
That allows the government to rate the area. Anyone who owns a block or lives there has to pay a rate to the government, rather than local government. You may also notice if you are coming in from there that all of a sudden there is a lot of third-party advertising on the left-hand side. The government seems to exclude that area from normal third-party advertising rules. That is a sign that you have left Palmerston and not reached Darwin.
People live in that area and own properties, and the normal process if you are going to tax people – a rate is a tax – is to at least give them some direct input into those decision-making processes. That is why when we have rates, we have local government, or the other way around. You have a representative on your council who you can talk to – or representatives, depending on whether you have wards or not – and who can give your point of view at a council meeting, especially when it comes to the imposition of rates in an area. That also gives you rights to talk about other things, such as the state of the roads, the need for facilities, families who require some recreation facilities, rubbish collection, etcetera. They are the sorts of things councils are about, and in the case of the East Arm Port area, people do not have that right.
There may not be many people living there, but an awful lot of people own land there. It does not matter, as with any other council, whether you live within your council area or not – you can reside or own property – you would expect to be able to tell council your feelings about rates. In this case you cannot do that, except to go to your local member – his area partly covers it – but it is not the same as local government. The bill being put forward does not really change that.
The main purpose of this bill is to modernise the act and allow for flexibility into the future. There is nothing wrong with modernising the act, because much of the legislation we have probably still has thees and thous in it, but the key, interesting part is that which says to ‘allow for flexibility for the future’. We are going to change this act so it does not only cover the East Arm Port area as we know it; this act is being cited as the Darwin Rates Amendment Bill 2014, and will allow the government to rate any unincorporated land in the Northern Territory.
The question, as I asked earlier this year and the minister responded – he gave us the impression that part of the reason for this act to be amended is to allow the government to look at rating land, especially in the larger Darwin regional area. That would be Marrakai, Douglas Daly and Dundee. Those areas presently do not have any local government and are not rated.
I have been to meetings before, especially in the Marrakai area, supporting the case that those areas should pay rates, but at the same time be part of a council. The government is saying they should be paying rates, but there is no guarantee they will be part of a council. That means exactly what the member for Nhulunbuy spoke about, to do with the famous Boston Tea Party issue. It is taxation without representation, something I thought the government would support.
This is very difficult. I had my baptism of fire in politics when I went to the Corroboree Hotel one Saturday morning and put the idea to people that it would be good if they belonged to Litchfield Shire. After all, the small blocks start only a few kilometres over the bridge, and it would make sense because they use the tip at Humpty Doo, the shops and their kids go to schools in Litchfield. That sounded good until I went to the meeting, and did I cop it! I copped it in a respectful way, but I copped it. Even though people at least thanked me for putting my thoughts forward, they would not have a bar of it.
I have been to at least two other meetings in Marrakai. The previous government had a consultant who held a couple of meetings there. They ranged from medium to fiery; there were those who totally opposed local government, but there were some who were supportive of it. The previous government did not use its head, and this government seems to be ducking its head. If you want local government, you do not go down this path of charging people rates, you use a carrot-and-stick approach. You need to set it straightaway and say, ‘Yes, you will have local government’. You need to be clear, upfront and brave enough to take the flak. In the process you need to be …
Mr Tollner: Brave enough to take the flak.
Mr WOOD: No, hang on, hear me through, member for Fong Lim. At least I had a go, but I did not have the power to offer people alternatives. One of the issues that was raised as a possibility for people to come onside at Marrakai was the provision of services, that is, community services such as a community hall or a football oval, a place the people do not have presently that would help that community feel like it is a community.
Dundee – bless the place – is the worst subdivision the CLP ever created in its life. I started in politics, basically, because of that subdivision. It was a subdivision which had no public land and no requirements to bituminise roads to small blocks. It was a developer’s heaven and, to some extent, it still is. What happened? Taxpayers have paid for Dundee through bitumen roads, power, having to lease land for a school, I think, and through leasing land for a rubbish transfer station. All the things you would expect good planning to have allowed for did not happen at Dundee.
Somewhere along the line, there must be overall control through local government, kept at the standard Litchfield Shire used to be at – I do not say it is there now – which was little regulation, flat rates and minimalist functions for the council, such as roads, reserves and rubbish, which is what Litchfield based itself on to keep the rates accordingly.
Douglas Daly is a difficult area. It does not have as many people living there. I am not saying this is easy, but this is not the way to go about convincing people they need local government. This is the stick approach – ‘Hey, up there in Marrakai, guess what we have for you this Christmas?’ The member for Daly would love this! ‘We have a package for you: a $650 flat rate this year. We are not sure what for, but we want you to come in line with the rest of the community.’ There will be many letters to the editor.
If you want to go down the path of convincing people that local government is important in these areas, you must use your brains. You must be willing to take a bit of stick, because you will get it. However, in the long term, it is a decision the government must eventually make, because to have some parts of the Territory not incorporated while other parts are is unfair to those who pay rates in those other areas. Many of those people not paying rates use facilities in those areas that are paying rates. We need to ensure it is balanced. That does not mean they have to pay the same rates, because you could have different stages of flat rates.
You could bring it in as it was for Litchfield. Litchfield’s rates at the beginning in, I think, 1985 were $55 for the southern part and $105 for the northern part. They came in low and were adjusted according to the area they represented. It was eventually decided they would both be the same; there was no point in having different rates.
The first thing you need to do is not worry about this particular legislation. Talk to Palmerston and Darwin about taking over the East Arm Port area. People might say, ‘Oh, they cannot manage it’. What needs managing? Most of the infrastructure is already there. I have already seen the greater kingdom of Palmerston plans. Not only do they have Howard Springs and Holtze in sight, they have the Holtze industrial area and part of the East Arm Port development where the prison is as well. That is in their plans.
However, we need to be a bit more sensible about this. We need to be talking to Darwin as well. One of those councils should take over the lead role in managing that area and collecting the rates for it. Why would the government want to duplicate a service that is the realm of local government? The government talks about cutting costs and then wants to be a rate collector. No, if you want to streamline things, give that job to a council. That is its job, what it gets paid for and how the administration works. It is not a job for mainstream government.
Let us sort East Arm out from a local government perspective, and let us look at the Waterfront; I believe a review is close as to whether the City of Darwin council takes it over. They should see, by now, whether it is feasible. The initial concern about the development of the Waterfront was that it would cost them a lot more money to maintain it because it is in a filled and industrial area. Perhaps those discussions need to be taken into account.
You must do the hard yards. Minister, you stood in front of people in Peppimenarti, who all said, ‘Yes, we want our local government’, and you thought that was terrific. That is the easy one. You had to pay some money, but everyone loved you because you stuck with your election promise. This is the harder side of the job. This is where people do not particularly want local government, whereas, to be fair to the rest of the community that pays rates, they should be part of the system. You have to devise a way to do it which will show those people there is an advantage to being part of local government. As I said, it could be facilities; upgrading roads; sporting facilities for the kids, such as a basketball court; or maybe acquiring some decent land that can be for future community use, so you show you are willing to put some money into that area to help the community.
This act is a waste of time because I know what it is intended to do, and it is not the right way to go about it. I do not disagree with modernising an act, but it should be taken off the books at the right time. Talk to Palmerston, Darwin, Dundee, Douglas Daly and maybe Coomalie – because they are close to that area – Litchfield and Marrakai. Also, be willing to take some pain but, at the same time, be clever enough to offer people something which may encourage them to think twice about rejecting the offer to be part of local government.
I understand the purpose of the bill is to modernise the act, but the flexibility for the future is the wrong future. It should be done differently, and I am interested, when the minister gives his response, to find out if he has held a meeting at the Corroboree Park hotel with the Marrakai people. Has he held a meeting at Dundee Lodge and asked people what they think? Has he been to Fleming and discussed it with the Douglas Daly people? Has he had a chance to talk to the Palmerston and Darwin city councils about the option of them taking over that area? It is more than just this act, there is a bigger picture which must be looked at, and this is too narrow. We need to be discussing this issue in a much broader context. This will not achieve anything but grief in certain parts of some electorates in the Northern Territory.
Mr HIGGINS (Daly): Madam Speaker, I have my doubts about this legislation. As a member of this party I said I would only support this legislation going through on the proviso there is no plan to implement any rates in any of the unincorporated areas in this term of government. I take the minister on his word that will not occur.
I will go through the different areas with the member for Nelson. I agree about Corroboree. I held a meeting at Corroboree about a month ago and one of the issues raised …
Mr Wood: You are alive?
Mr HIGGINS: Yes, it was at Corroboree Park Tavern, and one issue which arose was local government. During that meeting I said I would not support any rating there until there was much more discussion, but I also said they need to set up something along the lines of a progress association. My electorate officer, with that in mind, has been helping them do that.
In the last month I have attended a meeting at Cox Peninsula in the last month to look at the expansion of boundaries. I passed the same comment, which was that I do not support the introduction of rates on unincorporated land without further consultation.
I do not have clear in my mind the question the member for Nelson raised about expanding Litchfield, Coomalie and Wagait, and picking up Belyuen. I am not clear where that should go, and I want time to think about what you would do with those. I do not see that this piece of legislation stops us performing that consultation, but I have said I do not support the introduction of rates on unincorporated land prior to holding a consultation. My period of consultation would be to the next election.
Dundee is a very complex area – the member for Nelson is nodding his head. Dundee is not one area, it is multiple areas and they do not necessarily all agree or hold the same views. When I was first elected, a final report was released on local government in that area, which had been commissioned by the previous government. The final recommendation of the report was divided. Some people knew they would have to go this way eventually; they did not want to do it now, but one thing that came across in that report very clearly is that they wanted a lot more consultation and input into it.
More recently there has been a lot of turbulence within the progress association and, I think, only in the last couple of weeks it has elected a new president or Chair. But I can assure everyone in this House that every meeting I have been to there where it has been raised, I have not changed my view. I would not support the introduction of rates until such time as there was widespread consultation.
It should be fair on everyone. If we are to introduce any sort of tax – whatever we want to call it – it must be the same for everyone. This is the issue I raised with these people, and I said they would eventually have to pay some rates. I agree with the member for Nelson when he says you can have varying rates depending on block size, the value and the services you are receiving. But I make the big distinction between the tax or rates portion and the service
Mr Wood: I support the flat rate, not variable rate.
Mr HIGGINS: A flat rate. These figures are probably wrong, but the minister can check; my last inquiry showed the rubbish tip – it is a transfer station – costs about $150 000 a year, so if any of his staff are listening they might want to check that. That is a hell of a lot of money the government is paying for a service, for which the people at Dundee do not contribute. It will come, but there must be a lot more consultation.
Coomalie was to be amalgamated. It is reasonably economically viable and has recently asked for an extension of its boundaries. I fully support that because it puts it on a better footing. Wagait Shire is still one of the old community government councils, as is Belyuen. I think I have said previously what a dog’s breakfast it is when it comes to councils, and this is why. I think Belyuen has been in administration for at least five, if not seven, years and there are some diverse views there.
People at Belyuen think they should be taken over by Darwin, Wagait wants to take them over and Coomalie wants to take over Wagait. Litchfield wants to take over Coomalie and Coomalie wants to take over Bulgul …
Mr Wood: And Channel Point.
Mr HIGGINS: Channel Point. It is not a simple problem which will be overcome by introducing a piece of legislation. I see the legislation as something that possibly could be used in two years’ time. I am not 100% convinced it would be used, or even needed, when we get there. It is not because these all fit into my seat; I agree that everyone should contribute in some way, but they should be consulted. We cannot come along with a big hammer, whack them on the head and say, ‘Well, stiff bickies; that is what is going to happen’.
The fact the electorate could get rid of me quite easily if I went the wrong way is not a consideration of mine. I am a lot older; I might have two terms if I am lucky, but I would rather be here doing something for the people of my electorate. You do not come into politics at 58 years of age as a career. I came into this House to try to achieve something, and shires were part of the problem.
I have my hands full setting up West Daly and making sure it is bedded in. I cannot spend all of my time setting up a progress association at Marrakai and consulting with it. I cannot deal with two councils that are already there, a third that is under administration, plus all these other things for something which will not do a hell of a lot for government. I am not convinced we will make hundreds of thousands of dollars out of this. I do not think it would ever cover the cost of some of the bridges being built there. It will definitely not cover the cost of bituminising some of the roads. It may cover the cost of the rubbish transfer.
It is a bit like the separation of Power and Water into separate entities. I supported that legislation, but I do not support the privatisation of Power and Water. I do not support selling it, and I have made that view quite clear. With this legislation, I am not too sure; I will see how we go at the end as to whether I support it or not.
I wanted to put my views on the record. I hope they are quite clear and I have not left any questions out. The issue of Aboriginal land and the rating of that is a different issue, but when I talk about everyone contributing, that is a factor which has to be thrown into the mix as well. However, I will not start that debate now.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for Local Government for bringing important legislation to this House. Nothing can be more important than passing laws in this place, and, as we have heard so far, it is a bit of a ‘just trust me’ scenario. You learn from everyone every day in this place. I have already had a casual conversation with the minister for Local Government, reminding him that
I learned a lot from him; he sat here just over two years ago, in opposition. I was on that side of the Chamber and I was bringing in major legislation around creating a residential building industry insurance scheme to protect Territory families from losing all their savings should the builder go broke, disappear or become insolvent. It was major legislation and the debate went on and on. The minister for Local Government, the member for Fong Lim, challenged me seriously in that debate about how much it would cost. At that stage we were negotiating with an industry fund to keep the costs minimal and to receive maximum protection for Territory families. I said in debate that we were working through that, and he slammed me with, ‘You cannot tell us how much it costs’. He then introduced this concept of how important legislation is and that it cannot be passed on the ‘just trust me’ factor. It does not compute. This is Territory law, so, minister, I am afraid you have brought legislation to this House that has very shaky foundations because it is all based on the ‘just trust me’ factor.
It is a little more deceptive, even with the name. When we talk about the Darwin Rates Amendment Bill to amend the Darwin Rates Act we are then introduced to a very short clause which says ‘for related purposes’ in inverted commas, because they relate to ‘just trust me’. Essentially, what I take out of that is this bill will relate to all unincorporated land across the Northern Territory, therefore, it has a direct implication for the electorate of Barkly.
I have two questions. Where does King Ash Bay stand in this and what about those blocks of land in the Sir Edward Pellew Group of Islands that were sold off by the CLP? Where do the landholders of those two parcels sit with this legislation? It is very unclear. I am not able to give those constituents a direct answer, and they have very direct questions. Unfortunately, we are at the stage where this government wants to see clear passage of this legislation through the House, and there are more unanswered questions than there are posed. That is why the opposition has said to put the brakes on, and that we cannot support this.
It was very interesting to listen to the member for Daly’s very pragmatic contribution to debate. Is a pragmatic approach to dealing with this legislation necessary now? Let us involve consultation, let us go back to the constituency and leave it to the next election. There is a member of the government with a very pragmatic offering to the member for Fong Lim, the minister. It seems to me to be perfect common sense in this case, where there are so many unanswered questions and where it does not only apply to Darwin, but can be applied across the Northern Territory. It relates to constituents in Barkly, as well as Daly, Nelson and Goyder. We could also include the seat of Greatorex; I am very interested to hear from the member for Greatorex on this subject during debate.
It is, essentially, an opportunity for a Liberal government to apply a new tax. If you want to call it for what it is, it is a new tax. Unfortunately, at the moment in this country we have a federal Liberal government and a Northern Territory Liberal government that have broken promises in a major way. Many of those broken promises relate to new revenue-raising streams; new taxes essentially, under the surface, this is a new Liberal tax.
You have to ask yourself why. I appreciate the difficulties in own-source revenue within the Northern Territory; it is a massive jurisdiction with a very small constituency and it is very difficult to raise the Territory’s own-source revenue. Why would the Minister for Local Government and Regions be so intent on this new tax? It obviously relates to the reform program in local government. Whilst there have not been major changes to that reform of local goverment, there has been one major boundary change. That is the creation of the West Daly Shire, which now must be putting serious pressure on the budget. We advised the government, in opposition, to be careful going down this road – there was very serious debate – because you might find the cost pressures of breaking up the Vic Daly at this stage, without real economic modelling, could incur hidden costs.
I am suggesting that is what has happened, and the minister is looking at this opportunity in unincorporated land across the Northern Territory to start creating a new stream of own-source revenue. There is a member within government, the member for Daly, who is very concerned about his own constituency and brings a good, tripartisan approach to this debate.
The ‘just trust me’ factor will not work, and this passage of legislation on the ‘just trust me’ principle – I compliment you on having taught me that – will not apply. It is not a good base for legislation passing through this House; it will not be a good outcome.
Let us look at some of the opportunities within the legislation. The Darwin Rates Act talks about the Darwin area, and then we talk about the East Arm logistics precinct and the Darwin port. In the nature of this legislation that is a good way forward. Being a previous member of the Labor government I had a very active stake in seeing the more contemporary elements of that precinct develop. We can talk about the duplication of Berrimah Road, the railway overpass and the Marine Supply Base, opened yesterday by the Country Liberal Party government. We can talk about all those developments in the East Arm logistics precinct and those businesses and buildings stepping out of the ground; it is a rapidly growing industrial area of Darwin. It will become a major revenue stream in regard to the proposal of this act.
It represents the essence of what the minister is trying to do. Having been involved in those developments and the visionary and pragmatic work of the former Labor government in the duplication of Berrimah Road, the railway overpass into the East Arm logistics precinct, the Marine Supply Base, the whole concept of servicing that offshore oil and gas industry and the Land Development Corporation and its incredible work growing that industrial precinct, I know that area will generate significant revenue for government in regard to the essence of this act.
We then go into the unknown and the questions. The minister will be able to respond; I am very interested to know, on behalf of constituents who live at King Ash Bay, where they sit within this legislation. Will all those blocks on the Sir Edward Pellew Group of Islands within the Barkly electorate suddenly be burdened with rates? Will they suddenly have new taxes on their livelihood? Will they suddenly have this new imposition on their cost of living? If that is the case, the counter argument will be about which services correspond with this new tax. If we talk about King Ash Bay, we will be talking about rubbish disposal, roads, fire and health services. These are all elements the minister provided in his speech when he spoke about the Dundee area. These services are there, already operating.
He believes:
- We will invoke the Darwin Rates Act on them and charge them rates.
It is very clear they will be charged for government services provided. However, in all other unincorporated areas, what economic modelling has been done and what is the reality of providing services? The balance will be, for the constituents I represent in those areas and across the Territory, what will come first, the charges or the services? Should they not come together? For future planning, should we not be undertaking economic modelling around those unincorporated areas? Should we not, as the member for Daly said, be having this conversation within the next two years?
In regard to good democracy, would it be better to use the ultimate in democracy by taking this to the next election having completed all economic modelling and that conversation with constituents, with people fully informed and knowing the territory they are moving into? We will have to wait and see, and the minister will no doubt respond. I am very interested to hear what he has to say.
This has been put as refreshing legislation, but we have heard enough in the Chamber to see it is not only about refreshing the legislation, that it has far more implications, and a number of speakers, including the opposition and Independent – the concerning clich about taxation without representation.
There are elements above and beyond pure service delivery; it is about governance. It is about having the Northern Territory community involved, which is what people deserve and expect. The member for Daly has placed a good time frame on dealing with these issues around services, governance and defining the unincorporated areas through economic modelling.
That is probably a good two-year project for a minister and their team to pull together; a logical conclusion would be to then bring it back to the House. As I said, I am a member of the opposition and we cannot support this legislation and its passage through parliament. There are too many unanswered questions. Good legislation does not pass through this House on trust alone. I was taught that lesson very well and that should apply to both sides.
I am very interested in the minister’s response to all speakers on this bill.
Mr TOLLNER (Local Government and Regions): Madam Speaker, I thank all those who have contributed to this debate; I have enjoyed listening to the comments.
If I have this correct in my mind, the main concern Labor has is about taxation without representation. Is that correct?
Ms Walker: If you had been in the Chamber you would have heard it all, minister.
Mr TOLLNER: There are a range of concerns, but the one that has been coming back to me constantly is this idea of taxation without representation. That is one of the reasons I have been keen to promote this legislation, because I hope people start voicing their concerns about taxation without representation and start calling for a local government in their area if they are in an unincorporated area.
It is my view, and I think it is the member for Nelson’s view, that if we have it right it should not matter where you live. Rates are a fact of life and if you want local government services you should pay for them. The member for Nelson has a concern with how we are consulting, etcetera, but his view is similar to mine, that is, if we are to have local government in the Northern Territory – it is probably fundamental to ask if we want local government in the Northern Territory. I cannot help thinking there are a number of people in this place who do not believe we should have local government in the Northern Territory because they do not believe certain people in our community should pay for those services.
Taxation without representation is an interesting concept the opposition has come up with. It is something we can all agree to and believe in, but look at their actions in government. They were nothing like they are in opposition. When Labor was in government only two years ago, it created the Darwin Waterfront, which it banged on about as one of its great achievements. Guess what? At the Darwin Waterfront, residents cannot vote in Darwin city council elections. Why is that? Because the former Labor government excluded them from the Darwin city council area.
Those people do not pay rates to the Darwin city council, they cannot vote in Darwin city council elections, but they do pay rates to the Darwin Waterfront Corporation. It is a corporation set up by the previous Northern Territory government and is 100% owned by the Northern Territory government, so people who pay rates at the Darwin Waterfront pay them directly to the Northern Territory government, something Labor says it is now opposed to.
It is not that long ago you were in government. Make up your mind! Do you support the Darwin Waterfront Corporation or not? It would be interesting to understand whether Labor has now backed away from the way it acted on the Darwin Waterfront Corporation, because there is no representation at the Waterfront if you own a unit there. You have to take with a grain of salt some of the comments we hear from the Labor Party. I will not tar the member for Nelson with that brush; I cannot remember whether he supported the Darwin Waterfront not being in the Darwin city council area or not.
Mr Wood: You were in Canberra.
Mr TOLLNER: I could have been in Canberra, that is true. I am interested to know whether the member for Nelson supported the government’s efforts to excise that area out of Darwin city council land or not.
Another concern is about not changing boundaries. Mr Deputy Speaker, I remember a couple of months ago when you stood in this place, very concerned about the extraordinary powers the minister for Local Government was giving himself with the ability to change boundaries and make rulings in relation to what we were doing at the Victoria Daly council. It was so extreme – ‘The minister can, with just a stroke of the pen, change the boundaries all over the Northern Territory. It does not take any effort at all.’ I said at the time I would not use these extraordinary powers I bequeathed on myself irresponsibly. They would only be used for the de-amalgamation of the Victoria Daly council.
Everyone was very concerned then, but the legislation was passed. Lo and behold, here we are now, and I have calls saying, ‘Change this boundary, change that boundary’, etcetera. I was stunned to read in the paper the other day of the member for Nelson complaining about a new suburb called Holtze, which, as I understand the article said, government and Palmerston council were conspiring to take from Litchfield Council. I do not know where the member for Nelson got this information from, but I have never had a conversation with Palmerston council about it taking over Holtze.
Palmerston City Council seems to think it is a done deal, but, as the minister, I have never been consulted; I have never talked to them about taking that land over. There is no done deal. The reality is, member for Nelson, I will not be changing any boundaries anywhere until at least after the next election.
I have had Coomalie lobbying me for extra land, I have had the Litchfield shire council asking for extra boundaries, I have had a range of councils – Palmerston wants to take over the Darwin rates areas, Darwin wants to take over the Darwin rates area. There is all of this static in the background.
The reality is I am not changing any boundaries. You got your little headline in the paper. That was all wonderful, but it was completely without truth. I have no intention of giving Holtze to Palmerston at this stage. I have not talked to any of them.
Ms Fyles: At this stage?
Mr TOLLNER: I have not had a conversation – here we go, we have the member for Nightcliff chiming in. How is your imaginary island going? Are you still protesting? Maybe the member for Nelson is taking the same tactic. He is promoting imaginary boundary changes.
Mr Wood: No, check the NT News Monday.
Mr TOLLNER: Check the NT News Monday. All of these things are all imaginary, but the opposition and the Independent will happily say this is what is really happening and there is a great conspiracy going on, a great conspiracy against Litchfield Council and that we are trying to steal land from Litchfield. That is not true.
Mr Wood: I did not say you were.
Mr TOLLNER: I think you referred to the government. That would refer to the executive arm of government. That would refer to the Minister for Local Government and Regions, who would be me. I am not aware of any discussions I have been involved in anywhere agreeing to any boundary changes, apart from the Victoria Daly de-amalgamation ...
Mr Wood: Read the NT News.
Mr TOLLNER: Member for Nelson, I know you were very careful in the way you spoke about the Victoria Daly de-amalgamation. In your heart of hearts, you are probably a supporter of it, having sat on the transition committee and seen the way everything was done reasonably above board. There were many doubting Thomases prior to us doing that. Many people looked at us out of the corner of their eyes and thought, ‘I wonder what these guys are really up to?’ However, as the member for Nelson has realised, there are no funny games; we are trying to get on with business. We want to do what people want to happen.
In relation to how we are changing the Darwin Rates Act, it will be called the Territory Rates Act. I have been very upfront in saying why. We all support the principle, I think, that local government should exist in the Northern Territory. If we support that principle, then we should occupy our minds with how we pay for it.
At the moment – I find it difficult to put any other word on it – there is a number of freeloaders in the system. Freeloaders are people who, largely, live in unincorporated areas who, quite rightly as the member for Nelson pointed out, use services in Darwin, Palmerston and other municipal areas which they do not pay for. They are paid for by the ratepayers of those communities. Meanwhile, the ratepayers of those communities receive no services when they visit many unincorporated areas. If you want local government services, you should pay for local government services.
I have been very upfront about rating Aboriginal land. Similarly, I have much empathy with the views of people in Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs when they say, ‘We pay rates in our communities, and we have people coming in from outside communities who do not pay rates. What is more, if I want to go to their community, I cannot even access it. I have to get a permit to get on to that land. Whilst my community is freely accessible, theirs are not.’ I agree that Indigenous Territorians are the ones who most want local government services because local government, for them, is the most important tier of government, as it is the most accessible. We should bear that in mind.
However, if we want financially sustainable local government in the Northern Territory, we have to find a model, somehow, that makes it sustainable.
It was interesting to listen to the member for Barkly talk about the Victoria Daly and West Daly Regional Councils not being sustainable. Very few of the regional councils in the Northern Territory are financially sustainable. There was a hullaballoo a couple of weeks ago about this Deloitte report; it said local government is financially unsustainable. My response to that is, whoopee! It has been unsustainable since the year dot.
When you have other Australians having to pay the rates for people in outlying and remote areas, it is obviously unsustainable. People on that land should be paying their way, the same as other people in other parts of the country pay their way. Until we come to that realisation, it will be very difficult to make local government sustainable in these regional areas. I am very keen to see land councils, land trusts and local government work constructively together to find a way to make local government financially sustainable into the long term. Local government is incredibly important to people living in the bush and I want to support that.
Since coming to government we have done our bit to make local government more sustainable. In my capacity as Treasurer, I have overseen more than $10m in additional money going into the local government area, $5m to make councils more sustainable and an additional $5m was given to support local authorities and the works they do in their local communities.
The Labor government, when it created super shires, took away the people’s voice and ability to deliver anything in their local communities by centralising local government. We have tried to decentralise it whilst maintaining economies of scale through shared service agreements, etcetera. We have tried to put local government back into the communities through the initiation of local authorities. Having local authorities on the ground gives people a real say in their communities. Not only do they have a real say, but with that contribution of $5m distributed amongst local authorities they have real purpose and can make decisions, spend money in their communities and improve services. To suggest we are not strengthening local government is wrong.
I find the idea of taxation without representation from Labor as a reason to oppose this laughable, given the fact it set up the Darwin Waterfront and excluded it from Darwin city council. I find the fact rates go directly to the Northern Territory government from the Darwin Waterfront completely at odds with what they have said today.
The member for Nhulunbuy might believe we have short memories in this House. Perhaps we do, but they certainly last more than a couple of years. We remember the Labor government excising the Darwin Waterfront from Darwin city council land and charging rates that went directly to government. There is a little hypocrisy there.
Renaming the Darwin Rates Act as the Territory Rates Act is due. There are areas which require refreshing, as the member for Barkly pointed out, but there is also a need to change it up. Member for Barkly, this may well interest you: because of our extensive land release program there will very shortly be another 3200 dwellings built, which will come under the current Darwin Rates Act area. I will say that again, member for Barkly, so you do not miss it: another 3200 dwellings will be constructed in the Darwin Rates Act area; that is the area between Darwin and Palmerston …
Mr McCarthy: I know that. They are the same ones we were working on.
Mr TOLLNER: That is right, but it needs to change because if we build 3200 new dwellings there we can only currently rate them as we rate the 260 industrial properties in that area.
We are keen, member for Nelson, to ensure we have a system where we can vary those rates, because we do not want to charge new houses the same rates as we charge industrial ratepayers in the area. We can have variable rates. There is no suggestion at this stage that we will instigate rates on any other unincorporated areas. My view, contrary to the member for Barkly, who talks about $650 per year for somebody living in Marrakai, is that we would charge them a nominal rate, perhaps $50 per year, so they become used to the idea they are living in a rateable area, and nothing more than that. We hope the idea of taxation without representation will take hold in some of these unincorporated areas and we have those people calling to be part of a local government area, rather than resisting it.
It is an interesting concept the member for Nelson and others talk about when they say, ‘There has been no consultation, you should talk to people about raising rates’. I asked my good friend the Minister for Education, ‘What if I came to you and said that I want to charge you an extra $500 per year in rates. What would you say?’ I cannot repeat what he said, but it was basically no. I said, ‘Well, what if it was $100 per year?’ He said no again. I then asked him about charging an extra $20 per year, and he was not interested.
That is consultation and it is fair to say, member for Nelson, when you ask someone to pay something they are not currently paying, they will not want to. Your response, generally, is the same.
If, however, we gave them the idea they are paying something and they might want to have a say in how that money is being spent, as opposed to not having a say, then the idea of local government taking hold in some of these areas becomes much easier. Ultimately, member for Nelson, your idea of local government and my idea of local government are very similar. We have different views on how we might get there, but the end goal is the same.
With other members opposite I am not sure, because I do not know whether they believe in local government or not, whether they think the Northern Territory should have a system of local government or it is a pain in the neck and something we would ditch if we possibly could. I have no dislike for people with that view. There is a number of people in our community, probably a majority of people in our community, who think we are over-governed and one level of government should go. That Labor wants to see the back of local government would not put it at odds with many people in the community.
However, whilst probably in some places, such as the urban areas of Darwin, we have a few too many politicians, etcetera, when you get into remote communities, where there are sparse numbers of people and few politicians, local government takes on a level of importance not seen in the townships and cities of the Northern Territory.
Mr Wood: I move we dissolve Fong Lim.
Mr TOLLNER: Member for Nelson, we should have the debate as to whether we dissolve Fong Lim and Nelson. It would be very interesting to understand the views of people in this place, whether they believe we are over-governed and what level of government we should get rid of, whether it is the second or third tier. Ultimately, they are debates for another time and place.
My bill is about the Darwin Rates Act, how we can change it to make sure it is contemporary and will meet the needs of an expanding community and also meet the needs of the minister for Lands and Planning, who wants to build more than 3000 dwellings in the current Darwin rates area. That is fundamentally what this bill is about.
As I said, there should not be any surprises in this for anybody in this room. I have been upfront and open about this. It has been a bold step to suggest my desire to see rates paid on Indigenous land. It is a bold step to say there should be rates paid on other unincorporated areas around the Territory. Having said that, the government does not intend in any way to utilise this legislation to raise further revenue, etcetera.
We are currently focused solely on the Darwin Rates Act area, which is the area between Darwin and Palmerston, but it does give us flexibility in future terms, rather than this term, to start discussing and looking at ways of having people in unincorporated areas pay something towards the services they receive, and to start talking about how we might be able to levy rates on Aboriginal land where services are most needed and where people demand the most representation.
The Assembly divided:
- Ayes 11 Noes 10
Mr Barrett Ms Anderson
Mr Chandler Ms Fyles
Mr Conlan Mr Kurrupuwu
Mr Elferink Ms Lawrie
Mrs Finocchiaro Mr McCarthy
Mr Giles Ms Manison
Mr Higgins Mr Vatskalis
Mrs Lambley Mr Vowles
Mrs Price Ms Walker
Mr Styles Mr Wood
Mr Tollner
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time
Mr TOLLNER (Local Government and Regions) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I want to talk about something the minister raised during the second reading debate about the rating of Aboriginal land. Whilst I am not opposed to that, if you go down this path we ought to solve the issue of road ownership. The member for Arafura, the other day, mentioned roads on Bathurst Island.
Generally speaking, local government looks after public roads. One of the issues that has concerned me for a long time is that someone has to sort this out. There are roads in Aboriginal communities which require permits, therefore, technically, they are not public roads. There are other roads which are gazetted, therefore, they are public roads, so when you talk about rating people and bringing people into the local government arena you cannot speak about rates alone; you need to look at formalising the jurisdiction of a local government council area. I have been concerned for a long time that local government funds are spent on what are, technically, private roads.
As I said before, once upon a time they spent money on private roads on cattle stations, but I understand that has stopped. A road on a cattle station is the responsibility of that cattle station; I stand corrected if I am wrong in that area.
I thought I would note during the third reading debate that if you are looking at the issue of Aboriginal land, one matter is consultation, which is what we were talking about before, and the second is working through the issues that, obviously, will be complex because you have different leasing arrangements in these communities. You have land trusts and land rights legislation, but you also have the issue of what local governments’ responsibilities are on Aboriginal land which is, technically, private land.
I am not necessarily making judgments on those issues, but I hope if the government is considering rating it looks at a much broader vision of what its intentions are. You have already developed a new council at West Daly.
You mentioned my name in despatches; I am not against it and I have never been against smaller councils. My issue has been around the viability of those councils. The Deloitte report mentioned that it will cost an extra $2m to $3m to run that council. My argument was that government should have looked at the viability before it put its hand up for splitting a council because, regardless of whether you love these councils, they already have the administration and processes set up to run them. I thought I would mention that to you.
The other issue you raised was about whether the government was to take over Holtze. I refer to an article in the NT News, where two councillors from Palmerston had spoken to the Chief Minister, and he referred them to the minister for Lands and Planning, who is also the minister for changing names. There were two issues involved. People were already presuming this would be a Palmerston suburb, therefore, there would be a name change. The second is there was a map already issued showing a fairly large land grab that some people in Palmerston think would be appropriate to take away from Litchfield Shire. I have not mentioned you in despatches because I use the article from the NT News as the basis of my complaint. All I am saying is that people on that side of the highway should hold their horses. There is a lot more discussion about the hospital than worrying about whether Palmerston wants to take over the boundaries.
Mr Deputy Speaker, these were issues which needed a response.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Midterm Statement
Midterm Statement
Mr GILES (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, the Country Liberal Party was elected by the people of the Northern Territory on 25 August 2012 to lead the Territory out of the mess created by those opposite. We promised the people we would make the Territory a better place for everyone, and we are succeeding. Two years ago, the Country Liberals made 174 election commitments, and it is my pleasure to inform the House that 98% of those have been actioned. More than half have already been delivered and the remainder are being dealt with. Unlike those opposite, we track our promises and the results. We do not fudge the facts like the Labor Party; we make a commitment, plan it and deliver it. It is open, honest and accountable government at work.
We promised to reduce debt and we have. When the CLP came to power the Territory’s coffers were bare. The finances had been run down to such a point that it was difficult to fund any new initiatives to rebuild the economy. The Labor Party, with then Treasurer Delia Lawrie, had done its best to bankrupt the Territory. However, in May this year we delivered a net operating surplus a full two years ahead of schedule. By reducing waste, tightening out belts and staying focused on the outcomes, we have reduced the debt burden on the Territory by $1.3bn and reduced interest payments to service that debt by $55m a year. Let me repeat that: we have reduced our interest payments by more than $55m a year, or $4.5m per month. This is an outstanding achievement allowing us to get on with business and build a future which generates wealth and jobs for everyone.
We promised to plan for the future and we have. The Northern Territory government has taken the lead in the push to develop northern Australia. The Territory is ideally placed to supply more goods and services to Asia and the rest of Australia, and we are building on that for the future. We have opened the Northern Australia Development Office to spearhead the Territory’s role in this development, and laid the foundation for what is likely to become the longest period of sustained economic growth in the Territory’s history. We are working with our counterparts in Western Australia and Queensland, as well as the federal government, and I am pleased to say we are right on track. By unlocking and developing the full potential of northern Australia we are creating prosperity and jobs for everyone. We are increasing economic output, exports, improving our balance of trade and ensuring the Territory takes its place as one of Australia’s top economies.
This government is keeping its commitment to consult with Territorians about how they want to see the Territory grow. We held community meetings in Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and Nhulunbuy earlier this year, and feedback was extremely positive. We have just completed regional summits in Katherine and Tennant Creek, with feedback from both, as well as meetings with local residents who really appreciated being involved in the process and having their say about development of northern Australia.
Questions from the floor were wide-ranging and included live exports, land tenure, telecommunications and agribusiness. There is recognition that the Territory’s infrastructure must be improved to attract new development and that our northern Australia development plan is the way to make that happen.
I thank everyone who attended those forums, including ministers Westra van Holthe and Conlan, who did a fantastic job in Katherine and Tennant Creek, explaining this government’s plan for the future. Our northern Australia development website has been viewed almost 12 000 times; that is an average of 40 new visitors a day. The Northern Australia Development Office has hosted meetings with more than 650 people since opening in May, working with organisations such as the Northern Territory Seafood Council, the International Business Council, the Planning Commission and the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association to ensure the success of the development of the north.
The Country Liberals plan for the development of northern Australia will secure the Territory’s economic future well into this century. It encompasses the entire Territory and will create jobs, business opportunities and prosperity for all. We are succeeding where others have failed.
We promised to grow the economy and we have. The Territory’s economy grew by 5.6% to $19.9bn in 2012-13. This was the highest growth rate of all jurisdictions and well above the national growth rate of 2.6% and, according to CommSec, at the moment we are 36% above the average. Deloitte Access Economics forecasts that the Territory’s growth will continue to outpace other jurisdictions for the foreseeable future. In the year to March 2014, engineering construction work in the Territory increased by 41.6% to $4.7bn, the highest annual level on record and the highest growth rate of all jurisdictions. The Territory has also recorded 14 consecutive months of growth in trend retail trade turnover to June 2014.
We have established the Office of Asian Engagement, Trade and Investment within the Department of the Chief Minister to support Territory firms in building new business relationships and seizing the best opportunities in the region. Cabinet is now the principal mechanism governing Asian relations and trade matters to ensure they are managed efficiently across all government portfolios.
Darwin is closer to the capital cities of Timor-Leste, Papua New Guinea, Indonesia and Brunei than it is to Canberra. Asia consumes more than 50% of the world’s total food production and that demand is increasing rapidly.
By 2030, Asia will represent 66% of the global middle-class population and 59% of middle-class consumption. China alone has to feed 21% of the world’s population on 8.5% of the world’s arable land and is losing 2.5 million hectares each year to urbanisation. That creates enormous opportunities and the potential for increased agribusiness and exports, with a demand for a greater range and supply of quality produce.
As they become wealthier, our northern neighbours are demanding a greater range and supply of quality produce, and this presents the Territory with a unique opportunity. We are one of the few places in Australia with a capacity to significantly increase food for export production. We are investing $3.75m to promote international trade and Asian engagement to create more investment opportunities for the Territory.
This includes the appointment of a Northern Territory Commissioner for Indonesia and ASEAN, based in Jakarta, to strengthen our relationships in the region. We are promoting the Territory as a jurisdiction of choice for investors in developing new business links within the region via a suite of online investment guides written in Bahasa Indonesia, Mandarin, Japanese and English.
We are exploring opportunities to diversify workforce and migration strategies to support small businesses and targeted local industries. We are removing red tape and encouraging new investment.
I have travelled to Timor-Leste, Indonesia, Singapore, Japan, China and Vietnam to build on our strong links within the region. These talks have already opened up other potential industries, including the live cattle buffalo trade to Vietnam, with the potential to sell up to 10 000 head per annum.
The Territory is expending its cattle exports by connecting with new markets in the region and will soon diversify into packaged beef when the AACo abattoir comes on line later this year.
We have signed memorandums of understanding with Ho Chi Minh City and Haiphong to promote trade and investment with both of these major Vietnamese cities. A trilateral agreement is being developed by the national governments of Timor-Leste, Indonesia and Australia to build on the strong links between these three countries.
With the Northern Territory taking a central role in this relationship, a ministerial forum between Timor-Leste and the Northern Territory is scheduled for December 2014.
It was my pleasure to welcome a record number of participants and exhibitors to Northern Territory Resources Week at a reception last night. NT Resources Week includes the South East Asia Australia Offshore and Onshore Conference – SEAAOC – as part of the inaugural Building the Territory Conference. All four halls of the Darwin Convention Centre are being used for the first time to accommodate almost 200 exhibition stands and more than 1500 conference attendees.
Interest in investing in the Territory is at an all-time high. In July, Prime Minister Shinz Abe confirmed Australia is one of the most important suppliers of minerals and energy to Japan. The new Japan-Australia Economic Partnership Agreement is the most significant economic accord ever struck between the two countries, and is particularly significant for the Territory, given that over 50% of the Territory’s exports go to Japan.
Darwin will host the very first Australia Japan Joint Business Conference to be held outside of Japan in October this year. This is a great honour and provides a significant opportunity for the Northern Territory to showcase trade and investment opportunities to some of the most influential companies involved in Japan-Australia trade.
We are also looking at new opportunities for the Northern Territory in the growing market of South Korea, following the signing of the Korea-Australia Free Trade Agreement earlier this year.
We promised to strengthen law and order, and we have. Crime continues to drop across the Northern Territory, despite Labor trying to stop it. We have stopped the crime spree that was growing under Labor at an alarming rate and we have reversed it.
Property offences have dropped by more than 16.4% across the Territory since the Country Liberals came to government. House break-ins are down 25.6%, commercial break-ins are down 16.4%, motor vehicle theft is down 15.4%, general theft is down 12.2% and property damage is down 18.2%.
These figures speak for themselves. Labor – particularly the opposition spokesperson and wannabe leader, Michael Gunner, the member for Fannie Bay – often talk about our commitment to drive down crime by 10% a year and whether or not we have met it. We unashamedly set the target high – to reduce crime by 10% a year. It is something we hope to achieve. To the detractors in the Labor Party who say, ‘Motor vehicle theft has only dropped by 15.4% in two years, not 20%’, I say it is an outstanding achievement. We fought hard for an enormous target and we are striving hard to achieve it. In some areas we have gotten above 20% in two years and in other areas we are damn close to it, but most of all we are driving down crime in the Northern Territory, something Territorians are happy with.
In two years we have arrested and reversed a Labor Party crime spree. A real government came to power with real solutions on 25 August 2012. Our full suite of alcohol measures, including alcohol mandatory treatment, Alcohol Protection Orders, intensive temporary beat locations and Darwin Safe have been in effect since Christmas 2013, and we have seen dramatic reductions in personal crime.
The June crime statistics show assaults are down 14% Territory-wide, and alcohol-related assaults are down 18% across the Territory in six months alone. Alcohol-related assaults are down a whopping 27% in Alice Springs, 15% in Katherine and a staggering 47% in Tennant Creek over the same period. I expect the member for Barkly to congratulate us on our success.
Alcohol mandatory treatment is delivering on our promise to provide rehabilitation to those who abuse or misuse alcohol. We want to break the cycle of that alcohol abuse. More than 400 people have been referred to alcohol mandatory treatment to date, which is helping to turn the tide of damage caused by alcohol abuse, saving lives and changing lives for the better. By the start of 2015 we will have permanent and secure AMT facilities at Berrimah in Darwin, in Alice Springs and in Tennant Creek, with construction to start on new Katherine facility later in the year. You watch Katherine turn around once we open that facility.
We are also in the final stages of producing the first ever comprehensive domestic violence reduction strategy that will incorporate 10 agencies across government, removing the silos and working in partnership. In the 12 months to June this year there were 4453 victims of domestic violence, and those people need our help. In government, Labor tried to treat domestic violence like a misdemeanour, swept it under the carpet and left women and children to be beaten in their own homes. They did not prosecute the offenders of domestic violence, and they did not protect the women and children who were the victims of domestic violence. Enough is enough.
Minister Bess Price knows only too well the pain and suffering caused by this terrible and violent crime, and she made a huge contribution to this policy we will release. We will tackle domestic violence head on and give government agencies all the support they need to remove this scourge. Similar to the roll-out of alcohol mandatory treatment, we know Labor and those who like to be outspoken from the left will attack us for tackling domestic violence, but putting women and children at the forefront of protection is what this is all about.
It has been two years since the Country Liberals came to government, and in that time the only thing we have heard from Labor is the same old thought bubbles that failed every Territorian. As we roll out our two-year mid-term report, it is important to look at what Labor has done in those two years. They keep crying that someone else is taking credit for their plans. Which plans do they want to take credit for? The plan to fail, the plan to deceive, the plan to bankrupt the Territory? Which one of those plans will they take credit for? We know they were the ones driving up debt, crime and unemployment. They have nothing to contribute to the policy debate. After two years in opposition they have no policy, nothing at all. Labor failed when in government, nearly sent the Territory broke and now it is failing as an opposition. One thing is common in all of this: the Leader of the Opposition.
The Territory is the jewel in Australia’s economic crown. The resources sector plays a vital part in the Territory’s economy and will continue to do so into the future. It is estimated that the Territory has reserves of more than 240 trillion cubic feet of unconventional gas in six basins. Over 90% of the Territory is granted or under application for petroleum exploration, with $130m committed to onshore petroleum exploration programs for 2014 to 2018. The industry rule of thumb is that one trillion cubic feet of natural gas is enough to power a city of one million people for 20 years. To compare, INPEX is tapping approximately 13 trillion cubic feet. We have a gas pipeline running the length of the Territory to Alice Springs, and by building a gas pipeline connecting Moomba in South Australia with, for example, Alice Springs, we could sell gas into the domestic market in New South Wales or Victoria. We could also help with the international issues around supplying gas, or at least help to alleviate them. Importantly, this will open the Northern Territory to further exploration and development, creating more jobs and economic opportunities for Territorians, particularly in regional and remote areas.
We are in discussion with a number of groups interested in investing in the pipeline project and working closely with the South Australian government to make it a reality. The government is developing the terms of reference for a feasibility study, corridor identification and other opportunities to undertake work to speed up the pipeline construction.
To ensure onshore gas fields are managed correctly, this government is investing almost $1m to support an inquiry into hydraulic fracturing in the Northern Territory, and we expect to have the results of that inquiry by the end of the year.
Darwin is increasingly becoming a strategic hub for servicing the region’s expanding oil and gas, marine and Defence industries. Yesterday I had the pleasure of officially opening the new Marine Supply Base, a world-class facility which will help cater for growing industry demand for maintenance and logistics support in northern Australia. It adds to the crucial infrastructure driving the economic growth of the Northern Territory and helps unlock our economic potential.
We expect significant growth in the gas and oil industries. In order to capture this market opportunity the Land Development Corporation is master planning the marine industry park on waterfront land at East Arm. Consultation has commenced with prospective tenants for the park, of which a number have registered an interest in establishing marine maintenance and service facilities.
There are currently 15 projects which hold major project status in the Territory, 15 projects which are significant to the Territory economy as a whole, for regional economic development, or both. That means projects which create jobs, capital expenditure, business opportunities and a future for our kids. I can update that there are now 16 projects, with Tallis Holdings, the potential salt mine south of Alice Springs in proximity to Maryvale Station, or Titjikala, recently being granted major project status.
Of the major projects, the standout is the $US34bn Ichthys LNG project, which is the largest private investment in the Northern Territory’s history. It is the first Japanese operated LNG project in the world and France’s biggest ever investment in Australia. We have celebrated the halfway point in the project with dredging complete, one of two 30 m high LNG storage tanks nearly complete at Blaydin Point, the hull of the floating production and storage offloading facility built and the SEMAC-1 pipe-laying platform working in Darwin Harbour – or just outside of it – now.
More than $5bn of spending has been committed in the Northern Territory, with 150 locally-based companies awarded subcontracts or supplier purchase orders. We continue to fight to ensure Territorians benefit from these projects through direct engagement and employment.
The Ichthys project has underpinned one of the biggest economic booms in the Territory’s history. It has cemented the Territory’s reputation for delivering budget resource projects on time.
Toll Holdings is building the Ichthys offshore logistics supply base at Darwin’s East Arm business park precinct, which is due to be fully operational by early 2015.
We are in talks with other major resource companies about future projects which will build on the Territory’s proven track record as a reliable source of LNG.
Another project holding major project status is the world’s first floating LNG facility being built by Shell. This will be the biggest vessel ever built in the world. It is a project which has the potential to be a game changer in the gas industry and is being watched closely by other international companies.
Drilling of seven production wells at Prelude will be completed by 2015, and this project is expected to come on stream in 2017. Shell is currently constructing a purpose-built $25m warehouse to service Prelude.
Interest in the Territory’s gas industry is incredibly strong. There are more than 1500 people attending NT Resources Week and the South East Asia Australia Offshore and Onshore Conference in Darwin this week, wanting to create new business in the Territory. There is no doubt there is more investment to come, and I look forward to making some announcements in that area.
Mining projects include Minemakers, Australia’s largest known phosphate deposit at Wonarah. Arafura Resources is targeting production of rare earth oxide, equivalent to around 10% of the world’s supply, at its Nolans project. TNG is developing one of the largest new vanadium- titanium-iron projects in Australia, 50 km west of Barrow Creek.
Another project on the major projects list is the Ord River expansion. This has the potential to open up enormous areas to new agribusiness ventures. As I have already mentioned, the demand for produce and product in Asia is expanding rapidly. The Ord Development Unit has been established and native title regulations for the Knox, Weaber and Keep River plains are under way.
The Kimberly Agricultural Investment company is planning a substantial sugar export industry, including a $400m mill. The potential is enormous.
On the retail front, another major development with major project status is the Casuarina Square expansion, which provides for additional retail spaces, restaurants, student accommodation and car parking. The Development Consent Authority has approved three development applications associated with the expansion, and the construction of student accommodation is already under way. By giving the expansion major projects status I am able to personally oversee the development and facilitate any necessary government involvement. It is just another way the government is getting the Territory moving again and getting Labor out of the way. There is only one reason to expand Casuarina Square, and that is because the Country Liberals are driving the economy.
These projects, and many others like them, are the future of the Northern Territory. As we develop the north and build on our strong business ties with Asia this list will get longer, creating even more jobs and business opportunities. To me, this is what it is all about – a future for our kids.
We promised to open the Territory for business, and we have. To make new investment a reality we are doing what we can to streamline native title processes, negotiating one-stop shops for environmental assessments to reduce red and green tape, reviewing work health and safety laws in the Northern Territory and working on key areas of national reform, including infrastructure, deregulation competitiveness, productivity and reform of the federation and taxation systems.
This government is aware that the failed policies of the previous Labor government, now in opposition, put pressure on the cost of living. In the last six months we have dragged inflation back to 3.3%. It was at 3.9%, we brought it back to 3.6% and it is now back to 3.3%.
We are releasing land faster than any Territory government in history. We are investing more than $84m in new residential land releases this financial year to drive down the cost of living and make home ownership affordable for all. We have increased the First Home Owner Grant for new homes by $1000 to $26 000 and altered eligibility to encourage the construction of new housing. New housing creates more jobs and helps keep the cost of living down by increasing the supply of homes in a supply and demand environment.
We have reduced the cost of childcare services by increasing the childcare subsidies by 10% and expanding the scheme to include family daycare.
We have added an extra $5m to the Sport Voucher Scheme to get more children off the couch and into recreational, cultural and sporting activities. The vouchers have increased from $75 to $200 per child, and we have expanded the scheme to include more activities such as dance, music lessons, arts and ‘Learn to Swim’ lessons for children up to five years of age. This will encourage our children to live healthier lives and reduce the cost to families. We have doubled the Back to School voucher to $150 per child to ease the burden on families.
It is important the bush shares equality in the benefits of this extraordinary economic growth. A substantial increase in the Indigenous workforce continues to be a priority for this government, especially in remote areas. We have the highest workforce participation rate in the country, but we must underpin the capacity of Territorians in regional areas to participate in the wider economy.
We are supporting and supplementing regional economic development opportunities, programs and initiatives at every turn. We are spending a record $377.8m on roads this year because we know better roads will open up the Territory to new investments and opportunities, which will mean more jobs and more hope for people in regional remote areas. I have established Department of the Chief Minister offices in the East Arnhem, Big Rivers, Barkly and Central Australia regions to drive economic development outcomes and to ensure the development of the Northern Territory benefits all Territorians.
The Country Liberals team and I are removing road blocks to regional development and pursuing real economic opportunities within a number of communities. There has been strong interest in places such as the Tiwi Islands, Wadeye and Ngukurr. We have entered into a partnership agreement with the Tiwi Land Council to progress economic development.
We have also supported a partnership between Japanese multinational company Mitsui and the Tiwi Plantations Corporation, which has led to an MOU with Mitsui & Co, Australia’s fourth-largest woodchip exporter.
It was great to catch up with representatives of Mitsui last night at the cocktail party held in Parliament House for NT Resources Week and re-establish those friendships which brought about the commencement of the Mitsui partnership.
We have also brought an affordable ferry service to the Tiwi Islands, which carried nearly 5500 passengers last year. I am sure the member for Arafura is happy to see that Tiwi ferry service continuing. We are exploring the potential for ferry pontoons and a tourism precinct on the Tiwi Islands as well, and I look forward to being there to open that.
We are driving economic change in remote areas like never before. There are some who say we should have a silver bullet, click our fingers and change it overnight. This requires substantial, long-term investment and reform. We will achieve it, we will continue to roll-out new policies and we will continue to drive change for the future.
More than 40% of the total capital works budget for this financial year is being spent on improving infrastructure in communities and supporting regional development. We have completed an economic plan for Big Rivers and we are working on a new one for Tennant Creek. We have opened a $3.7m emergency department in Tennant Creek and a new GP service at the hospital.
We have delivered new bush police stations in Gapuwiyak and Ramingining, and we are now building new facilities in Arlparra, Pirlangimpi, Mount Liebig, Areyonga and Robinson River. We are accelerating the shire reform process with the introduction of new regional councils, served by local authorities made up of local people. We continue to hold out the olive branch; we want more regional councils to be established, breaking down from the old shire model and giving back to the people in the bush.
We have just completed the most comprehensive review of Indigenous education in 15 years to give our bush kids a future. The government is committed to improving educational outcomes for kids in remote areas, because we know a good education is the key to a good job and a future free of welfare dependence. The Country Liberals have committed $40m to implement recommendations from the Wilson Indigenous education review.
Pride is important, and owning your own home helps to build a culture that is proud and confident of its future. The government is committed to selling up to 50% of all remote public housing back to tenants in communities where there is a 40- or 99-year lease available. This will help restore pride in home ownership and further break the cycle of dependence on government. I do not expect to be knocked down at the door by people wanting to buy their own home, but it is a pathway to a future opportunity, and every person who comes through that door will be provided that service. It may take time to sell our first, second and third, but when we get to 20, 50 and 100 we will start seeing real change in people’s lives.
We said we would build a better future for all Territorians, and what better way than a better education and owning your own home.
The regional centres of the Territory can rest assured the government is focusing on ensuring everyone benefits from northern development. Following Rio Tinto’s decision to suspend production at the Gove alumina refinery, this government has been working tirelessly to support the Nhulunbuy community and local businesses to make a positive transition, despite opposition by the member for Nhulunbuy. The government remains committed to the township as East Arnhem’s economic and services hub. Very early on we made the commitment to spend more than $1bn over five years, to 2017-18, on services and infrastructure. The existing asset base on the Gove peninsula is a remarkable resource and we are working with Rio Tinto Alcan, industry bodies and regional stakeholders to build on it.
Defence spending in northern Australia has been increasing steadily for the past 15 years. Defence spent $1.42bn in the Territory in 2012-13, or around 7% of gross state product, the highest proportion of GSP of all the states and territories. Our location makes the Northern Territory the Australian Defence Force’s strategic edge. We currently have around 10% of Australia’s permanent Defence Force personnel and two thirds of the Army’s combat power based in northern Australia. We expect increased operations at Tindal and a squadron of the new Joint Strike Fighter aircraft to be based in the Top End.
The new Rheinmetall MAN heavy vehicles will begin arriving in Australia in 2016, with many of them destined for Darwin, creating new opportunities for business to service and support these vehicles. New wharf facilities at HMAS Coonawarra are under consideration by Defence. The US-Australia Force Posture Agreement signed by President Obama and Prime Minister Tony Abbott in June this year has put in place the formal structure required to increase the rotation of US Marines through Darwin and to embark on trilateral military exercises in Southeast Asia, something firmly welcomed by the Country Liberals, but not by Labor.
It also lays the foundations for new alliance defence initiatives yet to be announced. I plan to travel to the United States in the near future to promote this government’s position that the Marines should utilise local industry to support the Marine rotational force in Darwin, wherever practical and wherever possible. This includes the supply of rations and the warehousing and maintenance of equipment.
I also look forward to visiting the US to provide support to the US government for the Marines based in the Northern Territory for their rotation and to extend that support not only to the Marines, but also the Air Force and Navy.
The Northern Territory government has actively encouraged the continued growth of Defence in the NT, and the newly-created position of Director-General Strategic Defence has been tasked with ensuring the Territory’s position is front and centre as the Australian government develops its Defence White Paper.
I have spent a great deal of time today talking about money and budgets, but one of the things Territorians hold dear to their hearts is our unique lifestyle. In June this year the government created Festivals NT, a festival calendar that builds on existing events and incorporates new sporting, business and cultural elements, many of them with an Asian flavour. Festivals NT is already proving to be an enormous success, with an expanded program of events for the Darwin Festival, work on the Alice Desert Festival and supporting visual arts.
There is plenty more to come, including the inaugural arts forum TRADING IDEAS: Creative Investment, between the Northern Territory and the Asia Pacific, which will be held at the end of October. TRADING IDEAS will bring together arts, government, business, trade and education to create new networks and opportunities to build on our trade links, access new markets, deepen our engagement in the Asia Pacific region and grow sustainable, creative and culturally diverse communities.
Festivals NT will continue to build on existing festivals across the Territory, with a focus on Asian engagement. A new creative director will be appointed within the Department of the Chief Minister to oversee Festivals NT and develop a signature event to celebrate Territory Day in the coming years. Festivals NT is cementing the Territory as a gateway between Asia and Australia, as a meeting place for conducting business, a destination of choice for tourists, a place where the arts are showcased and where sporting events and competitions are expanding. I am also working with the Parliamentary Secretary for the Chief Minister, the member for Drysdale, on how we can expand opportunities for the Darwin Symphony Orchestra. I look forward to announcing, hopefully very soon, that the DSO will perform a special one-off show in Tennant Creek; that is a work in progress. I am sure the member for Barkly will complain about that like everything else.
In closing, it is my pleasure to stand here as the leader of an exceptional team of ministers and members. In two short years, this team has made the hard decisions to get the Territory back on track and set a clear plan for the future. It is now time to make more hard decisions to move the Territory forward even more rapidly.
The Treasurer will today explain, in detail, the measures he has taken to build a stronger economy. The Attorney-General will explain how a tough stand on law and order is working. The Health minister will inform the House about our plans to build a brand new state-of-the-art hospital. The Minister for Education will talk about extra spending on school infrastructure and a focus on outcomes, not inputs. The Mines and Energy minister will focus on exciting developments within the gas and pastoral sectors. The Tourism and Sports minister will speak about the fantastic work being done to boost our tourism numbers, the great sporting events we now enjoy and how that partners up with some of the biggest economies in this nation. The Infrastructure minister will address our growing list of exciting new projects occurring right across the Northern Territory and the time line for those to be rolled out. The Minister for Parks and Wildlife will outline the excellent work being done to preserve and protect our world-class parks, investing in the environment, but also seeing strong economic outcomes.
I could go on; I want to talk about the members for Blain, Daly, Drysdale and Goyder and the hard work every member of this team is doing for their electorates, the team of government and, most importantly, for the Northern Territory. Ultimately we are a team, and I want the team to share in today’s midterm statement to parliament, because as a team we are strong, and with a dedicated public service, we are delivering.
I thank the public service for its hard work and tenacity. The transition from one government to another is never easy. It has been two years, we have put out strident reform and we have had strong outcomes and performance. The future looks extremely bright for the Northern Territory, and we will continue to deliver and prosper.
On a last note I personally thank the police force. The police have been instrumental in assisting government to drive down crime. Put in partnership with those working in alcohol mandatory treatment and the health sector, those three tripartite services have provided exceptional leadership, responsiveness to government and have made the Territory a safer place, fundamentally changed people’s lives from alcohol abuse and misuse and, above all, protected so many women from the scourge of domestic violence.
As a government we are making our promises a reality and are leading the Territory to a prosperous future.
Madam Speaker, I also thank you for your service to this Assembly for the first two years of government. Your strong stewardship of this Assembly has provided good guidance and excellence in democracy in the Northern Territory, and I look forward to working with you into the future.
I move that the Assembly take note of this statement.
MESSAGE FROM ADMINISTRATOR
Superannuation Legislation Amendment and Repeal Bill
Superannuation Legislation Amendment and Repeal Bill
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise receipt of a message from the Administrator concerning the Superannuation Legislation Amendment and Repeal Bill presented this morning. Notwithstanding the requirement of Standing Order 233 that the message for a financial proposal be announced before a bill is presented, I have been informed that the government has legal advice which indicates the message being read prior to the vote being taken will suffice.
In the message the Administrator recommends to the Legislative Assembly a bill for an act to amend the Superannuation Act to insert provisions that provide for the payment from the Consolidated Holding Authority of amounts currently held in respect of unclaimed superannuation benefits, which are to be paid to the Commonwealth to be held in accordance with the Superannuation (Unclaimed Money and Lost Members) Act 1999 (Cth).
MOTION
Note Statement – Midterm Statement
Note Statement – Midterm Statement
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I will reply to a shambolic mid-point statement by the Chief Minister that sums up what his government is really like. I will quote a comment from a local business person, who said, ‘I keep reading this everywhere – develop the north, they say. How about supporting the people and the businesses who have already started developing the north?’
This Chief Minister, as we know, was not elected to the position. He took the job from a colleague who, as everyone in this Chamber would know, was an honourable man in the way he went about his business and signed up to several pledges when he was Opposition Leader; I am referring, of course, to the former member for Blain, Terry Mills. At the midway point of this government it is useful to look at some of those:
1. Lower the cost of living: the CLP inherited inflation at 2.1%; it hit the peak of 3.9% and has just pegged slightly back from that. It has doubled under the CLP. In real terms, what does that mean? Families and business are struggling. Three-hundred-and-forty businesses across the Territory have hit the wall, shut up shop and gone bust. Huge tariff hits through power, water and sewerage were too much for businesses to cope with.
2. Safer communities: we heard the Chief Minister proudly espouse his track record, but the reality is – I know he does not want to hear it – violent crime hit record levels last year and is slightly off those in the latest data. Domestic violence is at unacceptable record levels, with a promise that has been hanging around for months and months – the ‘Wait for it, we will have a whole-of-government strategy’.
3. Affordable housing: the CLP’s version of affordable housing is $500 000, yet they scoffed when in opposition that product at $375 000 was simply not affordable and out of the mortgage range of the average family. You have not met that one.
4. Education standards: standards have not improved. The government is pretending it has only sacked 35 teachers, when the evidence at estimates showed 125 teachers have been sacked, as well as 60 crucial support staff.
5. Access to healthcare: Alice Springs and Tennant Creek Hospitals are enjoying new emergency departments through Labor-funded projects. New health clinics across remote communities are also Labor-funded projects.
When you look at their track record, Katherine is buckling under the crisis of the alcohol regime the CLP government introduced. Ask anyone in Katherine what it is like getting into the emergency department there and what they have to deal with on a daily and nightly basis. You will not because you do not want to listen.
The CLP has delayed the Palmerston Regional Hospital by four years, which is a disgrace. Why? The Royal Darwin Hospital is in crisis, and when you tell them they say you are making it up. When the Australian Medical Association, representing doctors, says it is in crisis, when the Australian Nursery & Midwifery Federation, representing the nurses, says it is in crisis – we are all making it up because this government, as its hallmark, does not listen. It likes to live in its own little bubble where everything is good, and it ignores the facts and the reality that every day, Territorians are grappling with.
To its eternal shame the CLP created this crisis by not bringing online the purpose-built 100-bed medi-hotel at the Royal Darwin Hospital to ensure appropriate, supported medical conditions for people before they use acute beds and people, after needing acute beds, entering subacute treatment. To your eternal shame you have brought about this crisis by not using the medi-hotel for the purpose it was built. Now, in a mad rush, because we literally have a hospital which has been in crisis and meltdown for months – there has been bed-block for months, people waiting in the accident and emergency department for days, as well as double-bunking. I challenge the Chief Minister and Health minister to spend a day there listening to staff grappling with untenable situations and patients talking about the situation you are putting them through.
Where are the other 70 beds at the medi-hotel? You said you were bringing 30 beds online. You do not have a date; we are told it is soon or weeks away. Where are the other 70 beds in that facility and why are they not being brought online? They too are needed.
In access to healthcare we have gone backwards. To its eternal shame the CLP is not proceeding with the funding sitting there for the emergency department refit in Nhulunbuy.
Finally, there is number six: improved service delivery. Point to anywhere in the Northern Territory where service delivery has improved. There are delays for government services. It has been a shambles, and little wonder, when you move through the community, across regional towns, remote communities and our large urban centres of Darwin and Palmerston, there is one common phrase – ‘This is the worst government ever’. That comes from people I know have been CLP to their boot heels for many years. I say, ‘Hang on a second, you are telling the Labor Leader of the Opposition, when I know you have been a card-carrying member of the CLP, they are the worst government ever?’ and they say, ‘That is right. They do not behave in the best interests in the Territory and are too busy self serving.’
The run of jobs for mates has been the most scandalous ever witnessed in the Territory. That is saying something because we saw a bit of that in the later years of the CLP before 2001.
Promises to the bush were not part of the election commitments submitted to Treasury and have been happily ignored. You have not delivered on promises to the bush, and if you sit down with the traditional owners of the Northern Territory you will hear that. Listen to the people and you will hear what this debate will contribute. However, you do not want to hear it and you will not meet with the people. That too is a very common theme running throughout the Territory.
I meet with a range of peak organisations across business, non-government organisations, religious groups and cultural groups. There is a common theme in their comments that you cannot arrange meetings with ministers or the Chief Minister; they are not accessible. These people had quarterly meetings established with their relevant line ministers, as well as the Chief Minister and me as the deputy, but you cannot get in the door to see these ministers.
You have broken every major promise there is to break; I just listed your six core areas. You are a government people know cannot be trusted. It is little wonder you have been dubbed the worst government ever and have been given a D-minus on your first report card.
We continually hear the government has a plan. Where is it? Aside from the glossy ‘Develop the North’ brochures and the spin machine, where is your plan? At first the Chief Minister said the plan would be called Framing the Future, and he led with a draft. He released a ministerial statement that still, to this day, has never been debated in this Chamber on the interim and we have never seen the final document. Was Framing the Future your plan? Where did it disappear to and why have we never seen the final document? Did you realise it was so pathetic that you quickly jettisoned it and wrapped yourself in the cloak of developing the north?
If anyone thinks any government, regardless of political calibre, has not been developing the north since self-government in the mid-1970s, you are kidding yourself. On this side of the House we have grave concerns that it is shambolic, chaotic, dysfunctional and self-serving; there clearly is no plan.
Your first budget was a road map backwards. It scrapped many of the infrastructure projects and initiatives that had been set in place. It had no plan and added $1.1bn to the Territory’s debt. Your second budget was a litany of cuts and deception; in the firing line were teachers, health professionals, pensioner concessions, public servants, and mums and dads literally forced to pack up and leave the Territory because they could not cope with the burden of the cost of living, following your power, water and sewerage tariff hikes. These went to inflation and were added on to consumers in the Territory everywhere they turned. You did not engage with the bush and say, ‘By the way, your power card will be chewed through at twice the rate’. That is what is happening.
I will set the record straight on Labor’s time in power, because the Chief Minister cannot take his vision from the rear view mirror, which is part of the CLP’s problem. He cannot look forward because he is stuck looking backwards. That is a critical fundamental flaw in the character of the man, which is a hallmark of the government. You do not have a vision looking forward because you cannot get out of the way; you are constantly looking backwards.
Let us look at the facts. The Auditor-General identified that Labor left a net operating balance surplus of $16.7m as at 30 June 2012, not long before the general election and not a deficit, as you deceptively claim, Chief Minister.
The Auditor-General stated that the Northern Territory had suffered through lower GST revenues from the Commonwealth, which we now know was a direct result of the global financial crisis. This resulted in massive reductions in revenue beyond the control of the Territory or any state or territory government in our nation. The global financial crisis meant a massive contraction in private sector spending. To keep Territorians in work, Labor doubled infrastructure program spending, the one-off capital, and it worked. We created 13 000 jobs during the global financial crisis-affected years and literally kept the Territory economy in growth, not dropping into recessionary figures. When you return to your offices, look out of the window and you will see the growth of the city which occurred under Labor.
We navigated the Territory through the global economic crisis, and we came out of it with strong economic growth which continues today on the back of projects initiated by Labor.
Members opposite said we would not be able to deliver the major Ichthys project. The former Chief Minister described it as a 19th century project which had no place in our harbour. The member for Fong Lim talked it down to business, saying Labor could never deliver it, yet it is now the fuel of our economic growth.
The correctional services centre and the Marine Supply Base underpin those economic growth figures, projects the Chief Minister is cutting the ribbons for and claiming as his own when he had nothing to do with them and, in fact, talked them down in opposition. Did we borrow for infrastructure? Absolutely, as did every major economy. That is what you needed to do to get through the global financial crisis years without entering recession.
There is no budget crisis, there was no budget crisis and Territorians are scratching their heads and asking why they are paying for the lifestyle of the CLP and its mates. You inherited an operating surplus and a Territory with strong economic growth. In contrast, you have set about damaging the building blocks of our economy. There is reduced infrastructure spending, and you have scant regard for policy areas such as education, health, essential services and training for jobs growth.
It is alarming to see a government that does not understand and value the building blocks of the community and that very special relationship between community and economic policy. You have mismanaged our economy and you are making it harder for businesses in the Territory. You have failed to deliver a single new project, and there is no major new project on the horizon. You are living off the legacy of Labor’s economic credentials. You are quick to spruik economic growth and engineering construction work that is at record levels thanks to the Ichthys project and the Marine Supply Base, projects delivered under a Labor government. All economic commentators point to the fact that oil and gas projects are underpinning our economic growth, projects facilitated by Labor. It is the CLP that simply cannot admit it. Remove, as I said, the impact of the major projects and our initiatives like the Marine Supply Base and the correctional centre construction, and you will apply a handbrake in a significant way to our domestic economy.
We are now a two-speed economy with the haves and the have nots. Under the CLP, many Territory businesses are losing momentum. Territorians are falling behind and many have had no choice but to pack up. Three-hundred-and-forty businesses have shut their doors since the CLP came to government. I am informed 120 of those are in Alice Springs. The government has made it harder for business in the Territory. The closure of 340 businesses is a travesty; there are small business people who have invested their money and entrepreneurial effort to set up a business and provide Territorians with jobs.
Jobs cuts have created, with our rising unemployment, uncertainty in the community. The CLP price hikes on power have pushed many businesses to the wall and, in other instances, have stymied business growth. The irresponsible decision to hike up power, water and sewerage prices has been a big hit on businesses that have either had to absorb costs, stifle expansion or pass prices onto consumers, and it has contributed to our unacceptable inflation rate. You talk of a three-hub economy; the business community is asking where the next big project is and what you are doing.
The community wants to know what is after Ichthys. The Office of Northern Australia Development is good for producing glossy brochures, but there is no policy, no projects and no extra funding for the roads, bridges and infrastructure needed to grow the economy. Construction has nosedived under this government and there was a $500m reduction from December 2013 to the March 2014 quarter. As no new projects come online, construction businesses – our biggest sector in the Territory – need to think about survival.
Every ribbon-cutting event you have undertaken in government has been at a Labor project. Yesterday the Chief Minister was opening the Marine Supply Base, a key Labor project to transform the Territory economy, a $110m investment in our future which builds on Labor’s success in attracting oil and gas industry and creating the all-important oil and gas hub.
Adam Giles, the current Chief Minister, criticised this very project when the first sod was turned in 2012. He said he was concerned that the government is supporting construction and spoke about Labor’s obsession with the Marine Supply Base. Yet, all of a sudden, it is his project and it is the great saviour of economic growth. Shore ASCO will operate the base for up to 20 years and has contracted local company Macmahon to construct it. It is a good news story, but it has had nothing to do with the Chief Minister espousing that it is, all of a sudden, his project.
I am concerned by the way the Chief Minister behaves in engaging with the corporate end of town. He has, through his behaviour, set back our relationships with corporations. I have gone out of my way to ensure I engage with our major oil and gas companies on a regular basis. There are real concerns about some of the announcements the government has made; companies are wondering why a fracking inquiry was announced without a heads-up and without understanding what the energy committee of parliament was about. They are concerned about the views around sales, consistently hearing from industry that it does not support the sale of the port because they know, as we all know, it will lead to increased prices. Industry does not want to pay more, just as the mums and dads of the Territory do not want to pay more.
They are concerned about the delay in the gas project at Wadeye and that the government has selling the Wadeye airstrip on its agenda. Have you spoken to the traditional owners at Wadeye about that plan? Seriously, you need to listen. You need to abandon the ambition to sell the port and stop kowtowing to Canberra with the sale of assets which is, essentially, a quick cash grab we will all pay for forever through increased freight costs. Industry understands how crippling those costs would be to them, and the mums and dads, sadly, would understand all too late.
Tiger Brennan Drive is another key example of CLP ribbon-cutting projects, a project the member for Fong Lim, when he was in federal parliament, could not deliver. It took Labor governments federally and in the Territory to deliver Tiger Brennan Drive, yet it took seven CLP politicians to cut the ribbon on it. What an embarrassment!
Your government has snubbed local business. You have made it harder for them, and a constant concern we hear from local businesses is about tenders going to interstate companies. The bus contracts went interstate and the government’s travel contracts also went to two interstate firms, snubbing the many local travel agencies around the Territory, those small businesses which found it to be a devastating blow. The contract went to interstate firms without going out to competitive tender. You must question why locals miss out to interstate firms without there being a competitive tender process.
You do not have a jobs plan. You have slashed training funding by $64m each year for the next three years, yet you pretend you are about jobs for locals. We have less support for apprentices, trainees and upskill programs and you have lost sight of that all-important role of government in facilitating access to training, which is a leg up to jobs for local Territorians. You scrapped the target of 15 000 new apprentices and trainees. Since you came to government 1400 fewer people have entered vocational education and training in the Territory. You have accepted a cut from the Commonwealth of some 500 fewer places for apprentices and trainee commencements this year alone. You simply rolled over to that.
The cronyism which has been a hallmark of the government of late cannot go unmentioned. The consistent feedback I receive from business is grave concern about the appointment of former Chief Minister, Denis Burke, to the role of the Chair of the Development Consent Authority. They had hoped to see someone without political bias in that role, as it is crucial in proper planning processes.
I will have my shadow minister for law and order contribute at a later date, but the cut to the promise of an extra 120 police officers has been condemned by the NT Police Association. You have not met a violent crime reduction target, you have opened up a dangerous stretch of road to an open speed limit and we see road death rates continuing to increase at unacceptable levels in the Territory. We have Territorians dying at three times the national average, and you believe it is okay to open up a stretch of road to allow people to drive as fast as they want. It is an incredible step backwards and a return to cowboy country under the CLP.
In regard to health, one of the fundamental services Territorians quite rightly expect is a good system. Sadly, the federal government is introducing a tax on support and access to GP services; this Territory government has rolled over when it is such a critical front line for us and has such an important role in taking the pressure off our main emergency departments which, as we know – particularly at RDH – are in crisis.
We have seen a $33m cut to the Health budget by the Commonwealth, reduced to an $11m cut with no explanation as to where these reductions are occurring across the health system because this government shrouds itself in secrecy rather than transparency.
We have a Minister for Disability Services who, I am advised, does not make herself accessible to meet with parents of young adults with disabilities who are in dire need of post-school options. When the Minister for Disability Services does not meet with the parents of young adults with a disability, you have to wonder what they are doing in that role. I urge the Minister for Disability Services to meet with that group of parents.
It has been a disgrace to see the extent of cuts to the Education budget. We have lost valuable and skilled teachers and support staff across our schools, and our schools are buckling under the strain. You are introducing the global school budget, which is a way of ensuring the cuts continue to roll on at school level and you can wash your hands of responsibility.
School councils are very concerned about the process being rushed through as it is, but the Minister for Education is deaf to the calls by COGSO, the representative parent body, to backtrack and give everyone a chance to have a genuine contribution on why global school budgets are not the way to go in improving education. In fact, it will be a significant backward step.
With the Indigenous education review you did not listen to Territorians. You have a frame and focus on direct instruction out of the Gulf country. It is disappointing and disrespectful to Indigenous educators in the Territory that you have ignored their submissions into the Indigenous education review.
The cost of living has doubled under the CLP. That is across power and water, sewerage, fuel, registration, car charges and housing. The CLP said it would ease the burden in housing and, of course, we have rental prices going up, with an increase of 4.8%, and about an 8% growth in the mortgage market because you stripped out opportunities to access first homeowner concessions and you cut a couple of key housing finance programs in My New Home and HOMESTART Extra.
The saddest thing, and the hallmark of your government, must be the abandonment of the township of Nhulunbuy and the announcement of the curtailment of the Rio Tinto refinery, at the hands of Chief Minister Giles. The oil and gas industry was looking forward to a doubling of the domestic gas market, which would have occurred if the gas deal had not been reneged on by Chief Minister Giles. Instead over 1000 jobs have been lost. At a guess, we will see 2% stripped from our gross state product, and we have a town that has been left swinging in the breeze, with no structural adjustment package from the Commonwealth or Territory governments. There has been no pressure on Rio Tinto to do the right thing for the town, dismantle the plant, rehabilitate the red mud ponds and provide real jobs and opportunities. There has been no effort by this government at all to have a project delivered into the town that would provide respite and supported accommodation for sufferers of Machado-Joseph Disease, renal and aged care – you simply walk away from your responsibilities.
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LAWRIE: It is shameful Central Australia barely rated a mention in the Chief Minister’s contribution, given Alice Springs is his home town. For Central Australia there was no articulated plan for the future and no plan to stimulate the economic development of a region crying out for support.
They are not looking for handouts, they are looking at where the investment will be coming from in Central Australia. In that, I mean the Barkly region as well. This government is so out of touch, it does not seem to be aware there are at least 16 empty shopfronts in the Todd Mall precinct. CBD businesses such as Don Thomas, Murray Neck Leading Edge Music, Centre Souvenirs, Rusty Zipper, Travel Baggers, Fresh in the Desert – under your watch, these locally-owned small businesses, many who have been in the town for 40 years or more, have simply shut their doors.
These are small businesses which were the lifeblood of our regional town, not only providing employment but supporting community events and sporting teams. Under the CLP’s watch these are the businesses closing their doors. Just this week, Alice Springs’ largest steel supplier, OneSteel, announced it is closing its doors.
OneSteel has been in operation in Alice Springs since the 1950s, but because of the economic downturn in the building and construction industry in Central Australia, it is shutting up shop. Alice Springs town councillor Kylie Bonanni says other building industry companies in the Centre are contemplating doing the same. What response do we have from this government and the Chief Minister, who lives in Alice Springs? There is nothing.
You have had the opportunity to invest in locally-driven projects to create jobs and provide economic stimulation, for example, the second stage of the Todd Mall, which you knocked back, or a major residential development in the CBD, which you, again, knocked on the head. You produce lovely, expensive advertising campaigns, trying to persuade people they are part of some mythical northern development, but there is no development under your watch to invest and support the future of Central Australia. Meetings and glossy brochures are not driving economic development or planning for the future in the Centre.
Central Australians are not fooled; they know this government and Chief Minister have promised big and delivered very little. You promised a police call centre, but you reneged on that pretty quickly. The Chief Minister likes to beat his chest and say Labor does not have any plans; I do not doubt he would not turn his mind to reading Territory 2030, a strategic plan developed by Labor in partnership with the community, setting real targets and achievements for economic sustainability, education, health, knowledge, creativity and innovation.
The plan includes meeting the challenges of providing an effective health system through bold reforms; ensuring the availability of appropriate and affordable housing through targeted land release; kick-starting key projects and initiatives by investing in major projects that provide economic and social development, such as building the Palmerston hospital; investigating the development of Alice Springs as a regional transport and service centre and a hub for tri-state health delivery; assisting local businesses by reducing the cost of setting up in the Territory; and increasing government support for business development.
Territory 2030 provides for the growth of regional areas by fostering the growth of real jobs and wealth creation through innovative and collaborative solutions by working with Indigenous Territorians and, most importantly, with the federal government to ensure funding and investment decisions reflect the needs and aspirations of people on the ground. Territory 2030 drives development, captures new opportunities, targets investment and allows for investment in key infrastructure projects. It stands in stark contrast to the haphazard selective approach adopted by this government, which is more interested in looking after its mates and itself than developing the future of the Territory and ensuring every Territorian receives a fair go.
Mrs PRICE (Community Services): Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to contribute to the excellent statement of achievement and to acknowledge the Chief Minister. His statement outlined the great things we have achieved in our first two years of government.
Despite the mistruths and negativity of those opposite, we have achieved a lot for Territorians with not much left in the bank account, thanks to the debt and deficit legacy left by the Leader of the Opposition.
My portfolio areas have been very busy, with a number of highlights. I will start with the Parks and Wildlife Commission. The commission manages 87 parks and reserves across the Territory on behalf of Territorians. Our parks and reserves provide the natural spaces for the recreation of Territorians and are a major draw card for interstate and overseas visitors. The commission also contributes enormously to the social, cultural and economic fabric of the Northern Territory and its future. It also underpins the conservation of the Territory’s wildlife and the best of its environments.
The commission has been integral to the cultural identity of many Aboriginal people who are joint management partners with the government for one third of these parks.
There are about three million annual visits to parks managed by the Parks and Wildlife Commission. Many visitors are Territorians for who parks are a key part of a great outdoor lifestyle, places of inspiration, learning, exercise and fun. Territorians naturally feel great affection and stewardship towards our parks. I am pleased to report that in the last financial year there were 2.89 m visits to our parks, up from 2.8 m in 2012-13. This is a great display of confidence, and while we have more work to do, we are on the right track. We have worked hard to fulfil all election commitments as well.
New bylaws have been implemented to ensure the existing rights of commercial and amateur fishers are maintained in the Limmen Bight Marine Park. I am working hard with a number of groups and agencies to provide greater access to national parks and camping grounds.
A memorandum of understanding has been signed with the NT four-wheel drive association that provides benefits to both parties in the Top End. A memorandum of understanding has also been signed with Field and Game NT to allow permitted camping by members in return for management assistance. In late 2012 a memorandum of understanding was signed with the NT four-wheel drive association to allow their members greater access to four-wheel drive tracks within parks and reserves, specifically Litchfield and Mary River National Parks.
Five-year pig hunting permits were created to increase park use and reduce red tape and the number of feral animals in Top End parks. The commission facilitated the process which led to the first 10-year commercial sublease arrangement in a jointly-managed national park. On the Larapinta Trail in the West MacDonnell Ranges National Park, the commission has facilitated two high-quality camps operated by the global western tours company, World Expeditions. This outcome has paved the way for similar arrangements with other commercial operators and increased the area under the conservation management of the Parks and Wildlife Commission by 1000km2, with the addition of the proposed Woodgreen Conservation Reserve.
I am sure the member for Nelson will be interested to learn that visits to the Howard Springs Nature Park have doubled following the opening of a new family-friendly water play area and playground. In 2013-14 there were 1390 visitors.
The government has worked hard to maintain a balanced environment in our parks through proactive feral animal management. Throughout the past two years aerial feral animal management has been undertaken in the West MacDonnells, Finke Gorge, and Owen Springs Reserve to reduce the impact of these animals. This work has also reduced the impact in Garig Gunak Barlu and Nitmiluk National Parks.
The commission is developing integrated conservation strategies which promote healthy native flora and fauna, promote the sustainable and commercial use of native wildlife, and is also developing conservation strategies for specific parks. These plans take an integrated approach, identifying key values and threats to them, as well as setting measurable targets for achievement over a five-year time frame. Progress towards the achievement of these plans will be reported in public park report cards to promote public interest and support for our parks and to ensure management is adaptive and continues to improve over time.
Draft management plans for Nitmiluk National Park, Howard Springs Nature Park and the Adelaide River Conservation Reserves have been released for public comment, and will soon make passage through the Assembly. Management plans for several more parks are well progressed.
The commission has also been hard at work in managing asbestos in parks and reserves in the Territory to preserve the safety of our parks and protect visitors. Recent works have taken place in George Brown Darwin Botanic Gardens and on Casuarina Beach near Rapid Creek.
Talking of public safety, the commission has a main role in crocodile management. In 2013-14, Parks and Wildlife conducted 21 Be CROCWISE presentations across 14 community groups, businesses and schools. In 2013-14, the commission reviewed the Be CROCWISE education and engagement program to assess its effectiveness and identify new and innovative opportunities to raise community awareness about the dangers posed by crocodiles. This will see a refreshed program released over the next 12 months with more targeted programs at adults. Sixty permits have been issued for the management of problem crocodiles on private land to reduce impacts on pastoral productivity and to protect public safety.
The commission also partners with my colleague, the Minister for Land Resource Management, and the Department of Land Resource Management to undertake extensive crocodile surveys in the Adelaide, Daly, Katherine and Mary Rivers. These surveys are part of the crocodile management strategy to inform decision-making in relation to it.
Not only do we provide crocodile management here, but our croc management team also has a worldwide reputation for its professionalism and effectiveness. In the last 12 months, the Territory has provided management advice, training and assistance to Timor-Leste and the Solomon Islands in relation to saltwater crocodiles. We have also assisted in the research of freshwater crocodile populations of the McKinlay River with Wildlife Management International.
I thank Tommy Nichols and his crew for their excellent work, often undertaken in very sad or distressing situations. Tommy and his crew have developed strong working relationships with each of their stakeholders.
Talking of strong working relationships, the commission works hard in building and encouraging strong and productive working relationships between traditional owners, landholders, communities and special interest groups, industry, land councils for 32 parks and reserves, and local government. These strong relationships have led to groundwork undertaken around fire, weeds and feral animal management throughout our parks.
The commission has improved fire management across Top End parks, including Litchfield and Nitmiluk National Parks, in collaboration with Charles Darwin University and the Department of Land Resource Management.
Talking about collaboration, the commission has also increased engagement with Berry Springs Primary School, which now uses the Territory Wildlife Park as an outdoor classroom, as well as with Charles Darwin University, which uses the Territory Wildlife Park as a training location for Land Management students.
The commission also sustains and protects our environment by analysing land, water and flora and fauna information to facilitate sound decision-making. The commission is working with the Department of Land Resource Management to implement a five-year rolling program of biological surveys in the Territory’s most important parks for biodiversity, including Nitmiluk, Litchfield, West MacDonnell and Watarrka. The George Brown Darwin Botanic Gardens maintains seed banks and conducts botanical breeding to preserve the genetics of rare and threatened plants.
The Territory Wildlife Park and Alice Springs Desert Park conduct endangered species breeding programs to maintain the genetic diversity of native animals, have shortened processing times for permits to take threatened cycad species, worked with the Department of Land Resource Management to integrate approvals with land clearing applications and assisted the Department of Land Resource Management with surveys to assess small mammal decline at Charles Darwin National Park, Holmes Jungle and the Casuarina Coastal Reserve.
The commission works with volunteer groups, not-for-profit organisations and other stakeholders to provide opportunities for Territorians to come together to experience different cultural heritage and traditions and to participate in healthy outdoor activities.
The commission has also provided $47 000 in signage to improve interpretation along the Larapinta Trail to reflect the cultural values of the trail and inform the community about the importance of the area for the local Arrernte people. Culturally-themed signage has also been developed to enhance the visitor experience on the Shady Creek Walk at Florence Falls in Litchfield National Park and on the Nawulbinbin Walk at Joe Creek, Judbarra/Gregory National Park.
The George Brown Botanic Gardens draws thousands of people every year to enjoy the plants and floral communities through events such as the Darwin Festival, BASSINTHEGRASS and other concerts, the Etsy pop-up market, the Mother’s Day Classic Run, the Tropical Garden Spectacular and other events.
We have invested $150 000 in developing a 28 km network of mountain bike trails through the Alice Springs Telegraph Station Historical Reserve. This is stage one of a larger plan to confirm Alice Springs as an international mountain biking destination. We have participated in and coordinated a variety of events, including information stalls, community activities in parks, presentations and exhibitions for a total of 20 379 visitors, including over 2000 participants during Parks Week celebrations and over 9000 during the short circuit. In addition, the unit gave presentations at 71 schools to over 4232 children. We have successfully completed renovations of the Wesleyan Church and opened Eva’s Caf, which provides a new opportunity for visitors to enjoy the George Brown Botanic Gardens.
The commission has also worked hard to improve our Territory Wildlife Park visitor experience. This has seen a 7.4% jump in visitor numbers from 2012 to 2013. This contributes to developing and growing a strong Territory economy. Tourism in national parks makes an estimated contribution of $1.2bn to the Territory’s economy, including an estimated 2600 jobs directly and 2000 jobs indirectly. Visitor satisfaction ratings have been maintained at above 90% across all Territory parks and reserves.
The commission continues to work with our partners to develop and secure new investment in parks and sustainable wildlife enterprises, demonstrating the significant value parks can provide to the local economy through employment.
The commission has worked closely with the four-wheel drive and mountain biking associations, hunting organisations and others to enhance opportunities to pursue recreational activities in parks and reserves.
There is so much going on in our parks that I will run out of time, so I will move on to my portfolio of Community Services. Since August 2012, the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority has continued to achieve efficiencies. Processes of sacred site protection have continued to support development in the Northern Territory, with timely advice to stakeholders about risks and opportunities associated with sacred sites. This has involved significant management and the resolution of issues to achieve outcomes that satisfy the requirements of all stakeholders.
Since August 2012, the authority has successfully negotiated and issued 488 authority certificates to proponents of development, with no certificates refused and no requests for ministerial review of decisions made by the authority. Each certificate represents a response to a development proposal in the Northern Territory. Furthermore, the authority has responded to 1139 requests for information, including abstracts of the authority’s existing records and requests to access the registers of sacred sites and authority certificates.
During this period, the authority has registered 30 sacred sites, recorded 443 new sites and responded to 43 reports of alleged site damage. Only three cases of site damage proceeded to prosecution. The authority has facilitated a number of large projects, providing authority certificates and enabling proponents to develop good risk-management strategies around sacred sites during the planning phase. This has included projects such as the roll out of the NBN through the Northern Territory, the proposed gas pipeline from Katherine to Gove, and Bynoe Harbour environmental monitoring programs by INPEX, to name a few.
While the Department of Community Services only commenced as an agency in September 2013, we have had a busy 11 months bedding down a new department and growing its influence across the Territory, starting with the remote engagement coordination and language services area.
A few of the achievements include developing and implementing First Circles, a framework for which was approved in May 2014. On 2 July 2014, I attended the official launch of the First Circles program in Alice Springs.
Moving away from traditional representative and elder consultation models, the First Circles program focuses on future Indigenous leaders. Members will develop leadership skills while being actively involved in decision-making around Indigenous issues, supported by departmental staff. A key component of First Circles will be that members will have the opportunity to discuss issues and strategies for improving outcomes with the Northern Territory Cabinet.
Turning to language services – over 10 370 Aboriginal language interpreting jobs were completed, a total of 60 000 hours of interpreting. There were 10 355 ethnic and migrant language interpreting jobs completed in the two years to 31 July 2014, bringing a total of more than 19 000 hours of interpreting in 71 languages. There were 2685 ethnic and migrant language translating jobs completed in the two years to 31 July 2014 in more than 50 languages.
On 1 July 2014, the Aboriginal Interpreter Service, in partnership with the ABC, launched a 12-month pilot project to deliver daily broadcasts of ABC news bulletins in two Aboriginal languages, Warlpiri and Yolngu Matha. A department services engagement and coordination area administers the Stronger Futures national partnership agreement. The department has coordinated six-monthly progress reporting to the Australian government since 1 July 2012. This has resulted in the Northern Territory government receiving over $200m in national partnership payments. The Department of Community Services has administered grants for Stronger Futures data improvement projects with funding provided by the Australian government.
The projects enhance …
Mrs FINOCCHIARO: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the minister.
Motion agreed to.
Mrs PRICE: The projects enhance the capacity of agencies to collect and report on Stronger Futures project data. Indigenous governance and leadership development in June 2013 commenced a two-year project of practical governance and leadership support to individuals and decision-making groups in five remote Northern Territory communities. Delivered by the Northern Institute of Charles Darwin University, the project is making visible both Aboriginal and western governance systems in Gapuwiyak, Milingimbi, Ntaria, Ramingining and Wurrumiyanga. A distinctive ground-up approach that engages project participants in learning activities appropriate to their own governance and leadership needs has been used to grow knowledge and skills in governance and leadership. The project is now in its second and final stage where governance and leadership support activities designed in stage one are being implemented. Individuals and groups are enthusiastically participating in workshops, tutoring sessions and innovative knowledge-sharing events, such as the Q&A forum recently held over two days at Ramingining.
Turning to the remote service delivery unit, homelands, outstations and town camps: our homelands policy, launched in 2013, has been implemented. This policy reflects the government’s commitment to provide better services and living conditions for people residing in homelands. This includes some $206m committed over 10 years under the National Partnership Agreement Municipal and Essential Services Implementation Plan for the provision of municipal and essential services to over 500 locations, including homelands, communities and town camps, with 2469 dwellings and approximately 6000 residents.
We have introduced contemporary funding agreements with improved accountability and transparency for the delivery of municipal and essential services. Darwin town camps received a much-needed boost in 2012-13 with the release of $2.7m in grant funding to refurbish abandoned homes and upgrade essential services. The Northern Territory government has committed $25m over 10 years to support the provision of municipal and essential services to 45 town camps with over 750 dwellings, as well as $12m for projects to improve municipal and essential services on homelands and other capital infrastructure grant programs from 2012-14.
One-hundred-and-thirty-seven full-time equivalent positions were also provided for Aboriginal engagement in municipal essential services as part of the NT Jobs Package. Funding of $11m was allocated to this program in 2012-14. An amount of $14m has been provided for all repairs and maintenance of dwellings on homelands and town camps, and other housing maintenance programs over the period 2012-14, as well as $40m for the provision of municipal services on homelands and in town camps under the municipal and essential services program. The Homelands Extra Allowance was developed in 2012-13 and rolled out in 2013-14. Four-hundred-and-seventy-seven applications have been approved for 173 homelands at some $2.7m. An amount of $10m allocated to the program will be available for the next two years.
Talking of infrastructure, the department contracts Indigenous Essential Services Pty Ltd, a not-for-profit part of the Power and Water Corporation, to provide electricity, water and sewerage services in 72 identified remote Indigenous communities. A new three-year agreement from 2013-16 was implemented on 1 July this year for the provision of essential services to nominated Indigenous communities. In 2013, 83% of remote Indigenous community stakeholders surveyed expressed satisfaction with electricity, water and sewerage services provided under the Indigenous Essential Services program.
In 2013 seven major water supply upgrades were completed in five communities – Angurugu, Umbakumba, Wurrumiyanga, Wadeye, and Galiwinku – under the COAG strategy on water and waste water in remote communities. Water production capacity was increased at Maningrida in 2013 and at Lajamanu and Hermannsburg in 2014, with new bores drilled and equipped through capital funding of $2.45m at Lajamanu, $2.2m at Hermannsburg and $1.8m at Maningrida. In 2014, Milingimbi water supply infrastructure was upgraded with the installation of new ground and elevated water tanks to increase storage capacity. The project was completed through Australian government funding of $4m.
In 2014, Hermannsburg and Wallace Rockhole were connected to the Alice Springs electricity grid through the construction of a new 91 km high-voltage power line to replace the existing diesel power station at Hermannsburg. Grid connection to Alice Springs will provide Hermannsburg with a secure electricity supply and support future development in the region. The $6.5m project was jointly funded by the Northern Territory and Australian governments. IES also employs a total of 178 essential service operators for the day-to-day on-site operation of essential services in 72 remote Indigenous communities. A total of 75, or 42%, of these ESOs were Indigenous employees. In addition, 39 ESO trainees were employed, with 50% of these being Indigenous. Of all ESOs employed, 100 ESOs hold essential service certificate qualifications, with 51 of these being Indigenous. It is great to see Indigenous people being involved in their own communities.
The department also coordinates and monitors infrastructure development in remote communities to ensure adequate essential services are available. Major remote infrastructure investment programs include new health centres, child and family centres, police stations and facilities, new trade training centres, government employment and housing, new and upgraded remote community public housing, and new and upgraded community stores being project managed and funded by the Australian government.
The remote program office also coordinates asbestos removal work, taking medium-risk asbestos-containing materials from public buildings in remote Indigenous communities, such as stores, churches, art centres, community halls, regional council buildings and buildings managed by Indigenous enterprises. The Australian government has provided funding for the program of $19.5m for three years from June 2013.
DOCS has engaged Coffey projects – an Australian company – until 5 December 2016 to assist in the delivery of the asbestos removal program in 34 communities identified with asbestos-containing materials that fit within the scope of the program. The works program commenced in late 2014 with inspections of asbestos-containing materials at Belyuen, Maningrida and Kaltukatjara prior to the commencement of removal and restoration works in these communities.
The Northern Territory and Australian governments are jointly developing the Ilpiye Ilpiye town camp to current urban subdivision standards. It will benefit from a total of $10.63m available from the Australian government for the construction of a subdivision and upgrades to existing infrastructure. The upgrade works are being delivered under contract by Probuild NT Pty Ltd. Indigenous development opportunities within this project will be available through the construction phase, which is estimated to be six months. On 29 May, I was joined by Ilpiye Ilpiye traditional owners and town camp residents to officially launch commencement of the works at the Ilpiye Ilpiye subdivision development.
The remote program office is also managing a $7m, three-year rolling project for cadastral survey plans to be commissioned in 51 remote communities. These surveys support requirements under the Planning Act and allow leases to be entered into for a period in excess of 12 years. The Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment has carriage of delivering the project. In relation to the cadastral survey project works undertaken to 30 June 2014, nine communities have had survey field work completed, field work has commenced in one community and and 15 surveys are planned to commence …
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! The minister’s time has expired.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am sorry, minister, your time has expired.
Mr CHANDLER (Education): Mr Deputy Speaker, this government has had significant achievements in the past two years. For anyone to say it has not would be wrong; mountains have been moved. We went to the election with a detailed plan to get the Territory back on track after more than a decade of Labor’s madness. Over the past two years we have been working hard to implement that plan and much progress has been made.
I would like to share some of the achievements in the Lands, Planning and the Environment portfolio. The biggest achievement in this portfolio has been the release of land. We know those opposite talked a great deal about land release but never delivered. We are getting on with the job. Over 70 infill development sites have been identified for land release across the NT. I will correct the record …
Mr McCarthy: You want to talk about truth? Katherine.
Mr CHANDLER: The member for Barkly is correct. Did the previous government release land? Yes. Did it recognise, plan hard and get ready for the speed of the economy with the involvement of INPEX in the northern part of the Northern Territory? The answer is clearly no.
Over 70 infill development sites have been identified for land release across the Northern Territory, with the potential to yield 2700 dwellings, providing additional opportunities for Territorians to secure housing. Twenty-one lots of the 2013-14 infill program have been auctioned in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine, Darwin and Palmerston, with the successful sale of 18 of those.
Four residential greenfield sites have been released to the market since May 2013, with the potential to yield approximately 1350 residential lots. Kilgariff Stage 1A in Alice Springs is being undertaken by the Land Development Corporation, with 19 affordable lots already sold – a great take up. On 3 June I was pleased to announce that Sitzler Bros was awarded the $2.6m subdivision contract for Kilgariff, where subdivision works have commenced on site.
Katherine East Stage 1 has been awarded to Downes Graderways. This 19 ha site is expected to yield over 100 lots and support more than 200 dwellings.
Affordable lands is one of the key objectives to be met as part of the release of Katherine East Stage 1, with an average price between $110 000 and $130 000.
Zuccoli Stage 2 has been awarded to Territory Life and is expected to deliver at least 400 residential lots. The request for proposal process for Zuccoli Stages 3 and 4 closed on 28 July 2014 and is expected to be awarded in late September 2014. Stages 3 and 4 will deliver at least 750 lots, resulting in approximately 1300 new dwellings in Zuccoli. A key objective in the development of these new stages of Zuccoli is the delivery of land with an average price between $160 000 and $180 000, something the previous government did not monitor and did not put any management controls in place for. It is one thing to have land, but another for that land to be affordable.
A 37.5 ha greenfield industrial site at Humpty Doo was released to the market on 21 August 2013. Humpty Doo Industrial Park Pty Ltd is the successful developer. Constructions works are expected to be completed by mid-2015. This government is committed to pursuing good processes in the way we manage our built environment to ensure growth while protecting the environment.
On the Humpty Doo subdivision, one of the failures of the previous government was not releasing land in the rural area for commercial activity. One of the biggest complaints I heard from rural residents was about the fact their next door neighbour, or neighbour down the road, was using their residential/rural block to run industrial type businesses. The unfortunate thing is when I asked what we were doing to police that – it is very hard to police something when there is no alternative for people. There was no alternative land use for people and, therefore, you had created a problem by not releasing land, forcing people to use land they should not be using or which was inappropriate for the area. At least now we are starting to release land in the rural area for appropriate uses and, hopefully, over time less pressure will be put on people to use land in an inappropriate manner.
Talking about environment and cultural heritage assets and closer community consultation, an independent Northern Territory Planning Commission was established on 1 January 2013, to prepare integrated strategic plans for inclusion in the Northern Territory Planning Scheme. The Planning Commission also provides advice to me, as the Minister for Lands Planning and the Environment, on planning matters.
The Planning Commission has completed three substantial pieces of work: the Katherine Land Use Plan; a Tennant Creek land use framework; and the Berrimah North Area Plan. The Katherine Land Use Plan was exhibited for public comment. The plan positions the town to respond to growth opportunities in the future, while also protecting valued environmental assets.
Following consultation with the community – we seem to be criticised all the time for not consulting – the Northern Territory Planning Commission provided me with an integrated strategic plan for the Katherine region and requested I consider an amendment to include the Katherine Land Use Plan as a policy document under the NT Planning Scheme.
I am pleased to advise that following completion of statutory processes under the Planning Act, the NT Planning Scheme was amended to include the Katherine Land Use Plan as a policy document on 23 June 2014. The Tennant Creek land use framework was completed and included in the Northern Territory Planning Scheme. The Northern Territory Planning Commission completed a draft area plan for Berrimah north, the area west of Vanderlin Drive. Berrimah north is well situated for urban development, being central to the main commercial and employment centres and serviced by main transport corridors.
The Planning Commission is also progressing three other significant pieces of work, the development of a Darwin Regional Land Use Plan 2014, planning controls in the Alice Springs CBD in relation to building form and heights, and a draft conceptual plan to guide the potential development of the old hospital site and Flagstaff Park.
Late last year the Northern Territory Planning Commission released the Towards a Darwin Regional Land Use Plan. Community input led to approximately 100 submissions. The commission, following consultation and consideration of public submissions, has refined the plan. They listened and released a Draft Darwin Regional Land Use Plan 2014 on 23 July 2014 for further public consultation. I encourage members and the community to make further submissions in relation to the plan, which is on exhibition until 1 September 2014.
Correct me if I am wrong, but we have set out with a public plan. The Planning Commission has consulted with the public. We have had private businesses involved in the consultation process, and we then have a revised plan put up to the minister because of listening to the community. The final draft has now gone back out for public consultation. How that is not consulting with the public – I do not know what to do.
Mr Wood: You had no meetings in the rural area on the first draft.
Mr CHANDLER: Member for Nelson, you get in trouble if you do consult, you get in trouble if you do not consult. We have not consulted in Yuendumu or on Groote Eylandt; there are probably many places we have not been to for consultation, but there is a limit to what you can do. In fairness, there has been much consultation in regard to this.
Mr Wood: He loves me.
Mr CHANDLER: I do. Key elements of the conceptual planning include an expanded heritage precinct, large areas for community space, residential development and the potential for an iconic public facility. Extensive community consultation was held between 1 May and 11 June 2014. The Planning Commission has provided me with a report on the community consultation and the concept plan. Planning and building reforms have been implemented to streamline processes for the benefit of the development industry and the community.
The progressive online lodgement of development applications has increased the speed of processing them, and applicants can now track the progress of applications online. People may now have their applications for subdivision clearance, commonly referred to as part five, approved on the day of lodgement, provided they supply all clearance documents, thereby reducing the time in obtaining titles as part of the subdivision process.
Planning processes have been improved and streamlined with the continued development of the Development One Stop Shop, which allows developers and the general public to access information about development application processes and current applications online. The processing of development applications is being reviewed on an ongoing basis to minimise assessment times. Members of the public can now access proposals and make submissions online.
Development Consent Authority agendas are now available online two days prior to its meetings. This initiative provides improved transparency in the planning process by improving access to DCA reports, particularly for people living in regional and remote areas. Prior to this initiative people were only able to access paper copies by visiting departmental offices in Darwin, Alice Springs and Katherine. They are now available online for all to see. Delegations for all divisions of the DCA have also been reviewed to facilitate the processing of DCA decisions more efficiently, so as to generally allow applicants to receive a determination in a shorter time frame after meetings.
September 2013 saw the final release of Building Approvals Online, enabling private sector building certifiers to lodge building approvals online.
While I am talking about the DCA, there has already been a lot said about appointing Denis Burke as the Chair of the DCA. For the record, there were about seven applications for the job. The former Chair, Mr McQueen, who did a fabulous job for eight years, did not apply for the position again. I would go as far as saying that if you were to draw a long enough bow you could, in some way, find a link between at least five of those applicants and the Country Liberals in some form or another, and it did not matter.
As the minister responsible for making the decision, it would not have mattered who was ultimately selected, as there would have been someone drawing a bow and pointing it back towards a job for the boys. In this case I thought long and hard, because any one of the applicants would cause me a political headache as far as the perception of this as another job for the boys. To put the record straight, what did I do in that situation? I went back to my roots. I have put many people in different jobs over the years, and I went back to the quality of the application. I put all politics aside and said I had to find the right person for the position.
I worked out what I needed, what this government needed and what the Northern Territory needed in regard to the experience required to do the job. I listed about five to eight ideas, or terms of reference. I then judged each of those applications based on the terms of reference, and Denis Burke was a standout.
Denis Burke was the one who could provide us with the experience and ability needed for a growing Northern Territory. I put it down to that, and that is the truth. I went back to looking at and unpacking those applications, knowing any one of at least five of the seven of those applicants would cause some political pain. Do you think I am that silly not to know that? I had to look at those applications one on one and determine the best person based on the needs of the Northern Territory. That is on the record.
September 2013 saw the final release of Building Approvals Online, enabling private sector building certifiers to lodge building approvals online. An amendment to the multiple dwelling zone now allows for 300 m2 freehold lots. Deregulation of dependent units, commonly known as granny flats, now allows an occupant of an independent unit to be someone other than a dependent of a resident from the primary dwelling, while also increasing the size of permitted units in rural areas by 30 m2. This is a great initiative towards providing more housing choices for families and addressing the housing shortage in the Northern Territory.
The Planning Act was amended to provide for a concurrent assessment of planning scheme amendments and development applications, creating a single process for rezoning and development in planning legislation to save time and money. This amendment commenced on 1 May 2014.
Eight remote towns have been included in the NT Planning Scheme, something I am particularly thrilled about. In the last 12 months, Borroloola, Gapuwiyak, Gunbalanya, Kalkarindji, Numbulwar, Wadeye, Maningrida and Ali Curung have all become part of the NT Planning Scheme.
In May 2014, representatives of the Territory and federal government met with traditional owners to settle the Kalkarindji native title claim via consent determination and Indigenous land use agreement. This extinguishes all native title within the developed area of Kalkarindji and some additional land required for future development.
In Budget 2014-15 funding has been allocated for regional land release projects near Katherine, including Kalkarindji, Pine Creek, Mataranka and Timber Creek. This funding will facilitate future development in Kalkarindji, and subdivision design work is already under way for approximately 20 residential lots. This work is a great demonstration of how a township can develop once native title has been settled – Aboriginal people owning homes in their own towns, the way it should be.
The Territory government is engaged in negotiations with the Northern Land Council and native title claimants for a whole-of-town settlement in Borroloola. These negotiations are being undertaken in good faith by all parties and are proceeding in a positive and pragmatic manner. Whole-of-town settlement will support residential and commercial development, including Indigenous housing.
I will put my hand on my heart for a minute and think from an education perspective alone. We are trying our best to educate children in remote communities. What are we educating them for if there are no economies in their communities? Some will leave but some, ultimately, will remain in those communities for the rest of their lives. Through land tenure and creating economies in these communities, jobs will be created and, through that, there will be inspiration for a child, educated today, who can have something to work towards.
Mr Wood: Which jobs?
Mr CHANDLER: It is about creating economies in these remote towns.
I have tasked my Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment to consult with industry and council on the concept of introducing uniform subdivision guidelines for use by developers when designing infrastructure. In the Territory, each urban council, with the exception of the Barkly shire council, has its own set of subdivision guidelines specifying different requirements for infrastructure. Some examples include different requirements for footpath and road widths, as well as kerbing. Not only do standards differ across the Territory, they have been inconsistently applied across subdivision developments within the same municipalities or shires.
The introduction of uniform subdivision guidelines will provide more certainty and transparency to the development approval and infrastructure clearance processes. It will alleviate the complexity in costs that result from each local government authority having its own set of subdivision standards and, more broadly, the inconsistent application of standards from one development to the next by service authorities.
In addition, my department is also looking at bonding arrangements to enable early titling of financially viable developments. Bonding for early titles has its advantages to the developer in bringing forward titles, sales, cash flows and financing of a development in the first place.
As you can see, the Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment has been hugely productive in the past year. We are focused on the supply of new residential, commercial and industrial land. We will continue to cut red tape and find efficiencies in how government does business. This will support local families and industry.
Moving on …
Mrs FINOCCHIARO: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the minister.
Motion agreed to
Mr CHANDLER: At the Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment, I take my hat off to John Coleman, Leah, Fabio and all the rest. I will not go through all names, but there is quite a crew there and the work they have done in the past 12 months has been exceptional. In fact, only a few weeks ago during a northern development forum at the Northern Australia Development Office we were in a room with at least 20 to 22 developers – there are some frustrations in development – who praised this government and the changes we are making. It is not only the changes to processes and procedures; it is a change in attitude.
This government wants to get on and do things and develop the Territory. We want to stay in front of the wave, as I have said many times in this Chamber, because whilst we have an economy rocketing along as it is at the moment, if we do not keep up, particularly with land release, the price of land will continue to be out of the reach of the average Territorian.
Education is an area where we are making some serious reforms to improve outcomes. The stakes are too high for me to throw my hands in the air and make excuses. It would be very easy to say, ‘We are doing the best we can, there is nothing more we can do’. We have well-resourced schools, great infrastructure, passionate teachers and everyone is working hard, but the results are the results. I will not throw my hands in the air; I take education too seriously and I owe it to every child in the Northern Territory, as the responsible minister, to work my butt off to ensure we are doing everything we can. If there are better ways to do it, we can explore them, invest in them and deliver them.
The latest NAPLAN results show the system is failing students, especially in the bush. A total of 35% of students are not meeting the national minimum standards and that is not good enough. Two years in, our reforms are starting to bite, and some people on the other side do not like it. Focus on the classroom, not the department, was an election commitment, and changing staff ratios to better focus on the early years to build a better foundation for education – 66 additional teachers into our primary schools. The total Education budget has increased every year we have been in government.
Around 40 executive positions have moved from the top of the department and we have saved money on vehicle provision for these roles as well. If you want to criticise me for changing the focus from the department to the classroom, criticise me, but do not call it cuts to education. From the start we were upfront that our policies would require a loss of 35 teachers from high schools. Any other teacher losses in the Northern Territory have nothing to do with that policy. In fact, certain schools have more teachers today than they did 12 months or two years ago. This government has not put a cap on teacher numbers. As attendance rates grow – we work hard in that area – as we provide more schools and the Northern Territory grows we will need more teachers. There will be more teachers in the system this time next year. No doubt there will be more teachers in the system in five years from now because the Territory is growing.
If I save money by taking 40 executive contract positions – I have said before, in the five years before we took over government the net increase in student numbers was around 178 and the Department of Education grew by 780. That is not sustainable so yes, 40 executive positions were cut. That was a massive saving of 40 executive vehicles for the Department of Education. The focus is now on the classroom, not the department. We are not building empires here, we are trying to build an empire out there.
The Indigenous education review is tackling some of the real issues, not the easy ones, and focusing on results, not only the rhetoric everyone seems to focus on and which the other side is good at promoting.
I want to prepare kids to participate in the economy and strengthen culture and language in our schools. I would not bother going to places like North Queensland and trying to explore other methods of education if I did not think we had to.
As I said before, it would be easy for me to put my head in the sand and say, ‘You know what? The former government did the best it could. It cannot be done any better than it is at the moment.’ It can be, and we owe these children more; we owe these children every opportunity to improve their lives and give them an opportunity to have a life.
International education and training: it was another election commitment to create a 10-year plan, and this will be launched very soon. I have just been looking through some of the latest paperwork and I am extremely impressed with what I see. It has identified target countries to double our international student population and establish an international grammar school. It fits with the Developing the North agenda and with Asian engagement.
School autonomy: this has been put up as a masked plan to cut more money from schools. This is a personal policy that has come from many years of being associated with schools and the frustration associated with schools trying to get money out of the Department of Education for things such as approved minor new works.
Some schools have waited months, if not years, to get money back, and we owe schools a lot more than they have had in the past. School autonomy, and the fact they have control of their budgets, is exactly what is needed.
This is about improving outcomes – local decisions for local problems, which happens in other states. This does away with the horse trading that principals do every year to get the staffing mix right. It also gives schools councils a far bigger input than they have had before.
The review of middle years …
Mr WOOD: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! It is 5.30 pm.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: If you wind up in three minutes, I will work off my time here.
Mr CHANDLER: I will take the three minutes.
We should not be frightened to discuss things like school term dates. We should be mature enough to discuss them. Almost 4300 responses have been returned from the survey, which is amazing. This has created so much interest, because we want to see how we can change to improve outcomes and provide better support throughout the year.
On the expert panel on literacy and numeracy, another election commitment – getting the basics right and improving results. This is a fantastic group of academics and educators. The report was recently presented to me; I saw the first copy of it last night and I look forward to launching it next week during Literacy and Numeracy Week.
To finish up, I must put on the record that we need to do what we can to improve education in the Northern Territory. Again, we have passionate teachers, excellent infrastructure and well-resourced schools.
My biggest worry is results from remote communities, and we must do – I am hoping this will be a bipartisan approach – all we possibly can to improve them.
Debate adjourned.
MOTION
Inquiry into Political Donations
Inquiry into Political Donations
Continued from 13 May 2014.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly establishes an inquiry under section 4A of the Inquiries Act to investigate all aspects of political donations in the NT in the interests of public transparency and accountability, with particular reference to:
1. all existing legislation and any other relevant legislation relating to political donations
2. all donations to political parties and Independents in the NT over the last 20 years
3. the role of politically allied companies, such as Harold Nelson Holdings and Foundation 51, and any other third parties to see if they are being used as fronts to avoid the disclosure of political donations
4. the transparency and accountability of existing funding regimes
5. other jurisdictions and their practices in relation to political donations
6. other matters the board of inquiry may wish to pursue that would assist in improving the confidence of the public in relation to the transparency and full disclosure of political donations and possible effects on government policies and approvals.
The inquiry should report back to the Administrator within six months or any other extended period it reasonably considers necessary with any recommendations it considers appropriate that would improve the transparency and accountability of any matters relating to political donations.
I will go through each of these sections separately. I do not intend to get into the debate from my point of view – others may wish to do that – but to explain why we must examine this issue of public transparency and accountability, how we should do it, point out some of the issues that have been raised in this parliament and in the media, and discuss what is happening in other states in relation to political donations.
The first item refers to existing NT legislation and any other relevant legislation relating to political donations. We at least need to know what is in our own legislation.
- The Electoral Act and Electoral Regulations … outline the legislative framework to be followed for the conduct of elections for members of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly, for carrying out redistributions of electoral boundaries, the registration of political parties, maintenance of a financial disclosure framework and matters relating to judicial appeals, electoral offences and the administration of the Northern Territory Electoral Commission (NTEC).
All states have legislation regarding political donations. In the NT we have section 10 of the Electoral Act, which deals with financial disclosure, the definition of an associated entity, the disclosure period and reporting agents of registered parties.
Division 3, section 189, ‘Disclosure of Donations’, deals with defined details in relation to a gift or loan to a registered party or candidate which included the name of the registered tender. Defined details in relation to a gift means a gift from a trust fund or funds from a foundation, which means the names and addresses of the trustees of the fund or foundation and the name, title and description of the trust fund or foundation must be provided.
Under section 191, ‘Disclosure of Gifts’, all gifts are detailed to the commission in the return of an approved form. Section 193 deals with donations to candidates and section 194 deals with donations to registered parties. Section 197 deals with anonymous gifts.
Generally in the Territory you must disclose donations over $200 and $1000, and you must declare whether you have received a loan. We have some conditions on the amount of money a candidate or party has to declare after an election. I hope an inquiry would review existing legislation to see if it is effective today.
The second point was about all donations to political parties and Independents in the NT over the last 20 years.
If an inquiry is to be thorough, it will need to go back through the records and see who donated to the various parties and individuals, especially as they relate to decisions made by governments of the day.
Some of this would require checking through the Commonwealth Electoral Commission, as returns were lodged with the Commonwealth up until 2004. By going back through 20 years you could see any trends of donors to parties.
People might say that is a fair way back, but if you are to investigate, as I will mention later, whether government may have been influenced and policies affected by donations, and who has been giving donations regularly, that is the sort of material an inquiry would need to look at.
Point three was about the role of politically allied companies such as Harold Nelson Holdings and Foundation 51, and other third parties, to see if they are being used as fronts to avoid the disclosure of political donations.
Labor has an associated entity once called Harold Nelson Holdings, which I think is now referred to on electoral return forms as the Northern Territory Investment Fund. The CLP also has an associated entity called CLP Gifts and Legacies Pty Ltd, as well as Foundation 51, which is a private company. I doubt, if there is no impropriety, there would be any opposition to holding an inquiry into these structures.
What bothered me in all of this messy business we have heard about lately, and which led me to this motion, was what the Chief Minister said in response to a question from Mr Vowles on 8 May:
- If you want to ask a question of Foundation 51, ask that company or one of its directors. If you want to ask a question about the party, ask the party …
- If you want information about the party, ask the party.
He also said:
- There is no legal connection between Foundation 51 and the CLP, as far as I know.
Those quotes are from the Parliamentary Record.
It is very unlikely that information, either from the directors or the party, will be forthcoming to verify whether there is any legal connection between Foundation 51 and the CLP. An inquiry, which I am asking for, would be the only way to clear the air.
The Chief Minister, in responding to a question during that same Question Time, also mentioned the slush fund of Harold Nelson Holdings and the relationship between it and the Labor Party; he said if there were such slush funds, then an inquiry could verify if that was the case.
People see what is happening in New South Wales with the ICAC inquiry, and they start to wonder whether our Northern Territory parties have similar ghosts in the closet.
Point four deals with the transparency and accountability of existing funding regimes. Presently, political parties can dim the lights a bit, as can be seen in how the system works when the public wants to find out who donated to a party, as distinct from Independent candidates. For instance, a candidate for a party can ask donors to send their donations through the party. If they went directly to the candidate, that person would have to provide details of those donations within 15 weeks after the polling day. By telling donors to send donations direct to the party, the return detailing those donations does not have to be completed until 20 weeks after the end of the financial year. For instance, the last election was held in August 2012. The parties put their returns in 20 weeks after the financial year, meaning November 2013, and they only then made the Electoral Commission’s webpage in March this year. That is hardly a transparent and accountable process.
The government had been in power for 18 months before we knew who donated to which party. An inquiry would be an opportunity to make sure all candidates were on a level playing field when it came to financial disclosure of donations. Early returns should be for everyone.
Point five talks about other jurisdictions and their practices in relation to political donations. An inquiry could look at what is happening in other states and see whether there is legislation that would benefit our system if taken on by the government. For instance, in New South Wales there is not only a limitation on the reporting of donations, there is also a list of prohibited donors and an applicable cap on donations.
In New South Wales, prohibited donors are defined as the following: property developers; tobacco industry business entities; and liquor or gambling business entities. It is unlawful for a prohibited donor to make a political donation and it is unlawful for a person to accept the political donation from a prohibited donor, which is probably one of the reasons so many people have lost their jobs in New South Wales.
New South Wales obviously feels governments can be corrupted by receiving donations from various industry groups which would have much to gain by donating to a party.
If you look at the donations to our parties, certain donors come up time and time again. We have developers, the AHA and various gambling companies mentioned on both sides. Just because some of these groups give to both sides does not mean they cannot influence. For example, the AHA gave $150 000 to both parties at the last election, and both sites voted against restrictions on closing hours.
As I said, in New South Wales there is a limit to what a member of parliament can receive. I will give you an idea of what the caps are. Caps on political donations for state elections: Division 2A from 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2015 is $5700 for political donations to or for the benefit of a registered political party; $5700 for political donations to or for the benefit of a group; $2400 for political donations for the benefit of an unregistered party; $2400 for political donations to or for the benefit of a candidate; $2400 for political donations to or for the benefit of an elected member; and $2400 for political donations to or for the benefit of a third-party campaigner.
To make sure the rules are adhered to, New South Wales has an election funding authority which has a number of purposes, two of which are relevant to this debate. The election funding authority’s job is to enforce the imposition of maximum amounts, or caps, on the value of political donations that might be lawfully accepted and the electoral communication expenditure that might lawfully be incurred; to enforce prohibition of donations from a limited class of intending donors; and to enforce the requirement to disclose the source and amount of all political donations received and the amount of electoral expenditure for state, parliamentary and local government election campaigns.
The act imposes a duty on the election funding authority to exercise its functions in a manner that is not unfairly biased against or in favour of any particular party, group, candidate or other person, body or organisation.
If we hold an inquiry I hope we consider whether we need an election funding authority.
It is interesting to note that while we are talking about these caps, Queensland has just lifted its threshold for disclosure from $1000 to $12 400. That certainly would hide some consistent donations in the Northern Territory.
Point six: other matters the board of inquiry may wish to pursue that would assist in improving the confidence of the public in relation to the transparency and full disclosure of political donations and possible effects on government policies and approvals.
As I said before, New South Wales has a list of prohibited donors who deal with property, tobacco, alcohol and gambling. If you were to peruse a list of donors to both parties in the Northern Territory which might fit into this category you could ask whether government planning and development decisions or policy assisted companies which had donated to a party or parties whose decisions were influenced by those donations, for example, whether decisions about not restricting closing hours in Mitchell Street had anything to do with large donations from the AHA.
If we had similar electoral laws to New South Wales you would not have been able to donate to the CLP or Labor in previous elections if you were a prohibited donor. Should we look at prohibited donors? If we did, should it cover more than just the four categories in the New South Wales legislation?
Do entities such as large fuel companies control government policy? We have very high fuel prices in the Northern Territory and do not seem to have any influence on reducing them. Do constant donations from land or property developers over a number of years have any bearing on the government’s decision as to where development should occur? Can unions, through their donations or lack of donations, influence government policy?
I have the returns for the last few years from both parties. The Australian Labor Party had – this is mainly to do with the last election, if you were to take up some of the issues in New South Wales for instance – a donation, not very big, from Shenannigans. That is an alcohol provider, so therefore it would not be allowed to provide. There is the AHA as I mentioned before, as well as Halikos, Morandini, Strangways – more developers.
Under New South Wales legislation the ALP would not have been allowed to accept donations from those groups. By the way, I am not picking on those groups; they are just names I have pulled out. In the case of the CLP, before the last election there was a quite a large donation of $150 000 – similar to donations the AHA gave to both parties – from John Halikos. There is the Australian Hotels Association, Morandini, Randazzo and Shenannigans. There was also SportingBet, Strangways and one I do not know much about, which was from a few years ago – the Australian Lottery Company. If you examine the New South Wales process those companies would not be allow to donate.
I know there is some debate about whether this is fair or not, but it is a good idea. It can run into the problem of defining a developer, but if the inquiry was looking into that issue I hope it would study not only the New South Wales legislation but also talk to ICAC and see which issues have been raised in relation to whether this sort of legislation is workable. Whilst I might have a philosophical belief this is the way we should go, I hope the inquiry would look at the practical implications of trying to have donors who are not allowed to donate to a political party.
An inquiry should be able to investigate all of these matters. It could look back at which projects, developments or businesses saw favourable treatment by government and whether there was any correlation with donations, either directly or indirectly.
We are not the only ones talking about this issue at the moment. I have copies of the Australian Financial Review from Tuesday 19 August, as well as the day before. The heading is, ‘Developer’s $150 000 party donation’.
I will read from an article to give you an idea that we and New South Wales are not the only ones discussing this issue. It says:
- The largest individual donor to the Queensland Liberal National Party in the past year, former coal baron turned marina operator Paul Darrouzet, gave $150 000 to the party a week before gaining approval to dredge near the Great Barrier Reef.
As the Independent Commission Against Corruption in NSW casts a spotlight on the murky world of political donations, an investigation by The Australian Financial Review can reveal property and construction companies continue to help fill the LNP coffers.
Unlike NSW, Queensland does not have a ban on property donations and the Newman government recently lifted the threshold for donation disclosure from $1000 to $12 400 – in line with federal rules
Someone said it was 10 – I am not sure, but it is at least eight – members of the New South Wales Liberal Party who have either resigned or gone to the cross bench. I am not sure if they have all resigned, but there have been some issues in receiving donations that go against NSW electoral laws, and they are based on the capping and prohibition of receiving or giving donations from industries. I note – I may be wrong – the Mayor of Newcastle has now resigned as well. It begs the question as to whether we should look at something similar ourselves.
The last point is that the inquiry should report back to the Administrator within six months or any other extended period it reasonably considers necessary with any recommendations it considers appropriate that would improve the transparency and accountability of any matters relating to political donations. There may be other matters which have not been covered which the inquiry might find helpful in improving the manner in which political donations are dealt with. One option raised in relation to the scandal rocking the New South Wales Liberal Party was the idea of public funding in election campaigns to avoid private donations that can influence a government later on.
I knew Ted Mack, who used to be the Independent, when he was the Mayor of North Sydney Council, and he was a person who always spoke his mind. I believe he was also an Independent member representing New South Wales in the federal parliament for a period of time. He was interviewed about this matter and he put forward the idea that people standing for election should be publicly funded. That could be very controversial.
It may be that people do not accept they should have to pay for politicians to run an election campaign. On the other hand, it may take away all the concerns people have about the influence industry bodies, companies or individuals can have in making the policies of a government move in a way they would like.
There is a lot of politics in this debate, but if members of this parliament would like to clear the air on this issue, if only for the sake of looking at our legislation and seeing whether it is doing what it was intended to do and whether we could improve on it, whether other jurisdictions’ legislation is worth considering as part of a revised piece of legislation, while we are discussing this it could give parties an opportunity in an inquiry to talk about ways in which they raise money for their political purposes.
Much of this has been around Foundation 51. I have a great range of media releases from various people. I will use one to show you how the issue gets blurry. This is an ABC news item, ‘Foundation 51 had direct line to NT Chief Minister Adam Giles, FOI documents reveal’:
- The director of Foundation 51 asked Northern Territory Chief Minister Adam Giles to look over a press release refuting claims the company was a Country Liberal Party (CLP) slush fund, the ABC has learned.
E-mails obtained under freedom of information (FOI) legislation also showed Mr Giles wrote to Foundation 51 director Graeme Lewis about concerns of a possible conflict of interest.
Are there methods where people can donate, remain anonymous and that donation somehow finds its way into the corpus of any political party? I raise this motion tonight asking for support on both sides.
Territorians want to see governments they can trust on both sides. They want to make sure people who donate to those parties do not have any undue influence on policies, because we would hope governments make decisions for all Territorians, not for friends or people who have done them favours, otherwise our democratic system becomes corrupted.
You can see what is happening in New South Wales, and I do not want that to happen in the Northern Territory. I hope our process is sufficiently transparent. Some people might say we need to set up an ICAC. I do not know; perhaps that could come out of the inquiry if it felt things were happening that were not above board. I could not make any comment on that because it would be the role of the inquiry to look at those matters.
I raise this as a matter of public importance as well, not in the official way of having our matters of public importance, just in the broader context that this is an issue where people want to make sure everything is up-front, correct and transparent. I hope both parties will support this motion.
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this motion because it is about honesty, trust and transparency. It brings the focus of Territorians back to how we encourage people to think in the Northern Territory. It is about honesty. When we raise our children, some of the core principles we teach them are about honesty, transparency and not lying.
Why should Territorians lose out to big business which donates to the two major parties? Foundation 51 has been, as the member for Nelson said, the subject of huge debate in this House. As a former member of the Country Liberal Party, and on behalf of my two colleagues, the members for Arnhem and Arafura, I would like to ask a question. If we all support the inquiry the member for Nelson is asking for, I would like an inquiry into who paid for my, Larisa Lee’s and Francis Xavier’s campaigns.
These are the issues we need to be open and up-front about. Mr Deputy Speaker, maybe you need to ask who paid for your campaign. Was it Foundation 51? We know one of the donors for the member for Port Darwin. There are many people.
We have accused the new member for Blain of receiving a donation of around $10 000 from Foundation 51 that is not cited anywhere. This is the honesty and transparency we need. He is a Christian man, a teacher who taught about openness, transparency, honesty and trust. That was in your maiden speech – trust; maybe you can allow all of us to trust you and believe you are telling the truth. Did Foundation 51 fund or help you? You need to be very cautious in the answers you give.
I put on the record how important the questions are that people ask about our integrity. This is about the integrity of parties, and Territorians need to know. An inquiry would be one way of putting this to bed.
Let us be honest and transparent. I have asked, if an inquiry is approved, for the election campaigns of my two colleagues and me to be looked into. That is about trust, honesty and transparency. It is about telling Territorians that we listen to their voices, even if they are small and somewhere in the northern suburbs.
The member for Nelson is correct; this is about the integrity of this government and parliament. We need to show Territorians we are sincere and here to represent them. We will make sure, if there is any doubt, that we erase those doubts in the minds of Territorians asking these questions, whether they are journalists, the media or ordinary people.
There is doubt and there are questions being asked. It is up to everyone in this House to make sure we restore the trust, faith and integrity by allowing such inquiries to happen. We do not want to be like New South Wales or any other jurisdiction where you have huge inquiries happening and ministers and four politicians resigning because they know what is coming up might have an impact on their future as a politician.
If we are not scared of uncovering things we might not want other Territorians to see, we should be open and transparent. Everybody in this Chamber should be supporting the call by the member for Nelson, because it is about honesty. Are we ashamed? Are we hiding something? It will be very interesting to see, member for Nelson, who votes for this. It is about sending the message we are honest and truthful. It is about the integrity of the Northern Territory, and when we see the direct attacks on the free, democratic process here we must question ourselves.
Why is this happening? We need to make sure the integrity of this parliament and ourselves is returned. Let us close all the loopholes with regard to disclosure and donations to political parties. Let us not be ashamed or afraid to close all of those gaps. If we see gaps in our connection with each other let us close them. Let us say, ‘Okay, none of this will happen. We will close all of these little loops.’
I want to read into Hansard some of the e-mails between the Chief Minister, the president and some CLP members of Foundation 51.
Foundation 51, a private company, is described in e-mail correspondence between Graeme Lewis and the president of the CLP as providing the following service. I quote Graeme Lewis:
- … the existence of Foundation 51 and its now-claimed relationship with the Party, draws the whole matter into wide focus. The intent of Mr Melky to further canvass issues of the Foundation at future meetings causes me to actively consider disposing of the whole concept, refund the monies in hand, and forfeit the opportunities that have been built in past years, to assist in the political spectrum of the Northern Territory. It would be a shame, just to satisfy the egos of a few, and one hopes that garage sales will be able to replace the Foundation in providing adequate resources for future profile building.
I have made the Chief Minister aware of this probability, much to his concern. He and I have on many occasions discussed the matter of the Foundation, and he is well disposed to having the Foundation continue its activity, with the wall between the entities currently fixed in place.
Again:
- The Foundation has already contributed significantly towards the activities of the Blain by-election. In retrospect – not clever in view of this current interrogation!
While the member for Blain has now disclosed the amount of funds he received from Foundation 51 and its directors – was it $10 000? It did not show up on the Northern Territory Electoral Commission website. It was thought that closing Foundation 51 would make this investigation go away and that all wrongdoing in past and present activities would vanish.
Graeme Lewis also said:
- Indeed, a plan to set up a communication network under the F51 banner must now be scrapped.
Accountability, disclosure and transparency are vital components of good financial management for any organisation, but political parties must take extra care to ensure they do not trespass on the trust of the people and their supporters. Associated entities are required to disclose donations, as clearly identified in the Northern Territory Electoral Commission disclosure handbook for donors. If it looks like, smells like and behaves like an associate entity, then Foundation 51 is an associate entity.
To keep secret the identity of donors to organisations such as Foundation 51 and Foundation 51’s own financial contribution to the CLP can lead to a range of unfair advantages to those who donate secretly, especially if they are involved in tenders that win government contracts and/or applications for government support that can provide financial reward or gain to those companies or individuals.
It is in the interest of Territorians, and in our best interests as representatives of the people, that we support the member for Nelson’s motion.
Are we afraid to expose ourselves? Are we scared of something that might be find out? Or are we happy to support this motion and allow an inquiry to make sure all of these allegations can be cleared through that process? That is the only way we can put all of this to bed.
This is another e-mail from Graeme Lewis, sent Wednesday 26 March 2014, at 10.14 pm, to Ross Connolly. Copied in are Eli Melky, Daniel Davis and Damien Moriarty. SMS messages to Eli Melky were the subject of this email, written and sent in absolute confidence. It said:
- Good evening Ross, thank you for your e-mail/letter. I note that it is copied to three other gentlemen, and therefore I shall respond in that same way. There is an old mission statement used by well-known service club to ‘build up and not to destroy’ and you have been the epitome of exercising that mission throughout your Presidency. I commend you for that, and in that same spirit, I too offer you this response.
I note that Mr Melky tabled two transcripts of SMS items that I sent to him. In fact I sent four such messages and he responded in kind with four also. Would you like to see all of them? Whilst I do reject his characterisations, I recognise that I was justifiably angry with his actual and implied various attacks on both you and me, on Saturday and in his letter.
I can give you the undertaking you request that all future written communications from me, whether by text, e-mail or letter to anyone, will be professional and respectful. Indeed there shall be none after this. I do hope you will find this response meets the criteria to be professional and respectful.
I acknowledge that as Deputy Treasurer (not ‘assistant’ – am I right?), Mr Melky may well be entitled to information regarding the Party’s finances, and I did previously offer to assist him in this mission, but that was in vain. But his letter to you stepped well outside that range of inquiry, and canvassed other issues to which he is not necessarily entitled, by virtue of his Deputy Treasurer position. The information regarding Party finances is of course freely available from elected officers of the Party, including your good self.
I have recently briefed one of the Vice Presidents and of course the Treasurer. Ross, you did advise me of the discussions this morning regarding Foundation 51, and I thank you for that. Out of that discussion came two issues that may well be breaches in the wall that must rightly exist between the Party and the Foundation. One of those issues was remedied within days of it occurring several years ago, but I am well aware of that item remaining on Google pages to this day. Perhaps Daniel knows how to deal with that too.
The matter has long ago been addressed with Australian Electoral Commission, and is an issue no longer. The other matter – that of the domain address and ownership – you brought to my attention just today. It is quite disappointing that this has in fact been known to members of the team even for years, but was never ever advised to me as a member of the team.
It is because of allegations we throw at each other inside this Chamber that I speak, on behalf of my two colleagues, to ask for support of this motion from the member for Nelson, who has asked for an inquiry, openness, transparency and trust. It is what we all need, so we can put all of these allegations to bed. It is sending a direct message to Territorians that they can have faith in their leaders and representatives.
Mr VOWLES (Johnston): Mr Deputy Speaker, I too support this motion.
The activities of the CLP and Foundation 51 have undermined the fabric of the democratic process in the Northern Territory. Foundation 51 has much in common with Eight by Five, an entity established by the Liberal Party in New South Wales to conceal unlawful political donations. Investigations by the Independent Commission against Corruption in New South Wales have exposed illegal and corrupt practices by fundraising entity Eight by Five and members of the Liberal Party.
If the Chief Minister was really committed to good governance and propriety he would initiate a wide-ranging judicial inquiry into Foundation 51. He has refused to do that because he has much to hide about the CLP’s secretive fundraising activities via Foundation 51.
Foundation 51 is a slush fund set up to circumvent the disclosure of political donations required by the Commonwealth and Northern Territory Electoral Acts. Mr Graeme Lewis, a member of the CLP management committee, a former CLP Treasurer and, until recently, the CLP-appointed Chair of the Northern Territory Land Development Corporation, is a director of Foundation 51.
A former director of Foundation 51 is CLP-appointed magistrate Mr Peter Maley. Recently the Northern Territory Bar Association raised a broad range of serious concerns about the suitability of Mr Maley to continue to hold office as a magistrate in the Northern Territory. One of those serious concerns was magistrate Maley’s directorship of Foundation 51. Chief Minister Adam Giles has consistently stated there is no connection between the CLP and Foundation 51. That is simply not true.
In a recent e-mail disclosed under FOI, despite previous denials, the Chief Minister’s direct relationship with Foundation 51 and its director, Graeme Lewis has been clearly exposed. I seek leave to table an exchange of e-mails.
Leave granted.
Mr VOWLES: In an e-mail on 11 May, Foundation 51 director Graeme Lewis asked the Chief Minister to clear a media release refuting claims that Foundation 51 is a CLP slush fund. His e-mail to the Chief Minister said:
- If your people think this sort of Press Release might help, not hinder, then it can fly.
The use of the words ‘help’ and ‘hinder’ are an instructive. The clear objective was to help cover up and hinder exposure of the truth. The draft media release set out in the e-mail states:
Mr Lewis concluded by pointing out that the nature and operation of Foundation 51 Pty Ltd has progressed from its original structure in 2008 which envisaged an annual subscription system, and even perhaps initially, a close alliance with the Country Liberal Party.
On 13 May Mr Lewis issued a media release which omitted reference to the close alliance between Foundation 51 and the CLP included in the draft referred to the Chief Minister. The Chief Minister’s motive is clear. Under no circumstances did he want his mouthpiece, Graeme Lewis, to confirm in public the close connection between Foundation 51 and the Country Liberal Party.
Further confirmation of the Chief Minister’s involvement in Foundation 51 is exposed in the tabled exchange of e-mails with Mr Lewis.
On 22 May Graeme Lewis said in an e-mail to the Chief Minister:
- Ross C has tracked me down, and has faithfully briefed me on your concerns re the Land Development Advisory Board, and my position there.
…
I look forward to talking this through with you real soon.
In his e-mail reply of 25 May, clearly concerned about revelations concerning his involvement in Foundation 51, the Chief Minister said
- Graeme. Let’s have a chat when you get back … I want to ensure there’s no real or perceived conflict of interest with any dealing you may or may not have. Let’s discuss, any find out what’s really happening and we can resolve … Talk then. Adam Giles.
Despite his previous denials, the e-mail confirms the Chief Minister was fully aware that Mr Lewis’ appointment as Chair of the Land Development Corporation was a clear conflict of interest with his directorship of Foundation 51 and membership of the CLP management committee. It is also clear from this e-mail that Graeme Lewis, the Chief Minister’s hand-picked Chair of the Land Development Corporation, was being set up to take the fall for the Chief Minister, Adam Giles.
On 5 July, the NT News reported:
- CLP backroom figure and political fundraiser Graeme Lewis has resigned his government appointed position as director of the NT Land Development Corporation.
We know from CLP sources that Graeme Lewis was pressured to resign by senior government figures to take the heat off the Chief Minister. This is the same Chief Minister who knew Graeme Lewis was the member of the CLP management committee and a director of Foundation 51 when he was appointed as Chair of the Land Development Corporation. This is the same Chief Minister who sits on the CLP management committee with Graeme Lewis and who has said in this parliament that he does not know about Foundation 51. The appointment of an active CLP fundraiser as Chair of the Land Development Corporation was always inappropriate.
There are startling similarities between the CLP’s activities in the Northern Territory and breaches of the law concerning the disclosure of donations by the Liberal Party in New South Wales. In New South Wales, the Independent Commission Against Corruption has exposed systematic rorting of donation disclosure provisions and other corrupt and illegal behaviour by the Liberal Party. A central element of the ICAC investigation is a corrupt scheme to make donations to the Liberal Party using a slush fund called Eight by Five to avoid disclosure provisions in the Electoral Act.
The Liberal Party’s Eight by Five and the CLP slush fund, Foundation 51, are both designed to hide political donations from public scrutiny. The Chief Minister has consistently denied any connection between the fundraising activities of Foundation 51 and the CLP. However, this deception was also exposed by e-mails tabled in this Assembly on 8 May. An e-mail from Graeme Lewis on 26 March confirmed he had discussed the operation of Foundation 51 with the Chief Minister on many occasions. The Lewis e-mail also confirmed the direct involvement of Foundation 51 in CLP fundraising activities. It stated:
- … I personally, with others, are vulnerable, and accountable to the many contributors who support the Foundation regularly … I have to question how many garage sales and golf days will be needed to produce the many millions of dollars that will be required by the end of the year 2016.
The Lewis e-mail of 26 March also stated unequivocally:
- The Foundation has already contributed significantly towards the activities of the Blain by-election. In retrospect – not clever in the view of this current interrogation!
The Northern Territory judiciary, the legal fraternity and the wider community may well ask; what did Foundation 51 director, magistrate Peter Maley, know about these activities?
In New South Wales, ICAC inquiries will be extended to the national level following disclosures that illegal donations in that state have been laundered by the Free Enterprise Foundation, an entity of the federal Liberal Party. There are close parallels between the illicit activities of the Liberal Party of New South Wales, exposed by ICAC, and Foundation 51, the CLP entity which has solicited and refused to disclose secret donations in the Northern Territory.
Recently, the Sydney Morning Herald reported a key fundraiser for federal Treasurer Joe Hockey has been called to give evidence to ICAC on alleged illegal donations to the North Sydney Forum. The forum provides exclusive access to Mr Hockey in return for donations in the form of annual membership fees of up to $22 000. This is the model used by the CLP’s Foundation 51.
In common with Adam Giles and Graeme Lewis, Joe Hockey and the New South Wales Liberals have refused to disclose the details of secret donations. A common thread in New South Wales and the Northern Territory is the questionable appointment of political operatives to key positions in the public service, statutory boards and authorities operating in commercial environments.
These appointments have compromised government propriety and decision-making. The appointment of Graeme Lewis as Chair of the Land Development Corporation clearly conflicted with his directorship of Foundation 51 and membership of the CLP management committee. His belated resignation as Chair of the LDC under pressure from the Chief Minister cannot hide this clear conflict of interest. There is growing community concern and anger about the long list of CLP jobs for the boys, especially those in key commercial and regulatory environments.
The recent appointment of former Chief Minister and lobbyist, Denis Burke, as Chair of the Development Consent Authority is a clear conflict of interest and should be revoked. There is also growing community disquiet about the appointment of Gary Nairn, former Liberal Party minister and president of the CLP, as the Northern Territory Planning Commissioner.
The body count from the ICAC investigations into Liberal Party activities in New South Wales is two ministers gone from Cabinet, two members resigned from parliament, four ex-Liberal backbenchers sitting on the cross benches, the Mayor of Newcastle has resigned, a former Premier sitting on the backbench and a federal Assistant Treasurer forced to stand aside.
On events in New South Wales, one political commentator said recently:
- If MPs keep resigning from the Liberal Party at the present rate, the crossbench will be able to apply for party status, which requires 10 members.
There is an endemic and pervasive disregard for propriety in the CLP government led by Chief Minister Adam Giles. The Territory community has a reasonable expectation that donations to political parties and candidates will be disclosed in the public interest and in accordance with the law. However, providing good governance and integrity always comes last with this CLP government. The survival of Adam Giles, an inexperienced, immature, arrogant and out of touch Chief Minister, is the primary and only focus of this government and the CLP.
There is a compelling case for a wide-ranging judicial inquiry into Foundation 51, including but not limited to the activities of Mr Graeme Lewis, magistrate Peter Maley and the CLP ministers and MLAs. This is the only way to expose the web of deceit at the heart of Foundation 51 and its fundraising on behalf of the CLP.
I look forward to and hope somebody from the CLP will make a contribution to this debate. Thank you.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, I wonder who the real member for Johnston is. We always hear these eloquent and well-argued speeches, and every so often he will drop the piece of paper and try to articulate his way through an argument as he ad libs it. He betrays very quickly the yawning chasm between the member for Johnston and the real member for Johnston. Whoever you are member for Johnston, you write very good speeches, which are delivered by being read out in this place. I congratulate you.
To the real member for Johnston, whoever you are, what I just heard was gumpf and politics. I will give you an example with the e-mail trail that was just tabled; it is many pages long, and I asked the Table Office to provide me a copy. It is the same e-mail printed out about six times in different forms. The member for Johnston tried to pad out the e-mail trail, when it is the same message repeated.
Once again, the starting point for the member for Johnston is dishonesty, misrepresentation and untruth. We have to establish that …
Mr VOWLES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I know you are trying to bait me, member for Port Darwin. Standing Order 62: offensive and unbecoming words, so I ask that he withdraw.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Which words in particular?
Mr VOWLES: Dishonest.
Mr ELFERINK: I withdraw the word, but I am not sure how else to describe it. I could use the word liar, but that would be unparliamentary, so I would not do that. The peddler of untruths, the manufacturer of misrepresentation, is trying to be deceptive from the word go. I thank the honourable member for the half of a forest he placed on the table, which is pretty much the same e-mail reproduced again and again.
There is great focus on Foundation 51. You will notice not once did he mention Harold Nelson Holdings, which appears in the motion.
Ms Lawrie: That was fully disclosed.
Mr ELFERINK: I am glad we can pick up on this. This is where I will challenge this argument and the whole way it is constructed. ‘Fully disclosed’, says the Leader of the Opposition – indeed, fully disclosed.
There are several issues that come up in this motion. The first issue is, what are the rules? The second issue is, how are they policed? And the third issue is, who broke the rules? Let us start with the first issue. The member for Nelson articulated some of those rules which exist. I have been around this House since 1997. In that time I have seen this debate played out on repeated occasions and from time to time the rules have changed. The same set of arguments has been run each and every time – full disclosure, people have the right to know, all of those sorts of things.
The rules that change are then placed in such a way, before the House, that they will fix all of those problems. However, we keep coming back to the same debate again and again. The issue now is that we must have an inquiry and look at those rules again. We have to see if those rules are working; I am happy to see references to those rules, but in the game of politics there will always be members in this House – and we have just seen it from the member for Johnston – who will try to build something around nothing. We have a tissue-thin series of allegations, the rest of the gumpf built around it, and we will have a discussion about what is happening in New South Wales and add that to the list.
The rules of disclosure in this jurisdiction are clear and well-articulated. As far as I know, they have been complied with. I have complied with my obligations under the rules of disclosure and would expect that everybody else in this House applies those rules of disclosure to themselves.
The rules have been established after many debates in this House, they continue to exist and, as far as I know, they are robust.
That raises the issue of how the rules are policed. We have the Electoral Commission, which has a capacity to investigate those rules. As I understand it, from time to time the Electoral Commission will proceed with investigations and go through the process. It undertakes those investigations in accordance with rules which have been dictated. I could stand corrected on this but, if memory serves me, the current set of rules were established under the former Labor Party.
These are there rules; these are the benchmarks and standards the Labor Party said were fine and are what we expect in this jurisdiction. The rules are policed because professional people police them. If there is a complaint to be made, I urge any member who has any grounds to believe there is a breach of the rules to make an appropriate complaint to the Northern Territory Electoral Commission, which is properly funded to to pursue these matters to their exhaustion.
This raises the next issue – where the member for Johnston makes his case – of, who broke the rules? The member for Johnston is long on assertions, but if he has any to make I would take him back to the former point of how they are policed. I ask the member for Johnston to say, ‘Okay, I had a series of allegations to make; I have one e-mail to print out several times. I can send all of that to the Australian Electoral Commission and it can make whatever investigations of that it sees fit under the rules established in this jurisdiction.’
However, that is not what the member for Johnston is arguing for. He is arguing, ‘Let us have another investigation because it would suit us politically to do so’. The rules exist, they are well established, and anybody who breaks the rules will have to face the consequences. That is the normal process that is in place.
There is an investigate body in place, there is an established set of rules, and if there are any assertions of impropriety to be made I urge members to follow those rules and structures and pursue the matters accordingly.
I hear all sorts of references and quotes from members opposite in relation to the e-mail trail, particularly in regard to Graeme Lewis. All I can see repeatedly in those e-mail trails is Graeme Lewis being quite clear about the fact he has to create and keep boundaries in place between the company of which he is a director, Foundation 51, and the party, which is the CLP.
I have some understanding, as a former director of the party, of how the CLP works. I think I have been to one of Foundation 51’s functions, but it is something that is quite separate. That has been made clear again in correspondence from Graeme Lewis, which has been tabled in this place. If members opposite have any case to make there are appropriate avenues to go down, and I urge members opposite to do so.
This enthusiasm, particularly from the Labor Party, is politically driven. The rules are well established, the systems for policing those rules are well established, and if anybody has any information as to who broke the rules, I advise them to go down the path of referring it to the body that polices the rules. This motion will not be supported by government.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank those who responded to the debate.
The Electoral Commission is investing Foundation 51. I quote from an ABC website:
- Northern Territory Chief Minister Adam Giles is welcoming news that the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) is investigating Foundation 51, a company with strong ties to the Country Liberal Party he leads.
It goes on to say:
- ‘I was not aware that they were doing an investigation … it is good to see’, Mr Giles said on Tuesday.
The revelation that the Electoral Commission is investigating the links between the CLP and Foundation 51 came to light after a Freedom of Information request from the ABC. The AEC refused to release 68 documents relating to an investigation into Foundation 51 but did confirm it was looking at whether Foundation 51 was an ‘associated entity’ of the CLP.
If it is found to be an associated entity Foundation 51 would have to provide an annual return about its affairs to the AEC.
I quote again from Mr Giles:
- That is a matter for the AEC to have a look at and it’s a matter for the party and/or Foundation 51 to consider whether they may or may not be [an associated entity].
I heard what the Attorney-General had to say, and I understand what he is about. I hope an inquiry would not only be about Foundation 51. We have one state in Australia which – you might say it is only one state – has obviously seen there are dangers when certain industry groups donate to parties. They have said some of those industry groups should not donate to political parties. The reasons for that are obvious: we know certain businesses will try to persuade governments to make decisions that would favour them. I cannot say whether that is happening in the Territory or not. However, we have similar industries to New South Wales, and it would be good to hold an inquiry into our own books and into whether a system operating in New South Wales is something the government should consider.
The member for Port Darwin said the rules are robust, which is his opinion. I would like to see that tested in an inquiry. It is easy to say the rules are robust, but if I ask the member for Port Darwin to show me whether some of the donations given to the CLP have affected its policies in its time in government – whether it is in the last two years or previous periods.
I would also ask the opposition. They were in government for a good period of time and received some heavy donations from various companies, developers, the AHA and, I think, SKYCITY as well. There is a group of companies that in one jurisdiction in Australia would not be allowed to donate to parties for electoral purposes. As in many cases when people want to try to get around the rules, they have tried to do so by, in this case, handing out cash donations, hoping nobody will see.
Luckily in New South Wales they have a pretty strong ICAC, which has performed some fairly thorough investigations and found where people had received money from. People might say ‘So what?’ but it is interesting. If you know the rules – the rules in New South Wales have been in place since 2009 – why would certain people try to break them? If they knew the rules said you could not donate, why would they try to break the rules? Why would they give a politician a certain amount of money he should not be receiving? It is because they wanted some political influence or commercial favours from that government. If it was not for that, why would they break the law and donate money to particular individuals?
I do not know all the details about Foundation 51. The member for Namatjira has raised some issues in relation to the Blain by-election and whether she was funded by Foundation 51. The member for Johnston has also listed some issues, raised through an e-mail trail.
However, they are not the only issues I am talking about with this inquiry. An inquiry would clear the air, hopefully, on matters those two people are referring to but, at the same time, it would provide an opportunity to see whether our system is working properly. All right, the member for Port Darwin says the rules have been examined several times. But it is not only rules I am looking at, it is whether donations are affecting any government policies.
The public wants some certainty that donations and government policies are not related. I have heard people say the government sometimes looks at itself as being the most important part of being in government, if that makes any sense. The people they represent are the most important part, and you would hope receiving donations from any company did not sway government decisions which sidelined and ignored the trust of the Northern Territory community. They would hope that governments would do the right thing by them, rather than any specific group or body that was in favour.
I relate this to both governments, because I know of policies and actions on both sides which have concerned me. You wonder why a development occurred which seemed to be outside normal guidelines. It has concerned me that perhaps those decisions were influenced by donations. I might be wrong, and the best way to find out is to ask for an inquiry, even if it goes back 20 years, to look for any trends. Some of the documents I have before me – there is an opinion piece dated 4 February 2000 when the CLP was in power and Labor was the opposition. Even that talks about investments. Some of those companies contributing to the CLP are still contributing to the party. I imagine some of the companies are still contributing to the Labor Party as well. The only two I can guarantee would not be contributing to the CLP anymore would be Ansett Airlines and Gove peninsula-based corporation Nabalco.
The other ones here probably still donate some funds; I know they do because I have them on the record, which anyone can obtain, so they are not secret.
I understand this will not receive support from the government. That is disappointing, as it would not be a big inquiry. With the AEC conducting an inquiry at the same time, information in relation to Foundation 51 could have been shared and a simple analysis of donations performed, as well as looking at the structure of our legislation and any improvements that could be made to make sure there is a clear delineation between which funds governments and parties receive and which policies and decisions are being made by government, so it is clear for everyone to see.
If the AEC thinks there should be an inquiry into Foundation 51 it must have some concerns. If we also had an inquiry which did not duplicate the issues the AEC is looking at we could find a good outcome for all Territorians.
This is about transparency, about people in the Northern Territory having faith in their electoral system and donations system, and if you really believe in the democratic process you believe governments will be influenced by the vote, not the dollar. That is one area this inquiry could resolve and tell this parliament whether we have had governments – of both persuasions, because we have had both governments over the last few years – which have done the right thing by the people, not based on the dollar, but on what was good for Territorians.
Motion agreed to.
WORKERS REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION AMENDMENT (FIRE-FIGHTERS) BILL
(Serial 87)
(Serial 87)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader) (by leave): Madam Speaker, on behalf of the member for Fannie Bay, I present a bill entitled the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Fire-Fighters) Bill. I move that the bill be now read a second time.
It is with a heavy heart that, with comments from the Treasurer in today’s Question Time, we bring back to this House a bill that provides cover for firefighters and ex-firefighters who develop cancer.
Since the CLP voted against providing firefighters with protection a year ago, three former firefighters have passed away with cancer.
Since the CLP voted against providing firefighters with protection a year ago, Jock McLeod has had to fight cancer and fight the system. Jock still has not been covered by this government in his fight with cancer.
Since the CLP voted against providing firefighters with protection a year ago, Tommy Lawler has had to fight cancer and fight the system. Tommy still has not been covered by this government in his fight with cancer.
In the year since the CLP voted against providing protection, we have seen no action from this government until today, when the government has said it will finally release their review on the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act. Then, to add insult to injury, they have made it clear in their press release that they will not support retrospective legislation.
The government has essentially said, ‘We appreciate you guys bringing this to our attention. We will do this, but not for you’. The government will not cover the men who did the hard yards, the decades of work on the front line, to bring this to the government’s and the public’s attention.
It is the cruellest blow. What a disrespectful thing to do to these brave men who have laid their lives on the line for decades for Territorians and have paid a terrible price – contracted cancer on the job – and this government will not do the decent thing and support them.
The government’s own first review, handed down last year, supports the fact that firefighters are at greater risk of developing cancer while on the job protecting Territorians.
The government’s own review accepts that the medical supports the principle of reversing the assumption, the principle behind our bill. Yet there still has been no action by this government to provide cover for our firefighters and former firefighters.
This is a significant issue for our firefighters, former firefighters and their families. They have, over the last year, organised the largest petition in the Territory’s history to draw attention to their fears and their need for protection.
The lack of action provides us concern for the health of firefighters. There has been no guarantee from the CLP government that they would have retrospective provisions. That is a critical issue for firefighters. Without that provision, a firefighter would only be covered if they discover they have cancer after a bill that reverses the presumption becomes an act.
There are firefighters considering not visiting the doctor for their health checks. They have seen the problems their brother firefighters have faced while fighting cancer and fighting the system; the human and financial cost is significant.
Our firefighters should not have these stresses while they do their job keeping Territorians safe. We encourage all firefighters to look after their health. If you have cancer, the sooner you know the better you are. The CLP’s lack of action should not impact on your healthcare.
The CLP’s lack of action means we have to return to this Chamber to re-introduce a bill that provides protection for firefighters and former firefighters who develop cancer. With this second bill we have listened to the comments from the member for Nelson and made two amendments. The member for Nelson agreed that firefighters and former firefighters who already have cancer should be covered, but was uncomfortable with an open-ended retrospective period.
In our second bill we will provide a grandfathering provision. Firefighters and former firefighters have two years in which to come forward with their claim. We have consulted with firefighters, and we believe this is an adequate time period for people to come forward. As I touched on earlier, all firefighters who develop cancer after this legislation is enacted would be covered by the reversal of presumption.
The member for Nelson’s second concern was about providing a distinction between professional firefighters and volunteer firefighters. Our volunteers do an amazing job, often in difficult circumstances. The nature of their work depends on what the community needs them to respond to. That on-call nature means that the incidents they turn up to truly matter. We know from the medical evidence that professional firefighters, as part of their full-time activities, are exposed in a manner that means they are at greater risk of developing cancer on the job, just by doing their job, just by turning up for their shift.
That means time served, as the schedule in the first bill, and in this bill, sets out, is appropriate for professional firefighters. We have looked at other states and taken from South Australia its provisions for volunteer firefighters and a requirement to attend at least 175 incidents over a period of five years. We believe this is an important threshold to achieve for volunteer firefighters. It gives insurers some comfort that claimants have been active firefighters and recognises those who do serve on the front line during incidents. These two changes are responses to the member for Nelson’s contribution to the second reading debate.
The CLP provided no material response that we could respond to. The minister instead made accusations and false promises. The minister said that our first bill and our firefighters were politically motivated. That is an accusation we reject utterly. That is an accusation firefighters reject utterly. In every jurisdiction that this bill has been introduced it has received bipartisan support, in the Australian parliament and the Tasmanian parliament, and since the CLP voted against our bill, firefighters have received bipartisan support in South Australia and Western Australia.
In the Northern Territory we still have the farcical situation that firefighters at Darwin Airport are covered, but a firefighter working just 10 km away in Stuart Park is not covered. The CLP had an opportunity to be bipartisan and support our bill. The CLP had an opportunity to be bipartisan and introduce its own bill. We would have supported it.
The minister said, ‘Wait on our review’. He said today he will release a review with 58 recommendations and, pending Cabinet approval, accepts most of them, but, again, with no retrospectivity it means there are currently four known firefighters that their legislation does not help.
We do not believe our firefighters should wait, but after the CLP voted down our bill we have had no choice but to wait. The government’s own review supports our bill. The minister has not acted on the need for protection for our firefighters identified in that review. Every other parliament that has provided this protection has just done it. They have brought in bills specifically for firefighters. They have not made excuses like the minister did and has done.
It is a year since the CLP voted down our bill. That was a needless political decision that has abandoned our firefighters. Jock, Tommy – we will not abandon them; we will get legislation passed in this Chamber that protects our firefighters.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to the House.
Debate adjourned.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
Reversal of Decision of the Assembly
Reversal of Decision of the Assembly
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, whilst there is no question before the Chair I move that so much of standing orders be suspended to enable the …
Ms Lawrie: Madam Speaker, it is general business. He has to seek leave to suspend standing orders.
Mr ELFERINK: No, actually, I do not.
I move that so much of standing orders be suspended as to enable this House to reverse its decision in relation to the inquiry into political donations made earlier this day. The Northern Territory government made it abundantly clear we would not be supporting this matter. The House has made a decision, and I move the motion be put forthwith.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, speaking to the suspension of standing orders, tonight draws clear and stark just how incompetent and dysfunctional the CLP government is. It has to use the powers of the Leader of Government Business, vested in parliament, in an abusive way to ram through a motion that essentially includes a gag order, because he is moving that the motion be put forthwith. The government does not want a debate over whether to reverse a decision the parliament made earlier this evening.
I cannot recall – I will be happy to stand corrected in the summary by the learned member for Port Darwin – any time in the history of this parliament since self-government that a government has stooped to rushing in to General Business to reverse, through a motion that includes a gag, a decision of the Assembly.
Debate was held on the motion, led by the Independent member of parliament, contributed to by the minority party of parliament, the Palmer United Party, by the opposition in parliament and by the government representative, the Leader of Government Business. Appropriately for the debate, it was wrapped by the original mover, the member for Nelson.
We all expressed our views and the motion was put. On the voices it was yes; we did not hear any noes and you did not hear any noes, Madam Speaker. To be clear, even though you did not need to, even though it is not convention to call it a second time, you did so. You called for a second time, on the voices, and you heard the yesses. I heard a few yesses on this side. I did not count them, but I heard a few. You called again for the noes. There was silence. You had no choice and called it on the voices, which said yes.
Government then had the opportunity to call a division to test the call on the voices. There was no division sought. Is this a government so completely missing in action that it is incapable of a basic debate on a motion and basic debate procedures, such as calling it to your view? Are you so inept that you want to crash through on General Business Day and use the weight and power of the standing orders that are given to the Leader of Government Business to gag as well? You are out of control and are setting a new low in this parliament. You are showing arrogance towards procedures of the parliament that has never been shown before.
I note there is chortling from members opposite, because I know you do not care about democracy. That has been writ large.
Whether it is the shame of your Chief Minister and Attorney-General not understanding the separation of powers, or whether it is the contempt with which the Leader of the Government Business contributed to debate on the motion tonight into political party donations, you show that arrogance, contempt and complete disdain for democracy.
What you do in this parliament does not go unnoticed by citizens of the Territory. You will be held accountable for what you do in this parliament. If you have nothing to hide why are you rushing in to reverse a decision to hold an inquiry into political donations? If you have nothing to hide you might have answered some of the questions put by Palmer United Party members as to whether or not Foundation 51 contributed to their campaigns and, if so, how much? If you had nothing to hide you would have answered that. You did not answer and you have too much to hide.
There is no accountability or transparency in this CLP government. Even CLP members of the public know that, and members across the Territory talk about it. You go too far in your race to the bottom. In your desire to crash through democratic processes enshrined in conventions followed in this parliament you go too far. You do not care about every convention that is well held and well established, simple conventions and courtesies like distributing statements the evening before. No, it is only when you feel like it. We at least received a heads-up tonight, but we have not received the statement so far. Why have you not done it previously? Why do you want to drop it at 8 am? What do you have to hide? You should be proud of your work and your words, but you are not.
You are lost in your ineptitude, dysfunction and infighting. The various fractures and factions occurring – you are a disgrace. You go too far in trashing the processes of this parliament. A government that does that shows no integrity or decency, and you will be held to account for every failure and unmitigated, disgusting act and stunt you pull.
Our community has had enough and is well and truly over the CLP government. It is times like tonight, where it is writ large, that you will sink to any depth to get your way, which you may, tenuously, by want of numbers, achieve, but your numbers are thinning. You do not have a pair from 5 pm, so we will test your numbers and hold you to a division when you use your gag motion to not debate the inquiry motion again. You are thinning; by your own actions you have lost three members to a new minority party.
By rumours circulating through the halls of parliament you may yet lose one or two more. We already have a candidate on the ground in Casuarina, while you are still rolling around in your own little pile of issues. Your numbers will be tested and I hope, for democracy, your numbers fail.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, from the point of view of good manners, you would think the person who brought this before parliament would have a chance to speak about this motion. It is a disgrace.
I have said a number of times the problem with this government is that it can give us all the wonderful things it is doing, but it is downright arrogant. Today, it is acting like a spoilt child. It did not get what it wanted, so it is coming back for a second time.
It is kicking and screaming to its mother to say, ‘I want to get this’, and it is expecting this parliament to say, ‘Okay, I am sick of you, it will pass’, and the motion this Legislative Assembly passed, in a proper form, will be thrown out. The government shows its arrogance; this motion was not about the government setting up an inquiry, it was about this parliament acting to set up an inquiry into whether political donations were transparent, in a nutshell. Were they made through the right process, was there any influence on government policies and were there issues relating to so-called associate entities or a government company like Foundation 51?
That is not a terrible thing to hold an inquiry into. In fact, it is a good thing, and the government could show it supports transparency in the electoral process. What the government has done now by saying, ‘Let us look at this vote again’, besides sounding like a spoilt brat, is tell people it has something to hide.
It is saying, ‘We did not like the vote of this Legislative Assembly’, maybe because we would discover something uncomfortable. The CLP is saying, ‘We need to quickly quell this motion, because it is not to our liking. We are the government and we shall rule the kingdom, regardless of the peasants below.’ For a change, the peasants were winning for five minutes, but the king has spoken. ‘We shall not accept the will of the people, we shall tell them, in some other kind words, that this will not happen.’
It is a crying shame the government has had to stoop this low to overturn a mistake it made. That is its problem; it did not have enough members in here to say no and did not call a division. That is the name of the game; if you do not turn up for the football committee and you do not like the coach who is picked, you cannot come back the next week and sack him because you did not turn up for the meeting. That is too bad; you should have attended the meeting. If you did not attend this meeting and vote, that is your problem. You are trying to turn your problem into our problem.
We do not have a problem on this side; a motion was passed by this parliament to say we would like an inquiry. You held an inquiry into Stella Maris, which I supported. I am asking for an inquiry into just as important an issue and you do not want to support it. You were defeated in this House and, because you do not like it, you want to overturn it.
If that does not smell like a rat for the people out there, I do not know what does. The message will get out. I was halfway through issuing a media release; I thought, ‘Wow, we have had a win’, and now I will finish the rest of it: ‘Well, we had a win for 10 or 15 minutes and then what happened? The king made a decision that this would not happen.’ Unfortunately, that is what will happen because we will not have the numbers.
I ask anyone on that side of parliament to not vote on this, and to abstain. The Legislative Assembly is what we are about, not our political parties, not me. This was a decision made by the Legislative Assembly fair and square, the way the rules of this place are set. But we have a government that says, ‘Too bad, we do not care about fair and square, we do not like the decision you have made and we will overturn it’.
That is the height of arrogance, it is unTerritorian for a government to do that, and I will not agree with this decision being overturned.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I am happy to follow the rules of this place; let us do so by testing the numbers. I move that the motion be put.
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: The question is that standing orders be suspended.
The Assembly divided:
Ayes 12 Noes 10
Mr Barrett Ms Anderson
Mr Chandler Ms Fyles
Mr Conlan Mr Kurrupuwu
Mr Elferink Ms Lawrie
Mrs Finocchiaro Mr McCarthy
Mr Giles Ms Manison
Mr Higgins Mr Vatskalis
Mrs Lambley Mr Vowles
Mrs Price Ms Walker
Mr Styles Mr Wood
Mr Tollner
Mr Westra van Holthe
- In cases of necessity, any Standing or Sessional Order or order of the Assembly may be suspended on motion moved without notice: provided that such motion is carried by an absolute majority of the whole number of Members.
There was not an absolute majority, therefore the motion is not carried.
Motion negatived.
MOTION
Teachers, Health, Police and EBA Outcomes
Teachers, Health, Police and EBA Outcomes
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I was flicking through the Notice Paper in preparation for contribution to this General Business Day motion, and I saw an Order of the Day called ‘Chaos in the Territory Government’. How appropriate for what we have just witnessed. That Order of the Day was around inflicting power and water price hikes, the cost of living, the ongoing turmoil in the public service, broken election promises, cutting resources to the our schools, disputes with public servants, dodgy deals and jobs for mates. That was in October 2013.
Here we are, almost a year later, and the CLP government has gotten worse. In the year we thought was bad enough, add another 12 months, and it has become worse. This motion is to be a voice to the people who rallied outside parliament today. We saw teachers, representatives of paramedics, firefighters and the parents’ body COGSO, the Council of Government Schools Organisation, who spoke on behalf of parents who put their children through our public school system. We heard from all of those people about their deep concerns with the cuts the government is inflicting across core areas of service delivery.
We have seen a government embroiled in turmoil. We are six days from the halfway point of this government, what I will call the Mills/Giles government. It is an appropriate time to reflect on the shambles and dysfunction which has characterised this administration, led by an unelected, illegitimate Chief Minister. It is a government which, to the shock of many, summarily executed its first leader after just six months in the top job, and then sent him to Indonesia to ensure his silence.
It is a government which, after 18 months, has seen its numbers shrink from 16 to 13. Three members of the Palmer United Party realised they had been sold a pup, with promise after promise to the bush broken. It is a government which the member for Nelson has rated a D-minus. By any stretch, as an Independent, he is a fair and reasonable man. The D-minus is, by any stretch, a fair and reasonable rating. We would have given you an E or an F.
Chief Minister, you preside over the worst government the Territory has ever seen. It is the frontline workers or the public servants of the Northern Territory who have borne the brunt. It is why I am moving that this Legislative Assembly condemn the Chief Minister and government for the 125 teacher cuts from the Department of Education, the $11m cut from the Health budget, failing to keep the promise for 120 new police and the failure to reach a satisfactory enterprise bargaining agreement with paramedics, prison officers, firefighters and teachers.
I know you hide behind St John Ambulance in regard to the paramedics, but we also know that is an abrogation of your responsibility to our community because the government, through the Health department, funds St John Ambulance.
Where are your priorities? In the midst of all this, when the men and women who provide these crucial services to Territorians are seeing their conditions attacked, the Chief Minister ensures his own department receives a $33m budget increase in this financial year alone. It is extraordinary. Where are your priorities?
We know if you cut education funding you cut the number of teachers and crucial support staff, and our students come off second best. Your cuts can only mean worsening learning outcomes for our students and the dismantling of support structures will make it harder to tackle fluctuating attendance levels.
Fewer teachers has meant fewer subject choices. You cannot bring yourself to be honest enough to recognise that. Choose any senior school across the Northern Territory and compare the subject choices today to the subject choices two years ago before these cuts were invoked; there are fewer.
When you take basic subject choices out like you have you attack the future of our children. You have collapsed lines and told students they have to merge into classes because we cannot offer two maths specialties. It is extraordinary. However, stick your head in the sand and pretend it is not happening.
There is less individual attention for children in our classrooms, and there is certainly less opportunity for our young Territorians to take up the challenges our fantastic Territory and their fabulous future will deliver.
Minister for Education, you are so out of touch. You admitted to 50 teachers being cut in 2013 and claimed only 35 teachers were cut in 2014. I will quote what you told the NT News:
- No one jumped up and down when we lost 50 teachers. Now everyone is jumping up and down that we’ve lost 35.
That is so out of touch. The 50 teachers were cut as a result of CLP mini-budget cuts in 2012. Yes, we lost 50 teachers in 2013 as a result of the CLP mini-budget cuts in 2012. You are a disgrace. You must be the worst Education minister we have ever witnessed.
Normally, Education ministers stand up in Cabinet and say, ‘There is nothing more important in fundamental government service delivery than delivering the best learning outcomes for our children. I will defend the Education budget, you will not cut there.’ Not this minister, he just rolled over. I know he will provide the fanciful chant, rant and rhetoric around the projected debt, when he sits by and lets the Chief Minister put $33m into a department that provides advice. It does not put teachers in our classrooms, does not put a single nurse in a ward and does not operate any service; it provides advice to the Chief Minister. I get it. The Chief Minister is bereft of capabilities, so he needs all the advice he can get. However, $33m worth of additional advice is a stretch. It pays nonsense to your chest beating about having no choice because of the state of the Labor budget. That is rubbish. Around the Cabinet table you would not have accepted a $33m increase in one financial year alone to the Department of the Chief Minister if you had a budget problem.
You are so out of touch. They want parents to keep quiet. They are not, they and COGSO are speaking up. The estimates hearings and the work of the opposition bell the cat on the Education minister’s claim of 35 fewer teachers; the real number is 125. How could the minister get it so wrong? For months he maintained the number was 35. Minister, you were out by 90 teachers minimum. You chose not to count the contract teachers, and to compound the problem 60 support staff have also been cut. That is 185 fewer people in our schools to educate our young Territorians and provide them with a better future.
It is apparent the Education minister has no idea what is going on. Virtually nowhere in the Department of Education has been spared. Arnhem is down 47 teachers, Darwin 29, Palmerston and the rural area 24, Katherine 19; and Alice Springs is down 7 teachers.
Ten schools have lost more than five teachers, when you publicly proclaimed no school would lose more than five teachers. Minister, ten schools have lost more than five teachers, by your own department’s information provided during estimates. The NAPLAN results out this week show the percentage of students at or above national minimum standards is lower than last year in 13 of 20 assessed areas.
Let us think about this. The mantra of this Minister for Education is that these changes in resourcing are to provide better outcomes for students, and on the first test of that, the first NAPLAN results, you have failed. You have tragically failed our children.
Move out of the way and put someone into the job who will reinstate the funding in Education, who will put the teachers and support staff back into our classrooms and who will do the job you were elected to do. You promised no frontline staff would lose their jobs. You did promise that; it is a breach of trust, but, more abhorrent, it is denying our children the education outcomes they fundamentally deserve.
These cuts are sending our education system backwards. That is why teachers are rallying outside and why they are in a protracted EBA dispute. This is what happens when you cut teachers and the Education budget by $15m and tip $33m into advice for the incompetent Chief Minister.
No area of service delivery has been safe from your harsh budget cuts. The Royal Darwin Hospital is in crisis, and you receive vitriol from the government when you point it out. All you have to do is spend a day in emergency or a couple of days visiting the hospital. Go into the wards and listen to what the nurses and doctors and, importantly, patients are saying.
The hospital is in crisis, and has been for months. For months, staff have been struggling to find a bed for someone who is admitted, not in ED waiting to be admitted, and they have created a new room called the transit lounge. I called it the Tardis, because it seems to take forever to get through it. But you were admitted; it was a reference so they could tick a form and say you are on a ward. You are not on a ward, you are in a chair in a transit lounge adjacent to the ED, but under the forms and processes you are admitted to a ward. Rubbish!
Tell that to staff, struggling and stretched trying to attend to all patients in that situation who are admitted and need acute beds. Doctors and nurses are working in intolerable conditions; they are doing a fantastic job while your government turns its back on them, while your Chief Minister mocks them in Question Time, while you fill – not fill, that is part of the tragedy of it – while you put a handful of alcoholics into a purpose-built 100-bed facility for subacute care.
Part of the tragedy of this crisis is that there was an option. There was an alternative. You stripped it away, ignored the crisis and now everything is imploding and the doctors and nurses are publicly saying there is a crisis, you have said, ‘Oh, let’s find 30 beds’. Where are the other 70? Why are they not coming online?
You hand back funding to the federal government, you do not proceed with emergency upgrades in Nhulunbuy and you hand back funding for a medi-hostel for that region. It is a disgrace. Now is not the time to make cuts in primary healthcare, but you will not be even honest about where the $11m in cuts will occur. You will not be transparent; you will not be honest with Territorians about which primary healthcare services will be cut further, and $11m is a lot of cuts to find.
Instead of getting on with building the Palmerston hospital, work that would be under way if you had not changed the site, because how could you go with a site chosen by Labor? That would be against the grain. How on earth could you go with a serviced site ready to construct on? That is not your way of doing business. Choose a paddock with no services and have a bit of a scrap with a media stunt, bring in the bulldozer, knock over a couple of trees, upset the residents, pull the bulldozer out, whack it on a truck and drive off.
Mr McCarthy: And fly around in a helicopter.
Ms LAWRIE: And fly around in a helicopter for good measure. Are you serious? Do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you pull stupid stunts like that?
Mr Chandler: It just hurts.
Ms LAWRIE: Member for Brennan, four years of not having a Palmerston hospital hurts. You and your Cabinet decision have delayed the delivery of a hospital to the residents of Palmerston and the rural area, who desperately want and need it. You have delayed it for four years and you are feeling okay about that because you are calling it, in your jargon, a real hospital.
Isn’t that funny, because when we hear the detailed clinical descriptions of the real hospital by the real Health minister she talks about exactly the same components as those in Labor’s detailed plans for construction of a hospital on a different site.
Is a real hospital on one site which includes the same clinical services not a real hospital on another site? Are you serious? Is that your argument? You are bizarre, member for Brennan, because you should be, as a representative for Palmerston, saying, ‘It is not good enough. Fast track it! I do not care what you do. Get another bulldozer out there, and the services in.’ You are not, you have delayed it. You are market testing. You still have not decided whether it will be public, private or a mixture. You are confused. I know what the AMA is saying about your confusion, and I know what everyone else is saying about your confusion, but, meanwhile, Territorians are suffering. That is what you do not seem to get.
Any one of you can go to the Royal Darwin Hospital and spend a day there if you want. You do not have to be the Health minister. You are in government and I am sure your Health minister would give you permission to go to the hospital to understand what is occurring with clinical services there. But do not do that, because you would not want to burst your bubble of ignorance, would you?
Instead of getting on with the job, there is delay after delay. Instead of a brand-new paediatric wing at the Royal Darwin Hospital, an election commitment by Labor, all we see is an upgrade to the existing ward funded by the Commonwealth. Instead of delivering funded capital works projects, we have to wait years for new remote clinics to be built, three or four years after the funding was provided. No wonder this has led to a stoush between the member for Solomon and the Chief Minister over the capacity of the CLP to deliver Commonwealth-funded health projects. Instead of improving health services across the board, you prefer to spend $28m in this year alone on propping up your failed mandatory alcohol rehabilitation scheme.
Instead of supporting health staff to get on with their necessary work, there are constant complaints of bullying, yet you turn a cloth ear to that. It is not good enough, Chief Minister.
Our brave Territory firefighters have much to complain about. They said they would accept a 3% EBA outcome as a gesture of good faith. The Territory government has said no; firefighters have dropped their log of claims, but the Territory government has still said no.
The Chief Minister wants to reduce the conditions of our firefighters and remove minimum staffing levels. As you heard the firefighters explain tonight at the rally, they are fighting to ensure there is a crew to cover Palmerston and the rural area. That is with the increase in call-outs and traffic, bearing in mind our firefighters are crucial to traffic accidents. They come with the jaws of life to literally save a life. This government wants to cut back on crews in an area where there is industrial traffic mixing with residential traffic. You must wonder where you are not prepared to go in damaging the lives of Territorians.
When a firefighter goes to a burning building with oxygen masks, minimum staffing means there are also firies outside with oxygen masks in case something goes wrong. That is essential for safety. Minimum staffing levels are there for the safety of our community and our brave firefighters. But, not content with this attack on safety, you also want to take money out of training and not allow overtime for specialists to train recruits. That is a backward step.
The government’s treatment of paramedics has been disgraceful. The Minister for Health refuses to talk to them and their pay dispute has been going on for a year. What on earth do you have against listening to people? These are the Territory’s paramedics; the Territory government pays for the service to St John Ambulance. You, Northern Territory government, are the ones who can solve this crisis.
Compounding things, paramedics are understaffed and sometimes cannot run minimum shifts, as they are contracted to do. We hear sometimes two trainees go out on a crew, instead of one qualified paramedic and one trainee, as ought to be the case. The Territory public has a justifiable expectation that paramedics treating them are fully qualified. Northern Territory government, you are a disgrace.
Our prison officers, we hope, are closer to resolving their EBA. Again, they accepted the 3% offer over four years as a gesture of good faith negotiations. You refused and went on the attack on training. You do not want to offer prison officers an increments package that would help train existing prison officers into jobs – at train-your-own scheme. That would cost an estimated $140 000 a year, or $25 000 a course in some cases.
The prison officers want more flexibility on leave. Currently they must take leave at seven days minimum and, sometimes, put in requests up to 16 months in advance. Be reasonable! These are not unreasonable concerns our frontline workers are putting to the government. However, they hear nothing and witness an arrogant government.
Finally, to our fine men and women of the Northern Territory Police Force: Chief Minister, at the NT Police Association AGM this week you told them you would ‘agree to disagree’ on your promise to employ 120 more police. You have reneged on that promise. During estimates it was clear this was a promise you had no intention of keeping. But it is worse than that. This week, you finally answered a question we have had on notice since estimates; it is no wonder you have been hiding it. There are 61 fewer police officers in the Territory this year compared to last year. That is 181 fewer police than you promised. No wonder we are now experiencing our second year of record violent crime. You have made the thin blue line even thinner, which is a disgrace.
That is a taste of the report card for the first two years of the Mills/Giles government. I have not gone into some of the internal disasters you have had in detail. Territorians have judged you on that and will continue to judge you, just as we will continue to hold you to account.
Territorians are reeling under skyrocketing cost-of-living pressures. They now have fewer essential services being provided by fewer frontline staff. It is little wonder you are described as the worst government ever and are given a D-minus rating. I commend the motion to the House.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, can you smell a by-election in the air? I can. Clearly this is the usual Labor Party – ‘let us rally the unions and get them screaming from the rafters’ – because they want to create as much controversy as they can around the Northern Territory government.
I am sorry we are a responsible government trying to govern responsibly for the people of the Northern Territory. If you were to believe the Leader of the Opposition you would be utterly convinced the Northern Territory has come to a shuddering halt and there is nothing but darkness on the streets and dungeons in which we make public servants work as we flog them every day.
This is the picture the Leader of the Opposition will paint for Territorians simply because there is a by-election in the air.
I point out to the Leader of the Opposition that the general public service has signed up to 3% per year over the four years, as have the sparkies, the waterside workers and any number of other organisations. There are four EBAs left to deal with. With the prison officers, as I said in Question Time today I am hoping to achieve a resolution fairly soon. We are also hoping to continue the positive negotiations with the nurses and reach a resolution soon.
I will pause briefly on the teachers because the member opposite spoke about education results. The education union’s input into policy through the Labor government of the last 11 years saw the increase in staffing expenditure go through the roof. I do not have the numbers in front of me, but it was a very large increase in expenditure, about 33% over the period of the last five or six years. Indeed, the number of people working for the Education department skyrocketed equally so.
NAPLAN results over that time show no appreciable change. If anything, they generally saw a minor contraction. More people and expenditure did not necessarily lead to better results.
The argument from the teachers union, from day one in the EBA environment, was that if you keep doing the same thing you will achieve better results. We do not accept that, and anybody who has watched the expenditure and staffing levels go up, with no appreciable change at all in NAPLAN results, could only come to the conclusion that the former government had gone down the wrong path. That is exactly what it had done.
As a consequence, the new government determined it would do things like look at other models which have shown better success. This is where you have the direct tuition referred to by the Education minister, and it is about reorganising resources. The union responded to the EBA negotiations – the EBA being about pay and entitlements – by trying to factor a bunch of policy issues into EBA negotiations and trying to mix up the two.
That was the approach taken by Messrs Clisby and Cranitch, and they continued to hold that position. Their response was to hold a couple of strikes, lots of noise and demonstrating, expecting the Northern Territory government to capitulate. But, for the interests of better results, the Northern Territory government did not capitulate, and clearly said to both Messrs Cranitch and Clisby, ‘Gentlemen, we are not that interested in your political posturing; we are interested in achieving better results for the students of the Northern Territory. Separate out the EBA; we will always welcome input from professionals, but we will not give you a power of veto over Education department policy.’ Messrs Clisby and Cranitch said ‘No’, we will make sure Education department policy becomes inextricably linked to the EBA’, and so they pressed on to fight it.
When we put the question to teachers in general, the Australian Education Union told its membership to vote no. That happened on a couple of occasions, but on neither occasion was there an absolute majority of people voting, which means teachers did not give a majority view one way or the other. I do not doubt union members were active in voting no, but many other teachers chose not to.
I have spoken to a number of teachers since that time and they have told me they did not vote for various reasons. We have come to a point of stalemate. We remain, quite strongly, of the opinion that the elected government of the day sets education policy in accordance with the principles of responsible government.
We encourage teachers to sign up to the EBA, which would offer them 3% per year over the next three or four years, whatever the case may be. Total entitlements put to the last EBA were worth $27 000 to teachers, when you consider all compounding effects of the 3%.
The teachers, as has been pointed out, did not accept that offer and the union argued it was a noble thing to do not to accept the offer, because it is all about student outcomes.
We agree it is about student outcomes, but if we ask the teachers’ union to point out where their success has been from previous policies – the policies they continue to advocate for – they are unable to point to successes, certainly not on the global scale.
We then heard – going back to Messrs Clisby and Cranitch – them say, ‘We will take it to the people during the Blain by-election. This is an issue that will galvanise the people and make sure we win 22 or 23% of the vote.’ They actually secured 9% of votes.
Clearly there are other issues that govern and drive voters in the Northern Territory. The issue Messrs Clisby and Cranitch refer to was, whilst important, not top of mind for voters, as evidenced through the ballot box.
Consequently, we remain in the same position we were from the outset. We encourage teachers to accept the 3% per year and to have input into education policy. I understand there are some ongoing negotiations about developing some rigour in how they have that input. But we remain implacably of the position that the Northern Territory government must retain education policy, because it is the Northern Territory government’s job to roll out that education policy.
I heard the Leader of the Opposition talk about firies; there are a number of negotiations going on with firies about certain practices, and we will wait for the result of those negotiations as we step through them.
We are anxious to find a peaceful resolution between the firies and the Northern Territory government, but we are also anxious to make sure the Northern Territory government is able to provide an effective fire and rescue service to the people of the Northern Territory. The negotiating position of the Northern Territory government is sound in this area and will continue to provide the services Territorians require.
I could talk at some length about what is happening with all of these negotiations, but we have noise surrounding the by-election at the moment. The by-election is what is really driving members opposite. I refer to the office opposite the Chamber as the departure lounge, currently occupied by the member for Casuarina. He has announced he will be shortly leaving from the departure lounge. He is number three to go through that office in a row.
Ms Fyles: Two
Mr ELFERINK: There have been three: Mr Henderson, Mr Mills and now Mr Vatskalis. I imagine that office would seem quite attractive to a number of people in this House.
Getting back to the matter at hand, this motion is nothing more than politics. It is about politics being driven by, in part, the union movement. I do not doubt the Labor Party wants to win the Casuarina by-election and it will pull out all stops to do so. That is what political parties do, but we expect good, honest public servants, being union members or not, will persevere and do their jobs because they enjoy what they do.
There was no strike action today because apparently many teachers, both union and non-union, simply said to the teachers’ union, ‘We are not going down that path again’. The problem with the teachers’ union was that it was poorly led under Messrs Cranitch and Clisby, and fell apart when questioned. It used union funds to run an election campaign. The Leader of the Opposition was incensed when that occurred and powerless to stop them, which demonstrates it is the unions that run the Labor Party in the Northern Territory and not the Leader of the Opposition.
This motion is about posturing; we do not even accept the assertion of the figures in the motion. It will not be agreed to by government members and, as far as we are concerned, this is a tissue-thin attempt to deal with the matters of a by-election, one in which they want to be seen as the champions of all sorts of things.
However, they certainly do not want to be accountable and they do not want members opposite to remember anything like their role in the Stella Maris deal. I would still like to see whether or not, at any stage, the declaration of interests register will be updated to reflect the in-kind donation they have received in free legal assistance, or if they will stick by the assertion the legal assistance was paid for.
This motion is not supported.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Madam Speaker, I support this motion. What we have seen from this CLP government in the past two years has been appalling. They have attacked those people who proudly serve our community day in and day out. Teachers, nurses, firefighters, the frontline people who are the fabric of our community, this government has attacked them.
The CLP said one thing before the election and did the exact opposite afterwards. We all remember the CLP commitment that frontline workers’ jobs would be safe. They then went on sacking hundreds of public servants.
You had flyers outside public service offices saying jobs would be safe. You have sacked child protection workers and teachers; it is appalling.
You said you had a plan to strengthen the public service and that public service jobs were safe. ‘We will immediately provide secure employment for our teachers. We will immediately support and strengthen the NT public service. If your base salary is $110 000 or less, your job is safe.’ It went on and on. ‘If you are on the front line of police, education or health, regardless of how much you earn, your job is safe.’ We have seen the exact opposite.
It is always interesting that the Minister for Education has a strange look on his face when we repeat those comments. Somehow he thinks these promises should not apply to frontline workers in education, the teachers and teacher assistants. He has never given us a full explanation as to why the promise does not apply to them and why the CLP is sacking teachers. It is your ideology and it is in your DNA. You have never explained to us why you have broken this promise and gotten rid of so many teachers from our Territory schools. I have attended the rallies of teachers, students and parents opposing these cuts. I have spoken to them at the markets, in the shopping centres and when I am doorknocking. They are appalled. It is something they are united about. It does not matter what political persuasion they may have been in the past, they are appalled at your cuts.
Teachers are very clear, but you continue to ignore the message they are sending you. You will not listen. These cuts have affected subject choices, made our class sizes bigger, and teachers, parents and students alike are concerned about the reductions in support staff, teaching assistants and administrative staff, who also play a vital role in schools.
We have seen chaos in our Territory schools with uncertainty about teacher numbers and confusion about individual teachers coming and going. At the end of last year there was chaos with teachers and teacher positions in our schools. Schools did not know if they were to have an allocation for some teachers, and others were pushed out.
Instead of focusing on improving education outcomes, this minister and CLP government have been too busy cutting funding for schools and letting our Territory students down. In a media release dated 18 December 2013, acting Minister for Education, John Elferink, taunted teachers on the enterprise agreement. He said:
- ‘Northern Territory teachers could also receive an increase in their pay with an opportunity to accept the latest Enterprise Agreement being offered by the Commissioner for Public Employment. Teachers will have until this Friday to vote in a ballot that could too see them receive a pay increase of 3 per cent per annum, effective from 21 November 2013.
….
Through the processes of a ballot, teachers have an opportunity to bypass the muddy tactics and politics of the Union and vote for themselves on whether to sign up to the Enterprise Agreement on offer’, Mr Elferink said.
After denigrating public education, teachers and their union for months, educators overwhelming rejected the government offer, not once but twice. As well as the cuts, it is the continued talking down of our Territory education system that is upsetting. Attorney-General, you have stood in this House and said we could educate our kids at private schools in Sydney for what it costs to educate them in our schools. You miss the point: Territorians want a public education system they are proud of and that they can send their kids to. They want to educate their kids within their communities.
It is the NT government’s job to provide education in the Territory. It is a fundamental job of a government to provide education. It is time for your mean-spirited CLP government to listen to teachers and the general public when we tell you to stop cutting teacher numbers.
Abusing teachers and public education in the Northern Territory has not been a once-off event by CLP ministers. There has been a long history of the minister and this Chief Minister running down public education in the Territory. In fact, CLP governments of the past – as I said, it is in your DNA. I remember the strikes of 1990s. You shut schools and preschools overnight: Tiwi Primary School, Rapid Creek Primary School, schools that would be great to have now, but you made up excuses and shut them down. Not only will you shut our schools and put our teachers down, you have our Education minister making statements like, ‘Our students are at the bottom of the pile’. How offensive and misleading!
An Education minister and Chief Minister are meant to champion our education system. We are seeing the exact opposite. On 7 November 2013, the Chief Minister told the ABC the Territory had the worst statistics, shown through NAPLAN results and the My School website. He did not tell the ABC what his ministerial colleague, the former Education minister, Robyn Lambley, had said. Your former CLP minister agreed that Labor’s investment in education was paying off when she said in a media release dated 14 September 2012:
- The NAPLAN figures show the percentage rate of improvement in AANMS in the Territory is stronger than in other jurisdictions and that Territory students tested in 2008, 2010, and 2012 showed the greatest gains nationwide.
How can we ask our kids to do any better than their best? Their personal best is a basic. The current Education minister has even gone as far as implying that teachers are lazy, saying they have too much downtime.
On the fifth floor, minister, people might be telling you that you are doing a good job, but when I visit schools and school councils they tell me you are the most unpopular minister ever. You might be suited up, but you are totally unsuitable to be the Minister for Education. On 14 October 2013 the Minister for Education was quoted in the NT News as saying:
- No one jumped up and down when we lost 50 teachers. Now, everyone is jumping up and down that we have lost 35.
Minister and Chief Minister, you need to start listening to the hundreds of people like those outside today, not just teachers but parents. You need to hear that you cannot keep cutting our education system. You admitted on 8 October last year that they were budget-related cuts.
You are an incompetent minister with no clue about what is happening on the ground. You are a failed minister who pretends only 35 teachers have been lost, when the real number is 125, with 47 in the Arnhem region alone. That is not 35.
Minister, when will you stand up in Cabinet and defend the Territory’s education system? Education cuts affect students and teachers, and that is why teachers are voting no to the CLP’s enterprise agreement. You need to start listening.
The Chief Minister, the Minister for Education and the CLP government have their priorities wrong. The Territory budget this year saw more cuts – a mean-spirited government cutting our education system. As a minister, and as a government, you should be championing our education system, not telling us we are at the bottom of the pile, which is offensive and misleading.
The government is wrong to say our education system is going backwards. Between 2008 and 2010 we had the largest gains in Australia made by Indigenous students in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9 in reading, spelling, grammar and punctuation. These results are now under threat, as we have seen this week. Minister, your cuts are putting at risk our children’s future; we need to be investing in our education system.
Last year’s Territory budget paper showed funding for government schools cut from $685m to $670m, a cut of $15m, and that is not including the Commonwealth contribution. You have not stood up to Canberra and you would not sign up for the Gonski funding because you did not like it. You did not want to be forced to ensure your funding was not cut; you wanted to cut funding and use the federal government’s contribution to top it up.
During the estimates process I asked the minister numerous questions to get to the bottom of the real figures for teachers we know have been cut from our schools. The minister still says 35, yet we know it is far greater. How do we know this? Because our kids have less subject choice in their classrooms, fewer teachers in their schools, they are in large classes and there is less special education and ESL support. The figures tabled after estimates show we lost 125 teaching FTEs between 2013 and 2014. There were 2596 full-time equivalent positions in the Territory in 2013, and then 2471 – 125 fewer teachers in our classrooms. It is basic maths. One-hundred-and twenty-five teachers is a lot of experience to lose from our education system and directly contradicts, minister, your assertion we would only lose 35 teachers. That is last year to this year. You claim we lost 50 in 2012, and we have lost 125.
Minister, you maintained for months that your new ratio would only mean 35 job cuts, yet these figures show it is far higher. Is the correct figure 35 or 125? It is a 300% difference that you are unable to explain, and your department’s figures show us the opposite. Across the regions there have been big cuts, with seven in Alice Springs, 47 in Arnhem, 29 in Darwin, 19 in Katherine and 24 in Palmerston and the rural area.
You keep saying it is only 35, but these figures show it is far higher. In fact, on 12 June this year minister Chandler was maintaining the number was only 35:
- … the reality is there are 35 fewer teachers at this time than we had last year.
I have put the figures on the record from your own department. Numerous times in the media you claimed it was only 35. You need to come clean, explain these figures and why there is a 300% variation.
You claimed we would be investing in our early years’ education and that changes to the formula cut teachers from middle schools and put them into the early years. I reviewed the primary school figures for FTEs in 2013 and 2014 provided in answers to estimates questions, and there are 24 primary schools which have lost teachers, including the following: Bradshaw; Ross Park; Nhulunbuy; Anula; Jingili; Karama; Ludmilla; Manunda Terrace; Millner; Nightcliff; Parap; Stuart Park; Casuarina Street in Katherine; Clyde Fenton in Katherine; Katherine South; MacFarlane; Adelaide River; Bakewell; Berry Springs; Driver; Gray; Howard Springs; Humpty Doo; Moulden; and Woodroffe – all primary schools that have lost teachers. You claimed this formulation change would invest in early years’ education. It has done the exact opposite.
In addition to saying no primary schools or early education providers would lose teachers you said no school would lose more than five teachers per year; you said that numerous times. Ten schools lost more than five FTEs, including the following: Angurugu; Maningrida; Milingimbi; Shepherdson College; Yirrkala; Darwin Middle; Nightcliff Middle; Sanderson Middle; Palmerston Senior College; and Rosebery Middle School.
In your advertising campaign late last year, it was claimed that the application of the new ratio from 2014 would see an additional 63 teacher positions created across transition to Year 2. At estimates, you confirmed that you had spent $26 090 on that advertising. Where are those alleged 63 positions you claimed in your advertising campaign? We are well into the school year, halfway through it, and we have not seen the positions evidenced. Are they funded in the 2014-15 budget? Can you show us where the budget provision is for those alleged positions? Which schools have these positions? Again, this is not backed up by facts.
Across the range, you have cut from all of our schools. You claim subjects have not been hit; that is wrong. While average class enrolments have gone up, we have also seen a reduction in subject offerings in our middle schools. Answers to estimates questions showed significantly reduced subject choices in this year, with 1116 classes and subjects offered in 2014, compared to 1150 in 2013. Your decisions and budget cuts are restricting future offerings for our young people. This is why teachers will not accept your attacks on frontline workers. It is directly affecting our students; we should be investing in their future. It is extraordinary that, as a government, you continue to cut support for kids in the classroom after a year of cuts that have hurt our students dramatically.
Following on from teacher cuts, we have also seen significant cuts to the number of administrative assistants. Working in a classroom is hard work, not like you imply, with a lot of downtime. Teachers have busy days, and we have more children with special needs coming into our classrooms. We have larger class sizes under your government, with less individual support for our students. We need teacher assistants, but you have cut those roles too, with 60 support positions gone from our schools. It means we have less support for our teachers, putting more pressure on them. Our kids are not receiving the individual attention they deserve.
Class sizes are not what you say they are. At primary schools in your electorate, class sizes are at 28. You get away with this because teachers are approached and given more release time, but that is wrong; kids cannot learn in classes of that size.
Another program you have cut, which is having a real impact on the ground, is GEMS. It was an excellent way of getting kids to school and keeping them interested, and was a proven way of engaging and maintaining attendance. GEMS was used to build upon the successful work of the Clontarf program for boys.
The GEMS program was cut because of your government’s decisions to cut support positions within the Education department. Across our middle schools students are missing out on the program. This is having a real impact this year in our schools.
Some girls in Years 8 and 9 are no longer going to school like they were. They feel you have given up on them as a government, so they will give up on themselves. That is wrong; you are not investing in them. It was not a huge spend for what it was achieving.
A Smith Family report, along with OECD data, shows we need to invest in education. I quote from its June 2014 research report, Improving educational outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander girls, which refers to the OECD saying:
- Education brings significant benefits to individuals and society. Higher levels of education are associated with economic benefits, including increased employment opportunities and higher incomes. In terms of social benefits, high levels of education are also associated with better health, longer life expectancy, stronger civic engagement and greater overall life …
It goes on to say:
- Higher levels of education are related to a range of social and economic benefits for both individuals and society …
The same report says:
- … research shows that educational achievement is particularly important for females. While males are more likely than females to leave school early, females who leave school without completing Year 12 are much more likely than male early school leavers to be employed in low-skill jobs …
At age 13 and 14, you are shaping their whole life. Your government, by defunding that program, is impacting on those girls, 200 across the Territory right now. You cut that program last year. I know, from speaking to teachers and students at our schools, that they are missing that program. They need and deserve it.
The World Health Organisation argues that women are often instrumental in bringing about social change through their role in the family and the wider community. That is what it said in 2014.
We know investment in our girls, ensuring they receive an education, as the leaders in our community and particularly in families, will pay off. However, you are not giving them a chance. You have cut the program, and I urge you to reverse that decision immediately
You have cut support workers from schools running the program and you are not investing in our students. Girls are not attending school because important programs like GEMS have been cut by your government. It does not make sense. You need to invest in our children. It is not an economic decision; it is about the future and it is an investment.
You did not stand up for our CSIRO science program. During estimates you said you would do that. However, that program is gone. Now if children want a hands-on science program, they have to go to the CSIRO Discovery Centre in Canberra. How ridiculous!
You are out of touch if you think cutting support positions, teachers and programs will improve educational outcomes. You just do not get it.
In October 2013 you said we need to target further teacher positions in the early years, but this year you have cut the early years education budget by an astonishing 44% in real terms. Tertiary education has received a real terms cut of 9.9%, including a real cut in the operational grant for Charles Darwin University.
You have been spruiking international education, and that you want the Territory to be …
Ms MANISON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Ms FYLES: Minister, and Chief Minister particularly, you talk about investing in international education, but that has received a budget cut of 2.7% in real terms. You just do not get it and you have no idea about education. This is the government that has dropped the ball.
In the very early 1990s we saw horrendous cuts to our education system, and we are seeing that again. This will have a lasting impact. We will not be able to rebuild this quickly, as a result of cuts you are making.
This budget supposedly addresses outcomes for the Territory government’s Indigenous education review, but forecasts a drop in Year 9 non-Indigenous students achieving the national minimum standard in writing and numeracy, and forecasts no improvement in the number of Indigenous students attaining the NTCET. That is in your own budget papers.
The Indigenous education review’s recommendations are an all or nothing approach to education for Indigenous children in the regions. It recommends a shift of students from community schooling to urban boarding schools in Darwin, Palmerston, Alice Springs, Katherine, Nhulunbuy and Tennant Creek, but offers nothing for those students who do not want to leave their family for cultural reasons.
How ignorant as a government that you will not provide education within communities. Students do best when they are with their families, supported by their communities. It is appalling that you are treating members of the Territory community like this.
You talk about consultation. Turning up in Nhulunbuy – I think it was on a Friday afternoon – to consult on Indigenous education – how appalling.
You have said nothing about what will happen to students left behind. It is important that a government offers education across the Territory. It is disappointing that the CLP government is planning to force future generations off their country if they want an education. More worrying is the apparent lack of alternatives for those young people who do not wish to seek further formal education. What will they be offered, given the lack of options such as trade training opportunities in the bush?
We remain deeply disappointed that the Education minister is brushing aside the views of respected Indigenous educators and is determined to remove parents from the decision-making process on the education of their children. You should be listening to and bringing the community with you, and talking to parents. Only yesterday, respected educator, Yalmay Yunupingu from Yirrkala School, said on ABC radio that some Indigenous educators have said they are not ready to change current teaching methods and want to retain the bilingual model. Any expansion of the Cape York model of Direct Instruction ignores the Australian Council of Educational Research report into the trial in 2013, which found there is no solid evidence that it had improved results.
You have not been talking about this, minister, have you? You kept this one hidden in the cupboard. A 2013 report said there is no solid evidence it has improved results. The ACER evaluation on the Cape York Aboriginal Australian Academy trial in 2013 found it was impossible to conclude, except in limited cases, that the academy had a positive impact on student learning due to lack of information. The report said:
- … when the year levels within campuses were pooled, there were no statistically significant differences indicating an increase in the proportion of students being at or above the national standards in each of the campuses.
Members interjecting.
Ms FYLES: It found there was no increase in the proportion of students achieving natural literacy – you might want to listen to this, Dave, because he is fooling you with Direct Instruction. It is a waste of money.
It found there was no increase in the proportion of students achieving national literacy standards at two out of three campuses in the trial. It also found there was a decline in attendance rates at schools between 2010 and 2012. The ACER report found no evidence the Direct Instruction method improved results, only that students who came to school were likely to have better results. The Education minister is a strong supporter of Direct Instruction, but there is no evidence to support it. The ACER report contradicts assertions made by the minister about the Direct Instruction model, yet he appears convinced without any evidence of its benefit.
On the face of it, the minister is willing to gamble with our children’s future on a method which has not been shown to significantly improve student learning outcomes. We have significant community concern, Indigenous leaders raising their concern and we do not have conclusive evidence, but you want our children to be taught through that learning method. There was concern raised outside today about the Direct Instruction model. I urge you, minister, before it is too late, to reconsider before you gamble away our kids’ future.
The most recent NAPLAN summary report for 2014 shows the percentage of Territory students at or above the national minimal standard is lower in 13 of the 20 assessed areas, including all test categories for Year 3 students, four out of five for Year 5 students and three out of five for Year 9 students. These latest NAPLAN results show the CLP’s cuts are taking our students backwards.
The CLP is relying on spin to cover up Education budget cuts. The facts do not add up. We have seen the facts and we have the figures.
Previous NAPLAN results showed the Territory’s rate of improvement was above the national average. This was acknowledged by former CLP Education minister, Robyn Lambley. Territory students were improving at a faster rate than the rest of the country, but this is now at risk. It is wrong to say students went backwards under the previous government. Teacher cuts are not a way to raise the Territory’s educational standards to the national average.
The NAPLAN summary report for 2014 shows education outcomes are not improved by cutting funding for our schools. Another shift your government is taking, which is most concerning, is towards school autonomy, with global budgets. You released a discussion paper and the consultation period for submissions has now closed.
Your government has indicated it is working to introduce amendments to the Education Act later in the year, but it all seems so rushed. It is clear that moves to introduce global budgets and independent public schools are not driven by a desire to improve educational outcomes, but by a minister and government that want to cut even further.
Territory public schools already have a high level of autonomy. School councils play an important role in planning and the development of the school’s vision. School councils are responsible for approving the school’s budget and they receive updated financial reports each month. You would have us believe there is no autonomy at the moment, yet there is.
School councils assist with the broad focus of a school within Department of Education’s guidelines on curriculum and can develop policy in areas not set by the department. School councils are responsible for employing a number of non-teaching staff and are responsible for identifying and approving infrastructure needs at schools.
In fact, COGSO has raised concerns around global budgets and the independent public schools model. Today at the rally we heard its representatives say they feel schools already have a large degree of autonomy. Combined with global budgeting, it is clear the CLP’s plans for school autonomy are nothing more than an excuse for more cost-cutting. There is no evidence to support the minister’s contention that his plans for independent public schools or global budgeting are justified or, most importantly, will result in improved educational outcomes for our students.
That is what we should be focused on. These cuts will see a further erosion of NAPLAN results, which are going backwards under this CLP government. These are results from reports. If you cut education funding and teachers, students come off second best. Teachers and parents are saying that and you need to listen.
Your government’s cuts mean poorer learning outcomes for students, and dismantling sport structures makes the job of tackling fluctuating attendance and helping our kids even harder. We have fewer teachers in our schools, less subject choice, less individual attention for our students in their classrooms and fewer opportunities for young Territorians to take up the challenge for the future.
Minister, you need to stop the cuts, reverse the decisions that have been made and stand up in Cabinet. My colleagues will speak about other frontline workers your government has attacked, but what you have done to education – people are shocked. They are unhappy and have expressed that numerous times. Teachers want to see investment in our classrooms and our children. They want to be supported. You promised no frontline workers would lose their positions, yet we have seen hundreds of teachers and teacher assistants lose their jobs under this government. That will not improve our education system.
You need to start listening to parents and teachers. Minister for Public Employment, I urge you to do more than encourage. Encouragement will not sign up to the pay offer. It is not about that, it is about your government’s policies and investment in education. As a government, you need to listen.
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this important motion condemning the Chief Minister and the government for their appalling treatment of key Territory workers. Feedback received from public servants and key workers is certainly consistent when you are on the doors or chatting to people around the office.
They feel this government has shown them no respect. Their workloads are bigger than ever before. There are fewer of them and they cannot wait to see this government gone.
This evening I will focus on, particularly, the hard-working paramedics and emergency medical dispatchers across the Territory. From the Top End, to the regions and Central Australia, there is no doubt we have an amazing workforce in the St John Ambulance Service. They do a job not many people could handle, where they take actions day-to-day that could be the difference between life and death for the people they care for. They do an extraordinary job in what we all know to be one of the most challenging jurisdictions in the nation. Day-to-day they are on the road working to save lives in some of the most remote and challenging conditions. They are dealing with citizens and issues far more profound than their southern counterparts would ever see. We are talking about people with the highest levels of chronic disease, and they see the most horrific numbers of alcohol-affected and impacted patients in the nation. They also see some of the most shameful and disgusting rates of domestic and alcohol-fuelled violence in the nation.
Despite the horrors they see each and every time they go out on shift, they keep doing their job and continue to have a strong passion and desire to serve the community and save those they meet on the road. Despite the amazing and courageous work of our paramedics every day, when they need help it seems their requests fall on the deaf ears of the government.
This evening I make another plea to the government to sit with the paramedics and hear from them, firsthand, the challenges they face every day trying to do their jobs so, at the very least, they have some understanding of what is happening on the ground.
Instead, the government has failed to meet with the paramedics, despite their numerous requests. I first sat down with the paramedics earlier this year to hear about the issues and challenges they face. In that time, the government has made no attempt to hear them and has simply brushed off the issues they continue to raise as an industrial matter. The government says it has no place to be involved and it should be left in the hands of the St John Ambulance Service.
We have seen the old sticking your head in the sand approach, pretending there is no problem and ignoring it will not solve this issue. As a government, you should at least have the decency to sit with paramedics and hear them out. You have not done this yet, and I urge you to do so immediately.
In a recent media report, I heard the Health minister say she has nothing to do with the dispute with paramedics. Again today in parliament we heard the Minister for Public Employment say the government does not directly employ paramedics, so it is not an issue for them. However, this is not the case. The Territory government, through the Health department, funds St John to provide ambulance services. As someone responsible for procuring and delivering services from your agency you should be concerned about how those services are going and why there is an ongoing dispute.
If a contract arrangement you have to provide services is not going to plan, most people would think it fair to intervene to ensure you are receiving value for money and the quality of services you expect, but the CLP government has demonstrated no interest in this area.
At the very least, paramedics want to be heard. They want to know they have an informed Health minister who is aware of what they face day to day, so she is better placed to fight for them at the Cabinet table, to meet their needs, to ensure the government is meeting the needs of people St John tries to help, and making it a priority.
If government listens to paramedics and the emergency medical dispatchers, it will hear the realities of what it is like to do their jobs in challenging conditions every day. It will hear paramedics are flat out from the moment their 12-hour shifts start until they end; paramedics are tired, and there is no shortage of opportunities for overtime, as people get sick or there are not enough staff to fill shifts. It will hear the use of ambulance services in the Territory is amongst some of the highest in the nation.
The government would hear that fatigue management is a real issue amongst paramedics. It would be told workloads are increasing, while resources are not. It would hear that paramedics are starting to burn out. It would also hear the alarming fact that it is still not uncommon practice for student paramedics, still not fully qualified, to be working together as crews on the road.
These students are very highly educated, but they still require the support of a fully-qualified paramedic on the job.
I have said before in this Chamber that we know our paramedics are extremely professional and do a great job. If you end up in a situation where you need their care, most people would think it reasonable to assume that when a crew is sent to you, at least one paramedic is fully qualified, rather than it being two students.
The government would also hear there is sometimes only one emergency medical dispatcher working on shift. They have seen a high turnover amongst their staff. These positions are extremely important, as these dispatchers are equally under high pressure to make the right calls on where to allocate ambulance resources.
They would hear that relations between management and paramedics remain tense; this is an ongoing issue. The latest EBA offer was voted on by paramedics recently, and came back with 67 voting no and three voting yes. That is an overwhelming result. It is a huge rejection of what was on the table and not even a sign-on bonus could get the paramedics over the line.
Throughout negotiations there has been a loss of trust between management and paramedics. One unresolved issue, aside from conditions, is that of roster allowance when paramedics go on annual leave. They want an acknowledgement that they are shift workers, and this allowance does help recognise this.
There are also important questions regarding back pay for paramedics. They do not want to go through this dispute any longer than needed. They want to get on with their jobs with conditions to help them work to the best of their abilities, and pay to ensure they can afford to live in the Territory. Paramedics are now left with little choice but to take protected action in this dispute. Their actions will not compromise the health and safety of the Territorians they serve, but their issues need to be heard. This will help ensure people have a better understanding of the challenges they face day to day on their jobs.
There are also questions about whether St John will seek to deduct pay from paramedics who participate in these actions; this will only further strain relations. Yet, despite the fact this dispute rolls on and paramedics are calling for help because they are unable to resolve these important issues they continue to raise, the government will not seek to mediate or work through this.
The government has dropped the ball and walked away from its responsibility to Territorians to deliver the best ambulance services it can.
Mr Tollner interjecting.
Ms MANISON: I urge the government to take action and start supporting paramedics. Meet them, just once, Treasurer. There is nothing wrong with listening to people. This is the problem with your government, you are so damn arrogant that you will not talk to people delivering frontline services that make the difference between life and death for Territorians. You do not have the decency to talk with paramedics. It is not that hard to find half-an-hour in your diary to listen.
Do you not want to know what is happening on the ground? This is what people think of you lot, seriously. Have the decency to listen. It is very clear the Treasurer is not interested in helping paramedics and wanting better ambulance services in the Territory.
Mr Tollner: It is not our role to help paramedics in EBA negotiations, that is a matter for the federal parliament and Fair Work Australia. Work out whose responsibility it is …
Ms MANISON: The Department of Health pays the contract for St John Ambulance services, Treasurer. You do not care what is happening on the ground.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Can we have a bit of order, please! I only want one person speaking at a time and the member for Wanguri has the floor, thank you.
Ms MANISON: In some ways I am glad the Treasurer has been able to put his views on the record, because he has demonstrated again what a caring fellow he is, that he cares to listen to what is happening on the ground and that he cares about good service delivery in the health sector.
Territory paramedics and emergency dispatchers do an amazing job under some of the toughest circumstances every day and deserve our support. I hope the government will have the decency to meet with them to find out what is happening.
I now turn to the area of Health, where we are receiving strong feedback, particularly from RDH about the amount of pressure on staff working in the hospital. However, the consistent message that always comes through from people who have experienced the ED or the wards is that they are so impressed with the professionalism of staff and how hard they work under what they see as extremely trying circumstances.
It seems the government has the wrong priorities when it comes to Health. I have spoken to ED nurses and staff; they call me every now and then to talk about what they see every day, and double-bunking is certainly happening. They become very concerned about the privacy they can offer patients in the ED, generally under stressful circumstances; nobody wants to be in the ED in the first place.
They feel having to consistently move patients around to correctly double-bunk them exposes them to some risk. I was sitting in the canteen at the hospital the other day, and I do not know if they were speaking loudly to make sure I heard or not, but staff were talking about how disgusted they had been with some government comments they had heard that day about the issue of double-bunking and the ED, and that the government has no clue about what is happening there.
It is wonderful we finally have an acknowledgement that the medi-hotel has been used for the wrong purpose from day one, and we will finally have 30 beds restored for that purpose in the next six to eight weeks. We will be keeping an eye on that time line and on the full restoration of the 100 beds for that facility to help ease the pressure on staff trying to do the best job they can within RDH.
I still receive calls from staff regarding the parking system, which is driving them batty trying to find a space and constantly being fined. That has been an issue.
I also receive calls about bullying. The Chief Executive of the Health department has encouraged people to speak to him personally about bullying allegations and claims, but people are still hesitant to go through that process because, once again, they are going directly to the chief executive and are nervous and worried. It seems to be an issue within the Health department.
There is also much concern and worry about money allocated and cuts within the Health budget, how Health will function, how it will meet those costs and which programs and staff will go. You often hear the words ‘natural attrition’ used. Natural attrition ultimately leads to ensuring people left behind will carry bigger workloads, whether they are frontline or backroom. It makes things very tough for them.
We also have Power and Water staff coming into their EBA process next year, which will be an interesting process. Our Power and Water staff are very important; they keep the power on. We have seen recently what happens when the power goes out for an entire day and the disaster that can be. In the last EBA staff went through, the government was very quick to roll over existing conditions, but for a shorter period of time. It turned out they wanted to split Power and Water, so it was apparent why they were happy to roll over conditions for a shorter period to gain the agreement of staff. Staff at the Power and Water Corporation, Territory Generation and Jacana Energy will enter that process next year, not knowing what is on offer and how the structural separation will impact them. That is something we will keep an eye on.
I turn my thoughts to the treatment of firefighters, and what we have seen today with the government finally agreeing to presumptive legislation for those firefighters battling cancer due to their careers serving people in the Territory. I cannot get over that. One year ago you had an opportunity to deal with this. One year ago there was legislation brought to this House where you could have given those firefighters the help, reassurance and support they wanted. Instead, you have dragged your heels on that promise ...
Mr Tollner: In isolation.
Ms MANISON: One thing I hope you listen to now, Treasurer, is that we need to see this legislation passed. To not acknowledge the four firefighters battling cancer, so they cannot access the support they need is a disgrace …
Mr Chandler: You have not seen the new legislation.
Ms MANISON: I have seen the media release, and you say it only goes back for 12 months to 28 December last year. You must consider that; show some heart and make a difference in these people’s lives. Show them support for the years of service they have given to the Territory, serving people. I hope I am wrong, Treasurer, and that you will support those firefighters.
Ms Fyles: You can clarify it tonight.
Ms MANISON: Please do clarify or support, because they deserve support. We have taken a year to get to this point and I am very glad we are finally here. However, I hope you ensure those four firefighters are part of this and they get the support they deserve.
I will raise the fact, again, that we are still waiting to see if the government will hear the views of the public sector and how our key workers across the Territory feel about life under this government, their work positions and their workplaces.
Usually, we have been able to obtain a bit of data on how people are feeling in the workplace through the Northern Territory public sector staff survey. The last one was conducted in 2011. The government failed to conduct one last year. We are well into 2014 and still waiting to hear if you will conduct the Northern Territory public sector staff survey, so you can gauge how public servants are feeling about the workplace to make sure you have good policies to work with staff we should be trying to develop in their career so they stay in the Territory for a long time. They have a huge amount to offer.
I am keen to know if the government will be venturing down that track to find out how the public sector feels things are going, through this survey.
Our key Territory workers deserve our support. They deliver essential services and are wonderful members of our community. However, we continue to see a government that will not listen to the issues to try to resolve them. I hope you start treating those workers with the respect they deserve.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer): Mr Deputy Speaker, I cannot help myself and must respond to some of these things. I am thrilled to live in the Northern Territory; this might stun a few people, but this is the best part of the best country in the world to live in. This is a fabulous place and I am so proud to be a Territorian and call this place home.
I have to scratch my head at times, as I thought this would be a sentiment shared by most people in this House, but it seems not. There seems to be one or two individuals, particularly on that side of the Chamber, who do not like the Northern Territory at all. There is never a positive word about the Northern Territory from these people’s mouths, and I do not know what it has done to offend them so badly.
We are in a political arena and we will fight on policy, etcetera, but the last thing we expect is for members of this parliament to talk the Territory down. We see it all the time with the opposition. They do not talk the place up, they do not tell people what a wonderful place the Northern Territory is to live in and they do not sing its praises.
I look around the Territory and I see all sorts of things I like, admire and that keep me living here. There is the beautiful clean air; the wide open spaces, the ability to shoot a pig or buffalo or catch a fish; or the opportunity to go camping with the kids. These things keep me here. We also have first-class sporting facilities, a modern health system and education which extends across the Northern Territory.
When I went to school in Queensland we did not have a school full of classrooms. In the Northern Territory every school has classrooms. I attended many classes outside, under a tree, and I remember going to school – I often tell this story – with the sandflies. We were inundated by sandflies and would take Milo tins, fill them with cow dung, punch holes in the bottom, put handles on them like a billy, light the top, create some ash and walk around swinging these things around our heads, watching the smoke come out to keep the sandflies away. There would be 44 gallon drums of smouldering cow dung all around the school to keep the sandflies away. I do not see that in the Northern Territory. Everybody is operating in a classroom and we have teachers ready to go.
I was in a class of 45 students of mixed grades, in a remote school with one teacher. There were various grades – imagine if you tried to do that in the Northern Territory. The opposition would fire up if we said there were only 45 kids at a school and sent one teacher
The member for Barkly is secretly sitting there nodding along.
Mr McCarthy: There were forty-six when I opened Epenarra – in a caravan.
Mr TOLLNER: He had 46 in his class in a caravan. The member for Barkly understands hardship, but you would swear we were living in hell when you listen to the opposition talk about the Northern Territory.
I love the member for Wanguri – she is a lovely lady with a very nice, bubbly personality – but when she talks about paramedics and how the Northern Territory government should intervene in their EBA negotiations, I scratch my head and wonder whether she has the slightest understanding of the industrial relations system in the Northern Territory. St John is a non-government organisation. I do not know where you think it fits into government ranks and we should be paying its wages and conditions. We do not. That is a job for St John; it negotiates with its employees. I am sure you are not suggesting the Northern Territory should intervene in the EBA negotiations of St John or similar.
Perhaps the member for Nhulunbuy wants us to dive in and take a position on Rio Tinto’s EBA negotiations, or maybe the member for Arnhem wants us to dive in with BHP.
Ms WALKER: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 113: relevance. This would be so much more relevant if the Deputy Chief Minister had listened to the rally this afternoon and the brilliant contribution from a paramedic about why it is a government responsibility.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I do not see that as a point of order.
Mr TOLLNER: The member for Nhulunbuy is a lovely lady, when you strip away all that hardness on the exterior. She is a nice person, and I know she does not really believe the Northern Territory government should be intervening in the St John EBA, the same way she would only want us to intervene in Rio Tinto’s EBA at Nhulunbuy because it employs people in the Northern Territory, or at BHP, Westpac or the Commonwealth Bank. Are there any other companies or NGOs you think the Northern Territory government should throw its weight around with and dictate how they negotiate EBAs? I do not think so.
I cannot recall, in the time I have lived in the Territory – maybe there has been one – a suggestion that we take on IR powers.
Ms Walker: I hope you and your family members never require the services of St John Ambulance.
Mr TOLLNER: That is a low blow member for Nhulunbuy. My family has had much to do with the ambulance service over the years. My father was a chief ambulance officer in country Queensland. I have the highest regard and intimate knowledge of how ambulance services operate. To suggest you hope my family falls into some problem where we need to dial an ambulance – I do not know that is what you really want.
Ms Walker: I did not suggest that, I said I hope you never need the service.
Mr TOLLNER: You hope I never need the service; I hope I never need the service either. The point is, I do not hope to intervene in their EBA negotiations. I cannot see a role for government intervening in the EBA negotiations of St John, but Labor seems to think that is appropriate. A disaffected member obviously told the member for Nhulunbuy we should be intervening in the EBA negotiations.
Ms Fyles: He told a public rally outside – hundreds of people.
Mr TOLLNER: Hundreds of people were outside, urging us to involve ourselves in the EBA negotiations of St John. Do they also want us to involve ourselves in EBA negotiations of NGOs and corporations around the Territory? I do not think so.
People want the best deal they can get, which is fine. They should negotiate that with their employers, but I do not see any role for the Northern Territory government to start wading into these things, throwing our weight around. That would be inappropriate.
The issue with firefighters – I thought the opposition would welcome the decision announced today. Do you want to know why it was made retrospective to that date? Because that is the date Labor brought the legislation forward. We thought, in a spirit of bipartisanship, we might support you, not that we get any thanks from you mob. You belittle us for it. You cannot even associate the date we are backdating it to with the date you brought your legislation forward. Goodness me, how pathetic.
Ms FYLES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 67: digression. Could the Deputy Chief Minister please outline whether the four firefighters are included?
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: He is responding to your question, so I do not accept that as a point of order. Treasurer, please try to stay in the general direction of debate. Thank you.
Mr TOLLNER: I thought we were having a debate on EBA negotiations with all of these people
Ms Fyles. Are they covered? It is a simple yes or no.
Mr TOLLNER: Did I say we would introduce presumptive legislation for career firefighters for 12 types of cancer?
Members interjecting.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Please stop conversing across the Chamber. The Treasurer has the floor and I want only the Treasurer speaking. The next person who speaks will be out.
Mr TOLLNER: I fail to understand what their argument is. We backdated to the date they brought the legislation in; we thought that was done in a good bipartisan spirit. We did not signal it. We thought the penny might drop with the member for Fannie Bay, or somebody else who actually cared about firefighters, to understand that was the date you waltzed in here with your legislation, but clearly you are not up to it. You do not even know the date you brought your legislation into this place.
We are looking after firefighters and are keen to see paramedics get a good deal. Does that mean we should wade into the St John EBA negotiations? No. It is not our job to prove whether firefighters developed cancer fighting fires or not. That will be assessed by the employer and the insurer. It is not a job for the government to intervene in these matters.
In relation to Health, our Health minister is doing a fantastic job in tough circumstances. It is easy to say, ‘You spend $1.3bn on Health; that is a third of the budget. You should be doing more.’ That was always the Labor way, to keep pushing more in. We are spending $1.3bn and we have to deliver health services across the Northern Territory.
It is amazing how short a way that money goes. Can we afford more? Not really, as it is already eating up a third of our budget. I know Labor would say it does not matter and we should borrow the money. You borrowed money to pay teachers, nurses and doctors. The member for Casuarina outlined that in the last budget; you were happy to borrow money to pay the operational costs of what you saw as important in government.
When you borrow money, somewhere down the track it has to be paid back. Labor never had a plan to pay any money back, so that job has fallen to this government. We do not want to clean up your mess. Unfortunately, that is something we have to do. Whacking a lot more money into the Health budget is something we cannot do at the moment. The Health minister is doing a splendid job of finding efficiencies in the system, providing critical services to Territorians across an incredibly vast jurisdiction, supplying doctors, nurses, support staff, etcetera, to five hospitals, 64 or 65 remote …
Mrs Lambley: There are about 80, including community clinics.
Mr TOLLNER: There are about 80 remote clinics, plus a myriad of other services. Our Health minister is doing a fantastic job keeping the Health department operating under a dreadful situation bequeathed to us by the former government.
Do we get any accolades for any of this? We do not expect to receive accolades from the opposition, but we also do not expect to hear the opposition constantly talking the Territory down. That is what you are doing. You raise these concerns and your concerns are talking the Territory down. Any independent, objective person from outside the Northern Territory listening to you guys would not consider coming to the Northern Territory if all they heard was your talk.
The Opposition Leader thinks she is funny every time she talks about CPI, the cost of living, etcetera. You mix up CPI and the cost of living to the point nobody can understand the difference. There is a real difference between the CPI and the cost of living. CPI is worked out on the calculation of a basket of goods to see how much it will cost into the future. The cost of living is a range of other things outside the basket of goods. A basket of goods does not pick up the contribution government puts into people’s pockets through sports vouchers, childcare subsidies, the Back to School Payment Scheme, and it does not count toll roads people have to go through and pay a fee for. There is a range of things CPI does not include. However, the mob on the other side is very happy to try to confuse people and suggest CPI is a cost of living indicator. It is not.
It is interesting when you listen to those on the other side, because they never take into account any of these external issues. When they see a southerner, they say, ‘Oh, do not come and live here, it is too expensive. It is a dreadful place to live, this Northern Territory. We pay too much.’ They do not say, ‘Come and live in the Northern Territory. It is the best place in the the best country in the world to live.’ A basket of goods may cost a little more, but you do not have to worry about traffic jams or toll booths. The government will kick a bit of money into your back pocket to help you through your childcare years, education expenses and make sure the kids can have a game of cricket or footy …
Mr VOWLES: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! As much as I am enjoying the Deputy Chief Minister’s speech, which clock are we working off?
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: We are working off the Internet. The Treasurer has two minutes to go.
Mr TOLLNER: I might wind up there. It is a shame the opposition is so keen to talk down the Northern Territory. It is a sad thing when you lose your focus on what really matters. You seem to think all that matters is being on government benches, rather than relishing the fact you live in the best part of the best country in the world.
Debate adjourned.
MOTION
Note Statement – Midterm Statement
Note Statement – Midterm Statement
Continued from earlier this day.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Health): Mr Deputy Speaker, two years ago the Country Liberals government promised to make headway in improving access to health services for all Territorians. I am proud to say we have delivered on that promise. We have delivered on our promises with a focus on investment, reform and innovation in our health services for Territorians.
We have seen improved access and will continue to see progress in Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and across our vast Territory, including our 35 remote health clinics across 41 Central Australian communities and 26 remote health clinics in the Top End.
This year we developed a Health budget that contained the largest ever Territory government investment in the health sector. The $1.352bn budget includes an increase of $36.8m in Northern Territory government funding compared to 2013-14. We have also delivered the highest Territory government investment in the disability sector. We delivered this despite the $5.5bn debt legacy left by the Labor government. We have been working hard to reduce this debt so funding is better spent on improving services for Territorians by reducing waste and staying focused on outcomes.
When it comes to investing in health, I am pleased to say we have been delivering expanded and improved health services which are producing results for all Territorians. One of the Country Liberal government’s biggest investments has been in alcohol mandatory treatment. Alcohol mandatory treatment or rehabilitation is finally helping Territorians afflicted by chronic alcohol abuse to get the treatment they need to turn their lives around. It is just over 12 months since the Country Liberals government introduced the Australia-first program. More than 400 hundred people have already been referred for mandatory treatment; that is 400 people who have had the chance to reform their lives free of the scourge of alcohol, 400 people who have had the opportunity to become real contributors to their lives, their families and the Northern Territory.
CAAAPU has run a 20-bed treatment facility in Alice Springs which has had great results, with dozens of positive reports of people being rehabilitated, getting healthy, accessing job training and reconnecting with their families and communities. As CAAAPU Chair, Eileen Hoosan said, ‘The facility is helping to turn the tide of damage caused by alcohol abuse to individuals, families and the Territory community. Simply, the CAAAPU alcohol mandatory treatment service is saving lives and changing lives for the better. CAAAPU is a place of health, hope and healing.’
There are now plans for CAAAPU to expand to eight assessment beds and a further 36 treatment beds. This will allow the service to treat more people in need of this important program. Alcohol mandatory treatment is a valuable part of the suite of measures introduced by the Country Liberals government to tackle chronic alcohol abuse and alcohol-fuelled violence and crime. The rate of alcohol-related admissions to the emergency department of Alice Springs Hospital has reduced thanks to these measures. Alcohol-related emergency department presentations have hit a five-year low in Tennant Creek under the Giles government’s tough new alcohol polices. The proportion of all emergency presentations that are alcohol-related and go on to be admitted has dropped from as high as 37% under Labor’s watch in 2009, down to less than 10% in April 2014. That is a success story in anyone’s book. It shows the government’s measures are protecting the community from harm.
I will soon officially open the 12-bed facility to deliver alcohol mandatory treatment to Tennant Creek, a facility the community has been calling for. Late next month the Darwin alcohol mandatory treatment program will also move from its accommodation centre, also known as the medi-hotel, to its new home at Berrimah. It was important that AMT was rolled out quickly in 2013 to tackle the extreme alcohol abuse which afflicts some Territorians. The burden of alcohol abuse and alcohol-related violence on our hospitals is huge. It has, in the past, used up a significant proportion of resources.
That move means by the start of 2015 we will have permanent and secure alcohol mandatory treatment facilities at Berrimah, Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, with construction to start on the new Katherine facility later in the New Year. This will bring the total number of beds to 150. We will continue to expand alcohol mandatory treatment to keep producing positive results for Territorians, their families and communities.
To give one recent example, in Alice Springs a 43-year old women has almost completed her treatment order. She is proactive in managing her own healthcare after being informed of her medication requirements. This client has identified she has alcohol issues and has actively made decisions to remain sober and not drink anymore.
The client has indicated she would like to remain in a community treatment program post-completion of her alcohol mandatory treatment order. She wishes to obtain employment and has been given approval to gain experience in the CAAAPU kitchen. She is doing extremely well and has been discussing seeking an apprenticeship with GTNT with a view to obtaining a certificate in commercial cookery.
Staff have assisted the client to apply online and have worked with her to develop a resume. This client is also undertaking English and writing skills tests to ascertain what help she may require to successfully complete the apprenticeship.
As you can hear, we are changing people’s lives, and this has a significant impact not only on their family, but their community. We would not have been able to roll out such an important program without the help of police, nurses and hospital staff, assessment clinicians, tribunal members and the treatment service providers. I thank all of them for their hard work and dedication.
Another project that will help to change the way people access health services is the Palmerston Regional Hospital. This is another project where Labor failed to deliver for Territorians, and when I say failed, I mean failed miserably. Eleven years produced a fence, two volumes of discussion and one brochure. I am proud to say early site works have started on what is one of the Northern Territory government’s biggest infrastructure projects. The project is on track to begin construction in 2016, and I am pleased the Country Liberals government is delivering on its promise to build a new public hospital.
Contractors have cleared a 1 km section of land to enable construction access to the site. A site office has been installed to support the construction works, which are part of the $5m in-program funding from the 2014 budget for the preliminary planning and construction of the Palmerston Regional Hospital.
Next on the program of works is the construction of the major upgrade of the Temple Terrace and Stuart Highway intersection to accommodate increased traffic demand to this area. Designs for the new intersection are being finalised, with preparations under way for commencing construction at the intersection soon. We are continuing to develop the master plan for the Palmerston Regional Hospital and a health precinct across the 45 ha area. This will guide the development of stage one of the hospital and outline the future expansion of a health precinct.
Some of the early ideas for the health precinct include opportunities for a new ambulance facility, childcare, retail space and low-care accommodation for remote patients. Once finalised, the master plan will be released to the public.
The development of the hospital will go through several stages of public comment and review. We are releasing another round of public information, as we did in June, to keep everyone in the Palmerston and rural area informed of the exciting developments around the hospital project. In July, the expression of market interest was advertised nationally and has resulted in responses from several companies interested in the development of the Palmerston Regional Hospital, including a number of major healthcare consortiums.
We have made arrangements to meet interested parties as part of the market-sounding process. This is real progress in the development of the bigger and better Palmerston Regional Hospital when compared with the 11-year delay under the former Labor government.
The Palmerston Regional Hospital will provide medical and surgical services, including cardiology; renal services; cancer services; and maternal and child health, including antenatal and postnatal care, with birthing services to be delivered as part of stage two.
The Palmerston Regional Hospital will relieve pressure placed on the Royal Darwin Hospital and will respond to the growing healthcare needs of residents in Darwin, Palmerston and the rural areas. The Country Liberals government has invested substantially in the Territory’s hospitals over the last two years. Budget 2014-15 presented the biggest injection of Northern Territory government funding, $36.8m, into our hospitals.
Work on the Royal Darwin Hospital’s $22.2m expansion of the emergency department and operating theatres is now 60% complete. Building works for the two new operating theatres began in May, with the extended emergency medical unit for the emergency department starting this month. The upgrade is expected to be completed by early next year and will greatly improve RDH’s capacity to provide elective surgery and reduce congestion and waiting times in the emergency department for Territorians.
On Monday I was pleased to announce the Royal Darwin Hospital will be able to treat patients in the short-term accommodation centre from September, immediately relieving pressure on the hospital. Known as the medi-hotel, the facility will be opened as a short-term accommodation centre at the end of September. It will open in stages, with the first 30 beds from next month. This will accommodate a range of Royal Darwin Hospital patients not requiring significant nursing care.
To give a few examples, this may include patients who require complex assessments prior to surgery and those who require wound management or post-surgery care. These types of patients are often using beds within the Royal Darwin Hospital, affecting patient flow. They can now be appropriately cared for in the accommodation centre, freeing up resources in the Royal Darwin Hospital. The centre will immediately relieve the pressure on the Royal Darwin Hospital that has been growing over the last decade.
The short-term accommodation centre will require some minor fitting works before patients can be moved in. This work is only expected to take several days. It is planned that the centre will expand the number of beds, with more beds to come online during the first quarter of next year.
It is important that the Royal Darwin Hospital takes a staged approach to this transition to ensure the needs of the hospital, its staff and patients are appropriately addressed.
The facility must also accommodate carers and/or family members who may need to stay with patients and, therefore, must be flexible with its bed numbers as the demand presents itself.
The budget also continues to provide funding of $4.46m to deliver on our election commitment for an additional 400 elective surgeries per year. In Central Australia we have gone above and beyond what we promised, and I am pleased to say we have achieved an additional 186 cases. That is 10.5% in increased activity.
It was also an election commitment to expand cardiac services in the Territory and we have made some exciting achievements in this area. In December the Country Liberals government committed $6.5m per annum for the roll-out of enhanced cardiac services, including the establishment of a stenting service at the Royal Darwin Hospital.
For the first time, low-risk angioplasty procedures are being performed in the Northern Territory. That is fantastic news, as Territorians have previously had to leave the convenience of home, and the support of family and friends for interstate hospitals.
The service started on 19 February this year. Since then, 38 low-risk angioplasty procedures have been performed at RDH. Angioplasty is a specialised procedure for arteries narrowed by cholesterol build-up and can lead to significant improvements in a patient’s health and quality of life.
It is expected at least 600 Territorians over four years will have the procedure locally rather than having to travel interstate. This is expected to meet about 90% of estimated demand. Senior staff at RDH and Flinders Medical Centre have been integral in providing the service.
RDH is also undergoing $22.8m in other new upgrades. This includes the first stage of the $11.9m refurbishment of the hospital’s paediatric ward, so it can be amalgamated on the same level to provide excellent paediatric care.
Nearly $7m has been allocated to upgrade negative pressure rooms, and a further $4.2m to improve fire control measures at RDH.
The Alice Springs Hospital community recently celebrated the first anniversary of the new emergency department, which has cut waiting times for patients and created an efficient working environment for staff. The emergency department has recorded more than 43 000 attendances since the Country Liberals government built the larger facility in mid-June last year.
That is over 3000 patients more than the older facility was able to treat in the previous 12 months. The new $25m emergency department has 18 treatment bays and has employed more staff, with more than 70 nurses and eight ward clerks now working in the emergency department.
Waiting times are already showing a great improvement. The ED has been equipped with state-of-the-art technology, and hospital staff say they feel in control and have the room and facilities to treat patients in a personalised manner. This is a far cry from the previous emergency department, where overcrowding made treatment difficult.
The new ED also held up well during the very busy time of the Finke Desert Race and a recent spike in flu cases. The Country Liberals government has committed an extra $160 000 to the emergency department in 2014, bringing the total additional funding of the ED to $5.7m in 2014-15.
People requiring special heart scans in Alice Springs now have access to CT coronary angiograms, thanks to a fly-in service that started last year. This is another election commitment to expand cardiac services that we have delivered on. This joint Department of Health and NT Cardiac Services program has successfully delivered this service to the town. A visiting cardiologist visits once a month for a full day of appointments. This will soon increase.
I also recently toured the newly-constructed Ochre and Olive Wings at Flynn Lodge, which will provide a much-needed boost to the aged care community. The $4.4m wings will expand the facility to include an additional 20 high-care residents. In addition, front offices, an activity room, a chapel and nurses’ stations are being built at the front of Old Timers. The extension works will add to the two existing wings at Flynn Lodge, Mountain View and Riverview, which accommodate 20 low-care residents in single rooms. To improve the facilities further, these older wings are undergoing refurbishments to each of the ensuite bathrooms. The 20 additional residential places will soon become available following the completion of these refurbishments. Flynn Lodge will then provide 24-hour care for 40 Alice Springs residents.
This government has also spent $391 000 in extra funding to support palliative care respite care services. Last year I opened the $2m respite care facility in Araluen. Alice Springs Respite Day Care House provides daytime care for residents in the wider Central Australian community. This service has provided much-needed assistance to people who are aged and frail or who require palliative care, as well as assistance and support for their families and carers.
The Alice Springs Hospital is also set to receive $5.2m in Commonwealth funding to create a multidisciplinary teaching and training facility. Alice Springs Hospital will become a significant contributor to a clinical teaching and training hub in Central Australia, delivering high-quality training to multidisciplinary hospital staff and our remote workforce. The teaching and training facility will include a 100-seat lecture theatre with advanced audio visual capability, two simulation labs, four conference rooms with videoconference capability and student work areas. The hospital will also receive $29.9m for continued fire protection, air conditioning and remediation works, including upgrades to emergency power and water systems
...
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move that the member for Araluen be granted an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Mrs LAMBLEY: The Northern Territory government continues its commitment to providing quality healthcare at Tennant Creek Hospital, with the opening of the upgraded emergency department in 2013. It includes five new trauma beds which are more sophisticated than ordinary trolley beds; these allow for X-rays to be taken at the bedside. The upgrade has also resulted in two resuscitation bays, a secure pharmacy, a secure mental health facility and three separate waiting areas to respond to cultural needs. Four full-time medical training positions have also been established at the Tennant Creek Hospital and a GP clinic was established in September.
A new midwifery group practice was also established in collaboration with the Anyinginyi Health Aboriginal Corporation. This will provide women and families of the Barkly region with access to a streamlined model of maternity care based in Tennant Creek.
At Gove District Hospital we are working on plans for the refurbishment of the emergency department. Population modelling and clinical planning has been undertaken based on the Gove population growing into the future, and shows there is still available capacity in both the ED and in-patient services. A refurbishment of the old layout of the emergency department is urgently needed to ensure an improved work plan for staff and an appropriate level of privacy for patients. In addition, there is an opportunity to put in place infrastructure to better support improved infection control practices. It is expected that design work will be under way in late 2014.
In May 2014 a month-long extensive refurbishment of the Gove District Hospital central sterilised services department was also undertaken. Refurbishment included installation of floor-to-ceiling vinyl, new shelving and the installation of filters. Gove hospital also achieved a further three-year reaccreditation for the baby-friendly hospital initiative in April 2014. Ward 1, which serves as the combined adult-paediatric unit, saw the construction and completion of three new ensuite bathrooms to adjoin the three paediatric rooms.
In early 2014, Gove hospital trialled taking the specialist orthopaedic outpatient service to Alyangula, Groote Eylandt. This first visit was successful in attendance and cost-saving.
Gove District Hospital has partnered with Flinders University to establish an onsite learning centre for doctors and medical students. The centre facilitates clinical learning through active simulation scenarios. Included in the centre is a four bay simulation lab with state-of-the-art teleconference facilities.
This government is also investing in a new unit at Katherine Hospital that will be dedicated to caring for chemotherapy patients closer to home. Patients from Katherine and the surrounding region currently have to go to Royal Darwin Hospital’s Alan Walker Cancer Care Centre for treatment. In the last two years about 60 patients from the Katherine region have been diagnosed with cancer and treated in Darwin. Having a service in Katherine means patients have easy access to high-quality services and can go home after their treatment.
Completion of the Flinders University simulation learning centre on the Katherine Hospital campus, to provide ongoing support for medical and allied health students while they gain experience and treatment in the hospital centre, has also been completed. This centre also includes simulation services. The hospital has also worked with Fresenius Medical Care in planning for the transition of the renal unit in Katherine Hospital to the new private off-campus facility in the Katherine community.
We are investing in our hospitals in our major centres and, similarly, are investing heavily in building new remote health clinics, as well as extensive upgrades in the bush. The $50m program will improve healthcare delivery for Territorians in rural and remote areas. Workers have been onsite at Ntaria since September 2013 to construct the community’s brand-new $6m health centre. The project has been delivered on budget and on schedule, and I am looking forward to visiting Hermannsburg soon to inspect the clinic. It provides a bigger, better and more culturally appropriate health centre with dedicated spaces for a range of health services.
Tenders for the clinics in Docker River and Elliott will be released next month, with Galiwinku and Umbakumba tenders to follow in October, and Titjikala in November. This equates to more than $20m in investment in the bush.
The Territory government has substantially increased funding to the Patient Assistance Travel Scheme for remote Territorians. PATS is an integral part of providing access to health services for remote Territorians, and the Country Liberals government has worked very hard to improve this since 2012. The government committed to a full review of PATS and has put forward an additional $7.5m per annum for three years to fund any recommendations.
Improving health services is not about investment alone; you must provide innovation. Last month I launched the BreastScreenNT bus at Barunga that will give remote women the opportunity to have breast screens closer to home. The BreastScreenNT bus will make a big difference to the lives of women living in the bush. Remote women have always had to travel hundreds and sometimes thousands of kilometres for breast screening and some did not access the service at all.
Last month I also officially opened a new mental health accommodation facility to support Territorians and their families. This is another great idea from the Department of Health’s mental health team to provide Darwin’s first community-based rehabilitation centre of this type.
This year the Country Liberals government also held the first dedicated conference on suicide prevention. More than 100 experts and Territory stakeholders attended the conference. Feedback from local stakeholders will help to shape the Territory’s first strategic reform of the way we approach suicide prevention in the Northern Territory.
Reforming health policies to improve access for Territorians and correct the mistakes of the previous Labor government is also a big part of our commitment to Territorians. We have banned smoking in cars carrying children under 16, an initiative which was well overdue. All other jurisdictions have introduced legislation to protect children from the harms of second-hand smoke whilst travelling in a motor vehicle. It was time the Northern Territory strengthened measures to protect children from the harm of second-hand smoke.
Another one of our landmark reforms this year has been to introduce legislation that will, once again, allow private midwives to practice in the Northern Territory.
In another significant move to reform the health sector, the Country Liberals government is also delivering an eight-fold increase in the number of nurse practitioners throughout the Northern Territory.
I could spend half the night talking about the reforms we have made throughout the Northern Territory in Health. The list is extensive.
One of the most significant reforms has been the Territory’s new health services framework. This has meant the establishment of two health services, the Top End Health Service and the Central Australian Health Service, and local people making local decisions about healthcare in their community. Decision-making is devolved to these two health services and their boards, and we have many more reforms in health policy planned. We are looking at furthering community control of health clinics across the Territory. We are working very hard to bring the declining numbers of Aboriginal Health Practitioners across the Territory back on track through new initiatives.
We created a portfolio of Disability Services earlier this year, the first time it has had its own, separate portfolio. We are also developing a strategic plan for Disability Services, which I am very proud of.
I conclude tonight by stating that we are meeting our commitments within the Health portfolio. It is a huge portfolio, with the largest amount of funding allocated to it. It is a big responsibility, but we have kicked goals over the last two years, compared to 11 years of Labor. We are making significant changes which will ultimately improve the health and quality of all Territorians’ lives.
Mr KURRUPUWU (Arafura): Mr Deputy Speaker, in response to the Chief Minister’s statement, he said his government has actioned 98% of CLP election commitments.
People in my electorate believe he must have his percentages mixed up, because there are 98% of election promises yet to be actioned in Arafura. Before the Country Liberal Party came to power, it signed a contract with bush seats, including the electorate of Arafura.
Those contracts held promises Aboriginal people believed. There were promises to increase jobs for Aboriginal people, for infrastructure, economic development, to improve education and health and housing outcomes.
It is a very sad indictment of the current government that most of the problems with Aboriginal communities have, in some cases, gotten worse.
There have been incidents where major projects have been stalled and no jobs are being created for local Aboriginal people.
Our people remain very poor. We are often criticised for not working and wasting our money. We tried very hard to partner with the government and businesses to increase job opportunities for our people, so they can come off welfare and work in real jobs for wages. There are many examples of where we have given our most valuable asset, our land, over to Commonwealth and Territory governments to show we are trying hard to improve our standard of living. Many are now asking what the point of this is, when those who are major partners, such as the government or banks, are not prepared to contribute finance as part of the partnership.
I emphasise that we have shown we are prepared to give what we have to ensure a better life for our young people. However, we cannot have our land in leasing arrangements with the government when nothing happens and we receive no benefit through real jobs.
The fact we have no jobs for our people leaves us facing poverty. This, in turn, leads to the problem of poor health and poor outcomes in education. What is the point of Senator Scullion trying to make sure young people attend schools when the major root of problems is clearly one of poverty?
There is no evidence the Northern Territory government has improved the standard of living of people in my electorate, nor did I see any evidence the current government was prepared to spend even a minor amount on improving infrastructure. We have lost confidence in the value of contracts and memoranda of understanding with the government. They are only pieces of paper which are not being honoured by the government. My electorate wants real action on the ground. That is why I decided to leave the Country Liberals and join the Palmer United Party with my other brave and concerned colleagues, the members for Arnhem and Namatjira.
Minister Price talked about how governments help us with sport; my electorate is very interested in real jobs.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Mr Deputy Speaker, I am delighted, as are all members on this side of the House, to support of the Chief Minister’s statement on the Country Liberal government’s achievements over the past two years and our plans for the coming two years, because there are more very exciting times ahead.
Halfway through this government’s first term of office we can confidently say work is well under way on meeting our promises. We have delivered on most and, in many instances, we have achieved more then we committed to. Right now is an exciting time to be involved in the Northern Territory’s mining and resources industry, with major projects under way to explore and extract gas, minerals and metals.
This government has made the most significant investment in growing the minerals and petroleum exploration industry ever undertaken by a Territory government through CORE, the Creating Opportunities Resource Exploration initiative. This $23.8m commitment over the next four years, including an investment of $8m to undertake a major assessment of the Territory’s shale gas potential, will stimulate and grow the minerals and onshore petroleum exploration industry.
Since this government came to power in 2012 we have been setting a range of policies and initiatives to support exploration and attract investment into the minerals and energy sector. There are currently 19 mining projects in construction or approval processes in the Territory. These projects have the potential capital investment of around $4bn; it is estimated there will be about 3000 jobs created for the construction phase and more than 2000 jobs for operations.
Although commodity prices and issues with raising finance present challenges that must be overcome before a number of these projects can move into production, the Territory government is committed to doing whatever it can to assist these companies in getting their projects across the line. This includes targeted pre-competitive geoscience programs undertaken by the Northern Territory Geological Survey, which are designed to increase the Territory’s competitiveness in attracting exploration investment, with a particular focus on onshore petroleum.
The department is also developing policies around strategic development zones in the McArthur and Central Australian regions. In these areas there is a case for stimulating activity to facilitate a critical mass of developing projects that can support infrastructure development and the growth of regional economies. These zones are a focus for the NT Geological Survey’s current geoscience programs. Work is under way on developing protocols for tenement management in these regions. These initiatives will ultimately ensure we encourage aggressive exploration whilst not applying onerous or uncompetitive conditions on the exploration industry.
My department is also developing strategies to work with land councils, traditional owners and industry on mechanisms to facilitate improved processes for land access for exploration. By the end of the year the industry development strategy will be in place, and I expect to see parts of my department restructured to better reflect this strong economic development focus.
Following the establishment of the Energy Directorate in 2013, the energy team has already met a number of milestones. These include introducing amendments to the Petroleum Act in support of government policy to encourage aggressive exploration. The amendments enable multiple applications over the same vacant land, creating an environment for competitive processes.
In February this year I signed off on a production licence for Central Petroleum’s Surprise Field oil project in Central Australia. This is the first time the Northern Territory government has issued a production licence for a new oil field in over 32 years.
In consultation with industry on current and future energy needs in the NT, we are in the final stages of establishing a policy that will focus on delivering secure, affordable, reliable and sustainable energy. The NT energy policy will recognise gas, solar energy and emerging technologies play a key role in driving economic development, including investment in regions and employment.
The Territory’s onshore petroleum industry is undergoing record expansion, largely driven by our substantial potential for shale gas and oil. In the past few years, some of the largest onshore seismic surveys ever held in Australia have been undertaken in the Territory, and up to 25 wells are planned over the coming year.
Exploration for unconventional gas and oil continues to gain momentum, particularly in the McArthur Basin and Beetaloo sub-basin, with a number of major investments and farm-ins announced over the past year.
The discovery of large-scale onshore gas reserves in the Territory will provide major flow-on benefits for the minerals sector in new energy supplies for mining projects, and further impetus for the development of infrastructure in regional and remote parts of the Territory.
While this government has a strong focus on economic development, we also take our environmental responsibilities seriously. The Legacy Mines Unit within the Department of Mines and Energy became fully operational at the beginning of this year, and has commenced compiling an inventory of legacy components of mine sites. In addition, the unit has commenced projects on three sites. The largest of these projects involves an assessment program, with the expenditure of some $500 000 at Redbank Mine, which includes the installation of new bores and pumps.
The Northern Territory government has worked hard to improve the regulatory environment and reduce red and green tape for the minerals sector. This includes simplifying the process of submitting mining management plans, introducing multiyear cycles of mining management plans and transitioning to a compliance program that has an increasingly field-based focus, with a stronger concentration on risk-based assessment. It is our aim to streamline approvals, shorten time frames, and improve the industry’s ability to lodge documents and track approvals online.
In the coming months we will launch a new website mapping system to replace the department’s TIS and STRIKE systems. This will deliver spatial, geological and titles information online. This is the first step in a complete overhaul and modernisation of the IT systems that support the regulation of the resources industry in the Territory.
The Country Liberals government is determined to capitalise on increasing food demand from overseas and within Australia to drive economic growth within our agricultural, horticultural, pastoral and fisheries sectors. In order to better support Northern Territory food producers we have implemented policy changes and restructures within the two key departments that oversee these sectors, namely Primary Industry and Fisheries and Land Resource Management.
My Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries has been restructured to better focus on market-driven activities and implement measures to strengthen food industries. Indeed, the restructure will add to this government’s ability to deliver on the priorities set by the Framing the Future strategic plan, with a focus on north Australian development.
There is now a clear focus on building enterprise resilience in our industry sectors through diversification by creating closer alignment between our plant and animal research. This includes aquaculture opportunities. The restructure will ultimately ensure alignment to the government’s economic development priorities and the industry development plan, allow for the most effective provision of services and strengthen industry.
Importantly, the restructure includes a new Food Industry Development Group that contains our existing research functions, as well as adding market enterprise and major economic development to those. This government is committed to investing in quality research for new crops and products, and existing mango and banana industries. Indeed, there is a variety of research under way on these crops, as well as for rambutans, passionfruit, dates, tropical flowers, rice and melons.
Work is also progressing on development of an NT biosecurity strategy which will guide where investment in biosecurity is needed.
The election commitment to review export yards in relation to industry growth has been conducted. To ensure capacity can keep up with industry growth, my department is working closely with the NT Live Export Association to consider future requirements.
This government committed to improving cattle production on Aboriginal-owned pastoral land. To this end, the department provides property planning, training and advice to 14 Aboriginal properties; to date, this program has seen about 24 000 km2 of additional land brought into pastoral production, and an increase in cattle on Indigenous land of about 100 000 head.
We recognise access to good land and water resources is necessary for future growth and development of these industries. This government supports the use of the Northern Territory’s water resources to drive economic development. My Department of Land Resource Management is undertaking land and water assessment services to determine new agricultural precincts in the Territory as part of the northern development program.
Extensive field-based assessment is under way on Bathurst Island to identify potential areas for agricultural development. This project is part of the government’s commitment to identify up to 10 000 ha of arable land suitable for investment and local development on the Tiwi Islands.
Additional work to identify potential new agricultural areas will focus on the southern Katherine region, Ali Curung and Ti Tree.
The Ord Development Unit continues to work to progress the important Ord project. A cross-border legislation study has been completed, which is an important step in understanding how this development would operate across the border, to protect the environment and biosecurity, regulate water and maintain roads. Consultation with native title estate groups through the Northern Land Council has also commenced; this is another important step in ascertaining how the Ord development will occur.
Changes introduced last year to the Pastoral Land Act now enable pastoralists to diversify land use and develop new income streams without having to change the tenure of their lease. Pastoral leaseholders now have a unique opportunity to diversify their income stream and contribute further to the economic growth of the Northern Territory. The Department of Land Resource Management has already received a number of applications and inquiries for proposed non-pastoral operations, including tourism, aquaculture, sandalwood forestry and palm oil plantations. One such opportunity which will bring economic benefits to the Northern Territory is for the cultivation of poppies on a pastoral property. Legislation to allow the cultivation of poppies in the Northern Territory has been passed by this parliament and the first application for a licence to cultivate poppies has been received and is being reviewed.
Sensible water policy, long-term strategies and legislative reform are essential for the growth of the Northern Territory’s economy. Good science and adaptive management is essential to ensure our water resources are used sustainably and that water is available to support our natural ecosystems, as well as our livelihoods.
The development of the water policy will consider the different legislation and administrative arrangements across government in relation to water use, protection of water quality and the role of water in public health.
Considerations in developing the water policy will include the best model for the efficient and effective regulation of public water supplies and sewerage services and, where there are benefits in the integrated regulation of water extraction, the protection of water resources and service provision.
The Northern Territory government is committed, through the Framing the Future strategy, to developing a 50-year water plan to provide a long-term proposal for water planning and economic development approaches. We are the only government that has the vision to attempt such a significant plan.
The Northern Territory Catchments Advisory Committee will also enable community input into water policy development, as well as provide the opportunity for focused attention on emerging issues affecting economic development in river catchments throughout the Territory.
Fishing is near and dear to many Territorians. Whether recreational or commercial, fishing is an integral part of the Top End lifestyle and brings many economic benefits to the Territory through tourism, jobs and commerce. In recognition of the importance of fishing to Territorians, this government has established the Recreational Fishing Advisory Committee; implemented the recreational fishing development plan; established a recreational fishing data survey program to properly understand recreational fishing patterns in the Territory; reached six agreements with traditional landowners around the Territory for ongoing access for commercial and recreational fishers to waters affected by the Blue Mud Bay decision; and implemented a comprehensive safety and recreational fishing education program in conjunction with marine safety. These were all Country Liberals election promises in 2012 that we have lived up to.
We committed to establishing new self-launch boat ramps. Work on these projects is in progress and there is a $4.5m budget to be rolled out, with work expected to start during this financial year.
I could go on for a very long time listing the many achievements within my portfolio areas. However, I do not want to spoil the opportunity to raise them at a later time for discussion.
This parliament and the people of the Northern Territory can be assured the Country Liberals government is well on track to meeting many of its targets set prior to the 2012 election.
Here we are, halfway through the first term of government, and we have already met and, as I said, in many cases exceeded what we set out to do. We are driving economic development in the Territory hard and it is starting to bear fruit.
When I was at the Mining the Territory Conference this morning, which combines with SEAAOC and the inaugural Building the Territory Conference, it was heartening to see so many people turning up for a conference based around the mining sector, whereas in other states numbers at many of these regional mining conferences are starting to fall away.
That is reflective of a number of things. First of all, in other states there is no doubt the resources sector is coming off the boil. The reduction in exploration and mining occurring across other jurisdictions is reflected in the numbers turning up to conferences similar to the one we are hosting here over the next few days.
The other strong indicator is quite the opposite to that, and that is the positive effect we are seeing in the Territory. As I said before, we have 19 projects under way or in approvals processes. There is an inordinate, almost unprecedented excitement about the minerals and energy sector in the Northern Territory, being driven by what was described to me today by people who work in the industry as a can-do government. That is why the eyes of Australia and the resources sector are turning to the Northern Territory. There is no doubt about it.
The attitude is positive. Everywhere I turn major companies are happy to look in the Northern Territory, not just because it is prospective for minerals, metals, and, of course, oil and gas, but because they feel there is a government here that is welcoming, open for business and prepared to work very hard to have their dollar committed to Northern Territory operations. You can see that. The amount of effort going into our Asian investment strategy, for example, the number of trips I have …
Mr BARRETT: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the minister to complete his speech.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: The attitude coming from industry is – they see what we are doing. The overseas investment strategy – China has certainly been a focus in the past and we are continuing to work in that space, but over the last 12 months I have made two trips to Korea and Japan. That is the first time the Northern Territory Mining minister has visited those jurisdictions to take industry delegations to secure investment and firm up relations between us and those countries.
The work will not stop there, which is noted by industry. They look to us and see a government that has the political courage and will to make things happen across the resources sector. That is why you could be forgiven for thinking operations within the mining, oil and gas sectors in the Northern Territory are running counter cyclical to the rest of the country. While they are going down we are still going up, and that is a testament to the work this government is doing, not the tired old Labor government that was in power for 11 years and allowed some degree of sovereign risk to creep into its policy-making. It is a new government, one with a great deal of energy and, as I said, a great deal of political will and courage to make things happen.
Similar things can be said about the agricultural sector. Not only have I and others in this government spent a lot of time in Indonesia repairing relationships after 2011, but we are also punching into new markets. Last financial year some 130 000 head of cattle went to Vietnam. Previously only a couple of hundred head went across. We have built and strengthened that relationship to such a point where it is now becoming a major trading partner. We need to diversify.
We now have buffalo going to Vietnam. The first ever shipment was sent seven or eight months ago now. The demand is so high that we do not know where we will fill it. There are probably not enough buffalo in the Territory to do that sustainably in the long term. But, nonetheless, we are giving it a crack and helping industry to develop its business models so it can participate in that new trade with Vietnam.
It will not stop there. There are other countries we are eyeing off. We are working hard on China, not only as a place for minerals investment, but also in the agriculture sector. China is very keen to look at the Northern Territory; it also recognises a government open for business and willing to facilitate investment and better trade relations between our great jurisdiction and their great country of China.
We hope to soon have import protocols in place that will allow live cattle to go into China as well. Great work is being being done at the Australian government level to establish health protocols to allow that to occur. That is ably assisted by the efforts of the Northern Territory government in a number of sectors.
When I was there on my most recent trip – which was now almost 12 months ago – I met with senior officials within some of the government departments who have vested responsibility for decision-making around allowing livestock to enter that country.
We are also talking about the opportunity for Chinese to invest in the Northern Territory’s agriculture sector. Some might view foreign investment as concerning, but where there is a lack of investment from within the country, foreign investment holds a very important place to stimulate those industries and get them moving again. It is about getting the balance right.
I will quickly talk about the water story, which I like to do. It causes a lot of consternation in some quarters. However, water is critical to the growth and development of agriculture, generally, anywhere. We are releasing water, at sustainable limits, as quickly as possible.
We understand, and what the Labor opposition did not understand when it was in government, is that putting arable land together with a bit of water brings real opportunity. That is something we never saw from Labor, and that is a fact. When we won government in 2012 we were left with 75 water licences that were never dealt with and were sitting in an in-tray somewhere. It was a huge backlog of work that had to be undertaken by my department to clear those licence applications.
I look at some of the statistics that have been provided to me. In the 18 months before the 2012 election, the Labor government issued just three water licences. I do not know what the Agriculture minister – or the minister for Primary Industry, who was in charge of NRETAS at the time – was thinking. Obviously they did not want to upset anybody and did not want anything to happen. They were completely paralysed by fear.
Since coming to government, we have issued 103 licences, or it might be 102, at the last statistical milestone reported to me. That is new licences, additional water added onto existing licences and renewals. That is testament to a government willing to put its nose to the grindstone and make some sometimes controversial decisions. We are using that to grow the economy; water is essential for that and we will continue to do it within sustainable limits. We have good guidelines and professional people working within the Water Resources Division of the Department of Land Resource Management who keep those matters under control. I am very proud to say the Country Liberals government is driving economic development through the agricultural sector hard.
I agree wholeheartedly with some comments the Deputy Chief Minister made earlier that if you only listened to the comments made by the Labor opposition no one in their right mind would ever want to come to the Northern Territory. They constantly talk the Territory down.
If you want to criticise policy we are up for that, but be grown up and sensible enough not to talk the Territory down. The last thing we want is for people to hear what you are saying. God forbid they do, because they might not come. People living here will hear what you are saying and, God forbid they do, might decide to leave the Territory. That is not what we want to see. We want to see the Northern Territory grow, become strong and vibrant and have multiple economies, including those which exist within remote Aboriginal communities and remote parts of the Territory.
I am incredibly proud of the achievements of this government just two years into the first term, particularly given the horrible mess left behind for us to deal with.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Katherine for his contribution. I may disagree with the government on some issues, but the member for Katherine is one of the most hard-working members of this parliament. I do not always agree with everything he says, and that is not putting the Territory down, because the job of people on this side is to criticise, hopefully fairly, because that keeps you on your toes. I appreciate the amount of work you put into your portfolio. It is a considerably large portfolio and it should be recognised where people like you have the Territory at heart. I do not agree with everything, and I might raise those tonight, but in general you are doing a fantastic job.
You raised the issue of water. Hold your horses before you jump down my throat, because I would like to congratulate – I received a top book recently from Power and Water on future plans for water in the Darwin region. If you want to look at proposals for the future water supply of the Darwin region, which is a very important thing to deal with, the book it released showing the possible new dams – the idea of the off-water dam from the Adelaide River – is one of the best documents I have seen in relation to the future of water supplies for the Darwin region. It is excellent, as well as the little book that comes with it and your concept of living water smart.
The book talks about growing natives to reduce reliance on water. I will probably raise a question about a certain area of landscaping in Darwin which is very water hungry and goes against what your department is promoting. Be that as it may, and you know my concerns about water – it is not about having many water licences, it is about making sure each person who receives a licence only gets what is needed, not an ambit claim for water. My concern at the beginning was that a certain person who had a water licence did not use it, was given a lot more water and, as far as I know, has still not used that water. It is more about how the water is given out, rather than – I do not have a problem with giving out lots of water licences, but it is the amount of water and how it is done. Minister, you understand that.
It is great to hear about things like rice, which I have always been interested in. Believe it or not, I used to grow small amounts of rice on Bathurst Island. It is good to see there is still work being done on rice. The poppy industry and horticulture need to expand and there must be new varieties ongoing. I noticed that Woolworths has been promoting Northern Territory produce this year. As someone who used to supply produce, mainly capsicums and eggs, to places like Woolies, it was always difficult to get local produce into some of our big supermarkets. But this year I notice Woolworths displayed local produce at the Garden Spectacular and at the Coolalinga Woolworths, as well as in Katherine. They are the sorts of things we need.
There has been an expansion in cattle numbers. It is great to hear about cattle and buffalo going to Vietnam. You would hope we could get more buffalo because that seems to be an industry that could be a real positive, especially for Aboriginal communities. I presume the Bulman Gulin Gulin group is still going, with Markus Rathsmann. They were involved with buffalo for a long time.
I need to get back to water, regarding catchment committees. You have scrapped the Howard East bore field committee and have said there will be advertisements released for a new version. I have not seen a new version yet, so I will be waiting, because even though I am a politician, I am also a local with a bore and am interested in what happens to the water table in my area.
You spoke about minerals. There are a few areas missing in the debate, one being the direction of geothermal and the other being gas. I will not say too much at the moment about the issue of fracking and gas, the inquiry into it and how that all fits together. There should be more emphasis on renewables and you are talking to a fan of nuclear. Do not get too excited. It is an option; nuclear power is a carbon-free energy. There are issues about how you build it, as well as with the waste. There are other options for energy; in the Territory, we will probably not go down the nuclear path unless someone comes up with a little reactor that is economic.
We should look at renewables for many of our remote communities. In Europe I learned there are options starting to develop; renewable energies do not always give us 24 hours a day power, but that renewable energy source can be the way to produce other forms of energy like hydrogen. If you can produce hydrogen, which you can do from solar thermal and wind, you can then produce energy for use 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Those are the sorts of things on which I hope the Territory is starting to take a lead role in research and development. We can be left behind in this great dream of gas. Gas is dirty. It might be relatively easy to remove and ship down south or overseas, but we need to be proactive in the renewables area. It is not a silly area, we know Tenix Energy is looking at tidal power in the Clarence Strait. I understand from my discussions today with the Planning Commissioner that there is an EIS being developed for that plant. That is an option which may lead to several turbines down the coast of the Kimberley, so you can offset tidal changes and produce a reliable form of renewable energy that does not need to rely on wind or sunlight, which are both variable. The tides are not variable, they will be there every day and you can measure and time them. There are great opportunities to encourage organisations like Tenix Energy to go down this path.
There are issues with the gas supply for our power station in Darwin. What would you do if it was not burning up all the gas it is required to use? That is a difficult energy, but if you could produce something off the coast near Gunn Point, which is also very close to transmission lines, what a great opportunity. What a great thing for the Territory to show we are thinking outside the square.
People do not have to agree with my thoughts on energy, but we have the opportunity to look at other options.
We have wind turbines at Alpururrulam; wind in some of our small communities is certainly an option, especially coastal communities. There needs to be a bit more discussion about the Territory going forward, so it does not only sit on the gas issue as the only option.
The Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment raised some points about land. Sometimes when you have a different point of view you are accused of being anti-development, which gripes me sometimes. One of the problems I have with the Darwin Regional Land Use Plan is that we have one plan. That plan is being sold and is the only one that will come back for the government to look at.
The big mistake in the government saying it is consulting is that it does not really consult. It has information days. There is nothing wrong with information days, but I have held six meetings in the rural area, whilst the Planning Commission and the Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment have held none.
Six public meetings – they were not violent. No one got up and belted me over the head. I told people many times that I did not mind if they had a different point of view. We are not challenging people like the planning commissioner or the department about other options. They are expecting us to write a letter to say what we think. For all I know they dropped my submissions in the bin last time, because I did not see any differences that I put forward in the new draft.
A fundamental problem with so-called consultation is that the government is not facing up to its responsibility to do it properly. It is more about informing, and when people come to see what you have to say you convince them that what you have in front of them is the best option.
If you really want to consult, you have to put several options up for people. If you are to have a plan for Darwin, one might be the Elizabeth River and Weddell, or it might be rural. Another plan might have no Elizabeth River, no Weddell and cover the entire rural area and suburbs. Another plan might be a mix so people can see there are options. What I see now is a plan the government will pick up. There is one option. Consultation is with various groups. If you have various groups, where do I, as a person who perhaps believes this plan is not a good one, get the chance to say to those people, ‘How about this option?’
I do not have a chance, the money or government backing. I go out as much as I can, I have postcards, petitions and pamphlets going out and I have held six meetings. This was only for a small part of the huge development plan the government wants to put forward.
I cannot look at Glyde Point, I cannot deal with everything at the bottom of the shire and I cannot deal with all of the issues with Weddell. I am trying to deal with issues around Howard Springs. All of a sudden, I had a plan. It did not have anything to do with an activity centre; I am not sure what an activity centre is, except I think it is a suburb. Just in my area, which is rural, along came a plan to say it will be suburban. I do not know where it came from, but it came up all of a sudden. Four square kilometres of land – that is a big change to the area I come from.
There is not enough real consultation. It is consultation with various groups to look good. What you need for good consultation is debate. That debate does not have to be outrageous or rude, it must be a chance for people to look at the options.
In this document the Chief Minister talks about growth, industry and those things. I have nothing against the government promoting the development of the north and being open for business, but I noticed one very clear gap in this document: small- and medium-sized business.
I do not see anything in here about small- and medium-sized business, which are struggling. I heard recently that two local steel companies have folded and one is only hanging in there because the people they supply asked them to.
For a government that says it supports business it needs to knock on a few doors. Yes, some people are doing well. I spoke to one of the housing companies the other day, which is flat out. However, I speak to other companies – I get this information back from middle builders – and hear that they are not doing all that well. If they were doing well, would they be in here? I hope so. But there is no mention of small business. Small business is the heart of our development in the Northern Territory. We cannot only look at INPEX. That is a one-off big project. We need to ensure those people who have invested their life savings, who have lived in the Territory for a long time and are the blood and guts of our economy are being looked after as well. If you lose them then, when INPEX goes, we will have holes in the economy. There is nothing about small business in this document.
That is one of the problems when the government becomes all worked up about oil and gas. I saw those people in the hall last night and I did not know any of them. There were about two Territorians there. I gather they are high-falutin people. What can happen is when you start talking to those people you forget those below. It is good to be promoting business, but if you do not bring the people who live in the Territory along with you, you will lose them. When I say the government is arrogant, it is in the sense it has great plans and big ideas, but it is not bringing the people with it. That is the bit it misses.
Minister, I make an exception for you. I know you get your feet dirty with smelly cattle, you know what a mango tree looks like and you know what a buffalo looks like, but, in general, the government is not in touch with many people, especially those I meet.
As I said on TV the other day, I met an 80-year-old, long-time CLP person who shook his head and said, ‘It is the worst government I have ever known’. I did not ask him to say it; I only said hello to him.
The government needs to be aware you can have all of this good stuff, and it sounds good, but if you are losing the people you are supposed to be supporting, you will not be around for the next election, no matter how hard you work. That is where there is an issue.
I do not intend to always be negative; I am trying to make some points I do not always have a chance to talk about.
I raise the issue of mandatory alcohol rehabilitation facilities that we learned about during the FASD committee hearings. It is mentioned in here that by the start of 2015 we will have a permanent secure AMT facility – I presume that is the mandatory alcohol rehabilitation centre and not ATM spelled backwards – at Berrimah in Darwin, Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, with construction to start on a new Katherine facility later in the year.
I discovered the Katherine facility will be built next to Mitre 10. I am not against Mitre 10 as I used to work for it ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: It is not next to it.
Mr WOOD: It is in the industrial area. I look at Venndale – I know it is out of town, but I always thought if you were to rehabilitate people, bush, blue sky, clean air, and a little quiet is far more conducive to fixing people than sitting in an industrial block. I do not see that as the right spot. I am not a Katherine person, but I have taken an interest in this. I have been to Venndale and CAYLUS in Alice Springs.
I am told the Tennant Creek facility will take the place of something else …
Mr McCarthy: The sobering-up shelter.
Mr WOOD: Surely the sobering-up shelter is important. Talk to the traditional owners because most of these people will be Aboriginal, let us be blunt. Put it somewhere where there is peace and quiet, with a little space. To me, that is part of having compassion for people. Take them to a place where they have a chance not only to dry out and be looked after, but also a chance to breathe. Putting these rehabilitation places in town is not the option. That is not a good decision.
There are plenty of good news stories here. Obviously there are many things happening in the Northern Territory, but there is also the cost of living.
Unfortunately, whoever made the statement two years ago that they would reduce the cost of living – it was a silly statement. I have not seen any ministers bring the price of fuel down to be the same as southern states. If you could you might be able to argue you have made a real effort to reduce the cost of living. If you have to pay 17c to 25c a litre more here and the government cannot do anything about it, people should not have said they could reduce the cost of living.
The government introduced the Sport Voucher Scheme. I do not have anything against the sports vouchers, but does the government have its priorities right? It has increased the sports vouchers from $75 to $200 per child, yet it cuts out concessions for seniors who have worked here all their life. It has the wrong balance. It builds a road for $3.5m so people can go around the corner fast and miss a buffalo. By the way, I travelled that road and wondered why it was not fenced all the way. If you are promoting people driving at full speed surely you would make sure the road is fenced.
The Tiwi Land Council economic development issue is one area I am a bit concerned about. I know that …
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request an extension of time for the member to complete his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: I will be as quick as I can, but there are many issues in this statement. In regard to Tiwi Islands development, water on those islands is difficult to extract. I had to deal with water on Bathurst Island, and a lot comes from sand bores which did not last long. They had to drill new bores because they eventually became choked with sand. I do not know if it is the same on Melville Island, but I expect there would be similar patterns there.
I am concerned that with money – $1m was given to the Tiwi Land Council – it should be explained why they received that money because there is no lease yet. Money has just been given to them.
There are issues about local government and the future, which will be an ongoing discussion.
The statement says the Territory government is actively encouraging continued growth in Defence in the NT. That could have had more teeth to it so we knew what the minister was talking about. As I have Robertson Barracks in my electorate I would like to know what plans are afoot. I have heard one of the battalions or squadrons from Robertson Barracks might be moving to Townsville, but I am not 100% sure.
It talks about Festivals NT, which is supposed to replace the Arafura Games. It is a mistake; the Arafura Games were mentioned the other night when we talked about multiculturalism. It was something special. I loved going to the boxing where you had people from all over the place, for example, an Irishman fighting a Malaysian. The mix was great. It is a festival on its own and we should not mix it up with other things.
We have been talking about the hospital, and I support the concept of a Palmerston Regional Hospital. I have disagreed with this side of parliament because I did not think the piece of land they had was big enough. I spoke to the architects of the hospital and they had concerns as well. They wanted to have car parking underneath the building because that is a very important issue.
I am concerned that even though the government has picked this site, we have not had a chance to challenge whether it is suitable. The land there – you can look at it on Google – is not all flat. I put it to the Planning Commission today that there is another piece of land which is much flatter, just as close to Palmerston as this one, it is not near any residents and all infrastructure is there. That is the corner of Howard Springs Road and the Stuart Highway, opposite the Lambrick Avenue intersection. That land was scraped many years ago. It is rock hard, has sewerage and the new water pipe going past, electricity, and it is on a major road. It is close and has a lot of land. The bus depot is not permanent, and most of it has already been cleared. Before we throw millions of dollars into a block of land, I want to check it will be suitable. That is why I am concerned about bulldozing roads. I am not against having the hospital and I am not knocking the government for having it. I want to be sure you will not throw money down the drain. If you put it in another place 4 km down the road, you would not have as many issues.
When I see land being cleared I ask where the rezoning is, as well as the development plan. Where is the plan for the Stuart Highway and Temple Terrace intersection? You already have an intersection there so you do not need to build one.
There is a big cost involved in building that Temple Terrace/Stuart Highway intersection. I do not know if we have the plans to duplicate Temple Terrace; anyone who travels up there in the morning knows there is a lot of traffic from the rural area to Palmerston and from Palmerston to Robertson Barracks. It is a very busy two-lane road.
What are the plans and the costs? I say with constructive criticism that you could have a hospital right next to Palmerston, on a piece of land that may not be as expensive, but can still provide you with what you are after, on the corner of Howard Springs Road and the Stuart Highway. I put this as a positive view about the facility.
The Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment was talking about developing housing in Aboriginal communities, which would create an economy. Ministers sometimes do not have their feet on the ground. Of course we want jobs in the rural area and in remote areas, but have you been to some of these communities? It is pie in the sky if you believe there are lots of jobs there. When I say lots of jobs, I mean jobs created by an economy, not jobs created by government. We can create those jobs; I have argued many times that where there are no jobs the role of government is to provide money to the local government to ensure people have work.
If you are talking about standalone jobs based on producing an economy of their own, please show me the communities where that can happen.
Most people in communities live off the public purse, in some way or another. Without government putting money into those communities people simply do not have work. Some communities have tourism, mining and pastoral work, but if you start to count the number of communities in rural areas within the Northern Territory and tell me where there are real jobs – I wonder why the Commonwealth has all of these programs. It spends millions on companies or consultants whose job is to make people job-ready. Job-ready for what? I am not sure, and this is one of the areas not picked up in the statement. It is a statement that says, ‘Wow, look at us, two years in the job!’ I would say, ‘Wow, have you been out and looked at the unemployment rates in some of the remote communities? Wow, have you seen how many kids, for instance, are not going to school?’
The Minister for Education knows a lot about people not going to school, but I will say ‘wow’ when we have some good news about the future for youth who live in those areas. As I said the other night, a friend of mine teaches a course, the kids turn up and they are not interested. They have no vision for their future. It is throwing rocks through car windows in some cases, just sitting still and doing nothing – bored.
One of the areas I have always felt we can get lost in, up and down the main highway and a few larger communities in the Northern Territory – we do not focus on some of the real issues that need addressing and do not need glossing over with the idea we can create economies that are not there.
When the government releases these statements – it has been in power for two years and wants to tell us how wonderfully it is all going – it should not gloss over the fact we have some communities with very high unemployment and very low literacy and numeracy skills. The minister said he is working hard to overturn that, which is fair enough, but we should not lose sight of what we are doing in the Northern Territory by bringing out statements like today’s. We should make sure we are not glossing over those important issues for the long-term future of all Territorians, not just those who will benefit directly from some of this growth.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I will respond to the Chief Minister’s midterm statement. I too am proud of what this government has been able to achieve and what we have achieved in my portfolios.
It is remarkable when you listen to the Health minister and other ministers speak about what has been done in the last couple of years. I am proud of what the CLP government has done and continues to do in spite of the difficulties we have inherited from the former government, particularly in relation to our fiscal position. We continue, as a jurisdiction, to punch above our weight and provide good governance for the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory.
In my portfolios, the indefinite detention of sex offenders who pose a high risk to the community, through serious sexual offenders legislation, has already contained a person known as EE in the court list, whose sexual victims range from the ages of 80 to six, and who would have otherwise been released into the community unfettered. He now has at least strong restraints upon his liberty.
Whilst that matter did not see him incarcerated absolutely into the future, at least it is a restraint that has genuinely gone towards protecting people in his community. I am proud of that result and we will continue to make certain those who pose a high risk of offending through sexual violence will be restrained into the future.
We promised mandatory sentencing for assaults on workers, carrying a maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment where the victim suffers harm, and we have stuck by that. Whilst members opposite resisted it, it is something the community had expectations about. Despite predictions of increasing imprisonment rates as a result, that has not become manifest and we are substantially below the prison numbers the former government predicted it would have, which were used to justify building the prison Mahal.
We also introduced mandatory sentencing for violent offenders, where there was a three-month gaol sentence for the first offence.
It was earlier claimed that domestic violence is out of control. No, it is not; it has always been there. We are making sure the people who beat their wives, as a general rule, are charged with the crimes they commit. I am proud of that. Whilst it has a deleterious effect on the statistics, we knew full well when we embarked upon this that we would find a point where that started reducing, and now the message seems to be getting through. The last six months have seen sharp reductions in violent offences across the Northern Territory, something acknowledged by the Leader of the Opposition, although churlishly, earlier during debate.
One punch legislation closed a gap in the environment between serious assaults and manslaughter, which some argued did not even exist. I understood that argument, and when we discussed the legislation in the House, I pointed out that I believed the gap existed. We have already had a person convicted of homicide in relation to the one punch legislation because the DPP determined there was insufficient evidence to secure a manslaughter conviction, but clearly they proceeded with the one punch homicide legislation instead, rather than having the extraordinary thing occur where a person is charged with a serious assault leading to death, but the court cannot hear evidence of the death, only evidence of the injuries.
It appears we have closed that loophole in the law. Whilst I said at the time I was never sure this would be used in the Northern Territory, it turns out that within a couple of years of it being passed into law, a person has been convicted. Therefore, it has justified the choice to go down that path.
Methamphetamines move to Schedule 2. We are determined to make methamphetamines a drug the equivalent of heroin in our community, supported by members opposite, for which I am grateful. We continue to fight the war on drugs, which I suspect will be perpetual. We are prepared, through our efforts in the Northern Territory, to continue fighting that war.
The Emerson case which was recently fought in the High Court, and won, means we can now take drug offenders’ houses off them and keep them, despite the fact the property itself was not used or derived from drug crime. It costs a lot of money to police drugs in our community, and when we find somebody who is declared to be a drug trafficker, that person will have their house and other property taken off them. We make no apologies for that.
The destruction of child abuse material – once again supported by the members opposite – was an important thing to do. We had the ridiculous situation of police having to hang on to child abuse material indefinitely. It should be destroyed rather than returned to the original owner because the mere possession of that would, of course, be an offence.
Independent psychiatric and medical testing: courts have been granted additional powers to order psychiatric and medical assessments for independent experts where a defence is based on a mental impairment and medical conditions. This means the element of entrapment, for a lack of better words – in cases where medical evidence is led we have now made certain trials in which medical and psychiatric evidence is led are carried out in a fashion that is now fair to the prosecutor, the defence and the community.
Hit and run legislation was introduced after an incident in the rural area around Darwin. Once again, we now have hit and run legislation which compares and is at a level expected by the community.
Identity theft: when I was younger my mother said I could be anybody I wanted to be. That apparently is not true, because under the CLP that is now called identity theft and you must be yourself. Thank you, member for Johnston, for at least smiling at that lame attempt at humour.
Match fixing: we have introduced offences for match fixing as part of the uniform legislation that operates nationally.
Drugs supplies to Indigenous communities: the former government worked in this area and we have expanded that to create tougher charges.
I referred earlier to the Emerson assets property forfeiture through the High Court challenge. That was something we won; the High Court ruled 6:1 in our favour. There are more cases flowing from this matter and we, as a jurisdiction, will be intervening when the High Court sits in Brisbane in the not-so-distant future. We will be doing that in an effort to support Queensland’s fight against the various forces it is trying to deal with under legislation dealing with bikies.
Today I made public comments about the new police pursuit offence. Legislation has gone through parliament to make it an offence to run away from a police officer – it is a crime. Even today we were debating part of the Northern Territory government’s legislative reforms.
There is also the presumption of joint trials, the procedural provisions to make it more likely multiple sex offence charges against an accused person will be heard together, rather than severed and separate trials ordered. This is a fair and just approach. One of the first reports I read upon becoming Attorney-General was a Tasmanian Law Reform Commission document. Whilst I was reading it this issue arose, and I thought whilst Tasmania may or may not move down this path, we should, as a jurisdiction. We have done so, making certain that where there are multiple victims in sex offender matters, the same jury and the same court can hear evidence, or there is a presumption in favour of the same jury and the same court hearing that evidence. That is an important amendment to the law.
I do not think it is inherently unfair that a jury hears multiple victims make allegations against a person. We have seen trials like that in other jurisdictions, not least of which most recently was the Rolf Harris matter, which led to a successful prosecution. Mr Harris, quite rightly, now languishes in a British gaol for the crimes he committed against British citizens. I wonder how much more difficult it would have been to secure that prosecution if offenders were not able to make their allegations in the same courtroom in front of the same jury.
A single person making an allegation without the support of other victims holds a much weaker prospect of securing a conviction. A trial is supposed to be fair, and joint evidence being heard by juries is not unfair.
The name escapes me of the Hey Dad star, but I understand he also went through a process where the prosecution had to battle for victims to be allowed to give evidence jointly, not separately, against that gentleman.
We have increased the levy to support victims. That has increased the contribution from offenders for the victims assistance levy. Of course, Sentenced to a Job prisoners also make their contribution with their 5% income allowance, which goes into a victims assistance fund.
Advance personal planning was a policy we went to the last election with; it was a CLP policy in opposition. I know the Health minister is working on adult guardianship legislation which will encompass advance personal planning into the future, and I look forward to that legislation coming forward.
The Pillars of Justice reform has introduced a number of important reforms, with more legislation to come. I am looking quite closely at the defence disclosure provisions of Victoria and other jurisdictions to make certain we end up with a fairer and more efficient judicial system in the Northern Territory.
I acknowledge the chief magistrate’s adjustment to the practice directions in his court, and there is already a requirement for pre-trial disclosure in the Darwin Magistrates Court. I have spoken to Professor Hempel, a man of eminent quality formerly sitting on the bench of very senior courts. I think he is now 81 years of age, and he continues to be very active in teaching jurisprudence. He is still a professor out of Victoria and has been kind enough to give me some assistance and advice as to how we can continue to advance pre-trial disclosure in the Northern Territory.
Tomorrow, I hope we will be debating the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Appeals Tribunal Bill and passing it into law. This was something I mentioned in opposition and I now find myself in the privileged position, as Attorney-General, to be establishing a civil and administrative appeals tribunal. People are only just starting to realise the enormous change that will make to our tribunal system.
Some 117 acts and about 250 sections will be amended to enable this tribunal to cast its net wide. It will create a system of more affordable justice for Territorians, including carriage of the small claims jurisdiction. Few people understand yet how big this change will be, but it will mean the courts and the judicial process will be accessible to average Territorians in a way it has never been. If I leave a legacy as Attorney-General, it will be a legacy I will be proud to bequeath to the people of the Northern Territory and will consider myself blessed to have been in a position to drive it.
The domestic violence reduction strategy is complete and we will be making some announcements very shortly about the roll-out. That is another thing I am proud of because it is very difficult to go into this space and feel confident you will make a difference. We are awaiting one or two more things to fall into line before this policy is announced. We will have one of the finest domestic violence policies, if not the finest domestic violence reduction strategy and policy, in this nation, and I look forward, with excitement, to rolling that out.
The Alice Springs Justice Precinct: the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory will find itself with new digs in Alice Springs. We have finally managed to get through the process of making sure kids will no longer be in cells at the bottom of the magistrates court in Darwin; that has been surprisingly difficult to achieve. But, having made that observation, we have gotten through the process and continue to get through it.
We have built the new cells for juveniles in the Alice Springs court house, and once the Supreme Court is out of there in a couple of years’ time, we will spend a few shekels bringing that up to standard. It will become the Alice Springs Court of Summary Jurisdiction, as the Supreme Court will be in the justice precinct – which we promised as government – in Parsons Street in Alice Springs. Alice Springs will have, in the new Supreme Court building, the tallest building constructed in the town to date. That will be a welcome injection into the Alice Springs economy in the intermediate future.
In the Corrections environment, youth boot camps are up and running. I am pleased to report that Operation Flinders continues to plan for its expansion into the Northern Territory and provision is being made for it to start operating in a very useful fashion.
I am also pleased to report – and I will not dwell on it – that Sentenced to a Job continues to go from strength to strength. I remain ambitious, particularly regarding some of the projects we are putting together now. The number of jobs available for prisoners will expand substantially over the next 12 to 18 months.
We now have the permanent work camp at Nhulunbuy, and whilst I understand there is some controversy as far as the member for Nhulunbuy is concerned, it means 18 of the 100 or so Sentenced to a Job prisoners who go to work every day are going to work in Nhulunbuy with other prisoners supporting them. Now we have found permanent digs we are looking at other areas where we could expand the mobile prison camp, because of the equipment that will become available once permanent digs have been moved into Nhulunbuy.
We have expanded prison work parties by $500 000 to create two additional prisoner work gangs; the member for Barkly knows how much demand sits on those work gangs and we will continue to support them.
I made some comments about electronic monitoring today. There will be a capacity to monitor prisoners. We have held a number of trials, which have led to a successful trial program, and we are now prepared to expand the process.
Don Dale will move into the old medium section once we get into the new prison, opening next month, and we continue to have lower projected prisoner numbers.
The substantially lower projected prisoner numbers between what the projection is and what we have, if calculated over a 12-month period, represent a $17m saving – more to the point, $17m we will not be spending – in the prison environment.
The former government announced it would introduce the total ban on smoking in prisons. The difference is that we did it and we are proud it has now set the benchmark for the rest of this country.
The increase of members to the Parole Board – we had to expand the Parole Board from 10 to 18 members because of the workload. I would love to keep going, but I shall not, because it is late. When I sit down I will be adjourning the House so we can pack it in.
I am proud of what we have done, and the list goes on and on. We are a government that does stuff and achieves. We are a government that soldiers on and we are a government proud of what we are doing.
I listen to the naysayers opposite, and I understand they have a job to do in being critical, but just once I would like to hear them acknowledge this government is capable of doing good and does so on a regular basis.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
Mrs FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, the Palmerston Crocs rugby union club is one of the oldest sporting clubs in Palmerston. The Crocs first moved to Palmerston in 1984, a good year – the year I was born – and since that time they have developed a large, family-orientated club with a strong club culture.
The Palmerston Crocs have participated in the Good Sports program over the last few years. It recently achieved Level 3 accreditation, which is the highest level of accreditation you can receive.
Good Sports is an initiative of the Australian Drug Foundation and is proudly sponsored by the Northern Territory government. Good Sports NT works with 12 clubs in Palmerston to ensure they all have a healthy and non-alcohol reliant culture that respects the responsible service of alcohol. The scheme requires club rooms to be smoke-free and that club environments promote safe travel and are family friendly.
The Palmerston Crocs have instituted meals after senior training and often serve food after games, prior to any alcohol consumption.
I was at the Palmerston Crocs clubhouse last month during senior training to present a $5000 Community Benefit Grant cheque. The second I walked through the doors I was immediately struck by the family friendly culture of the club. There was an army of mums busily preparing meals in the kitchen and serving hungry mouths. There was no shortage of children running, scrumming and playing in the yard, enjoying the safe environment and another beautiful Dry Season evening. It was an impressive club with an impressive feel. Ben Blyton is the president of Palmerston Crocs and is well known to me through his advocacy of the club. Recently, Sharron Noske, the Good Sports NT manager, spoke with Ben to seek his comment on the club’s achievement of reaching Level 3 accreditation. Ben commented:
- The club is striving to be a premier family sporting club in Palmerston and has found the structure and resources provided by the Good Sports program valuable in achieving this. The Level 3 accreditation is an independent confirmation that our club takes its role in the community seriously and that we are a safe, family friendly and responsible club, one that its members can be proud to belong to …
It is wonderful that 12 Palmerston clubs, including the Palmerston Crocs, are committed to making their contribution to disassociating binge drinking from sport. Congratulations, Palmerston Crocs.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I will share a letter forwarded to me from Madam President Barb Shaw of the Barkly Regional Council. The letter is addressed attention Gerry McCarthy MLA, member for Barkly, 114 Paterson Street, Tennant Creek NT 0860.
It was written on 28 July 2014 and received on 31 July 2014. It is a call to restore financial assistance grants in line with CPI and population growth. I read from the letter:
- Local Government, at its most recent June National General Assembly, resolved to call on the Commonwealth Government to restore indexation of Financial Assistance Grants in line with CPI and population growth immediately.
This resolution was as follows:
Delegates of the 2014 National General Assembly, in recognition of the vital importance of the Financial Assistance Grants (FAGs) to local government for the provision of equitable levels of local government services to all Australian communities, call on the Commonwealth Government to:
reject Recommendation 22 of the National Commission of Audit in which the Commission recommends that tied grants to local government cease, and to the extent that programmes are identified as priorities, local and state government provide them to the communities they serve.
Further, Delegates resolve that:
In recent years, the FAGS have slipped to 0.7% of tax revenue, and declining further to 0.53% by 2017-18. The impact of the Government’s decision on our local community is immediate and will financially impact upon Council delivery in the vicinity of $494 801 over the next three years. This will both affect service levels and job availability for some of Australia’s most disadvantaged residents in real terms.
We are calling on you as our local Federal Government member to recognise the severe impact on our community and support a review of the Government’s decision.
Regards
President Barb Shaw
Barkly Regional Council.
It is not only about very important revenue that comes into the Northern Territory; it is also extremely important for the continued development of the local government sector, local government reform we all share in after it was initiated by the previous Labor government and continued by the CLP. To benefit our regional and remote communities, it is something we need to be both cognisant and supportive of, in a tripartite sense.
I thank our Madam President Barb Shaw of the Barkly Regional Council for this letter. I will start the lobbying campaign immediately in the House, with the Treasurer and Minister for Local Government and Regions hopefully leading it. I request he immediately contact his counterparts in Canberra and lend his weight and support on behalf of all Territorians living in local government areas.
I also take this opportunity to bring to the attention of all MLAs that this is a very serious issue for the Northern Territory and one that we all need to get behind and lobby.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, not so long ago I had cause to telephone Russell Goldflam of CLANT – the Criminal Lawyers Association of the Northern Territory – about an article he had produced for the Balance magazine, which I had taken umbrage to because of the way my name was superimposed upon a photograph of a group of people in 1930s Germany performing a Nazi salute.
Whilst I acknowledge that in that article he was at pains to say the reference was not to me personally, he was very kind in extending an apology to me for the umbrage I took. I place on the record my gratitude to him.
Equally, I also want to recognise he is a man who is temperate and balanced in his approach to the work he does. Mr Goldflam is a fine lawyer who tries to offer a considered opinion to the people of the Northern Territory from time to time.
I refer to an item he drafted during Question Time the other day. Mr Goldflam will understand the three minutes you have to answer a question does not allow for the expansive construction of an argument so, from time to time, you are forced to condense references. I received an irritable e-mail from Mr Goldflam today suggesting he had been misrepresented. I place on the record that there was no attempt to misrepresent Mr Goldflam. Indeed, in his measured fashion, what he was describing in the letter he had written was his usual balanced approach to things. He had pointed out in his letter that whilst he agreed with the position of Mr Lawrence et al from the Bar Association, he made several references to Mr Maley:
- It is generally considered that on the bench he is able, astute, affable, efficient, sensitive and fair.
These were references I used in relation to the answer I gave.
I also used several other quotes in which he described the argument and he came down on a particular side. I agree with Mr Goldflam’s assertion that Mr Maley is able, astute, affable, efficient, sensitive and fair. I also agree with his assertion that there is no suggestion Mr Maley has not been true to his oath of office. The only point of separation I take is that I do not agree with Mr Goldflam on his conclusion that an independent inquiry is needed.
Mr Goldflam has not demanded an apology. He merely, by the e-mail I quickly saw today, wished to make the record straight. In deference to the good relationship I have enjoyed with him, I do not think he should have to demand an apology from me. I will happily correct the record for Mr Goldflam because of the way he extended himself to me when there was a previous point of difference. I place on the record, in the time I have, that Mr Goldflam has made his difference of opinion with me clear.
Having said that, he has also acknowledged all of the issues where there are other people with another opinion, even in the Criminal Lawyers Association of the Northern Territory. Once again, I place on the record this clarification. It is an important clarification to make and I remain grateful to Mr Goldflam for his measured approach, which is something I wish many other people would show in this debate. It is an approach I have been trying to maintain from day one. I will continue to assert that the courts have vehicles available to deal with the issues raised by the Bar Association.
That is for the record. I hope that is sufficient for Mr Goldflam’s purposes and I will speak with him tomorrow to let him know the record has been appropriately corrected.
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Madam Speaker, I wish to correct some of the things said about Russell Goldflam. I spoke to Russell on the phone and offered to put all of what he wanted into the Hansard. This is what he sent to me, ‘I have posted this response headed ‘postscript’ on the CLANT website to comments attributed to me, made in Question Time yesterday.’
During Question Time in the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly on 19 August 2014 … Chief Minister Giles and Attorney-General Elferink replied to a series of Opposition questions in relation to the Northern Territory Bar Association’s calls for an inquiry into the conduct of Peter Maley SM.
In doing so, they selectively quoted from my statement about this issue published on 16 August 2014, creating the completely misleading impression that I do not support the Bar Association’s stand on this issue. Assuming they had read my statement from which they had quoted, they must have been aware that I support the Bar Association’s call for an inquiry. As I stated: ‘for a judicial officer to publicly continue an association with a political party is inconsistent with the principle of both impartiality and judicial independence’. That is my firm view.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the public debate about the issue of public importance. In doing so, I took the care and trouble to acknowledge that there a differing opinions on both sides of the issue.
Of course, I do not expect that everyone will agree with my opinions, but I am disturbed that my views have been so unfairly misrepresented in the Parliamentary chamber by our Chief Minister and first law officer. For the record, by the way, I have never been a member of any political party.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I wish to pay my respects to a great Territorian and long-term resident, Mr George Brown, who passed away on 21 October 2013, aged 84. George is survived by his wife, Mrs Shirley Brown, who lives in the Araluen electorate in Alice Springs. George Brown made a profound contribution to the development of the arts industry in Central Australia and the social fabric of Alice Springs, spanning over 60 years.
His dear friend, Dr Bruce Walker, has given me permission to read an abbreviated version of the eulogy he gave at George’s funeral in October 2013:
- Today we mourn the loss and celebrate the life of George Brown, a person who has seen this town grow from 2000 people to what it is today. George Scott Brown was the first and only child of Scottish parents Adam and Nita Brown, born on 9 February 1929 in Geelong. He lived a good life until he passed away on Monday 21 October 2013, aged 84. George was educated at Manifold Heights State School in Victoria and then went on to junior tech and later to the Gordon Institute of Technology in the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology to study both commercial and fine art. George worked in commercial and display art before travelling to Alice Springs in 1950 with a fellow artist on the old Ghan.
When George arrived it was a pleasant little town of some 2000 people. He also spent time in Darwin as part of this early Territory experience. George did a painting trip with Albert Namatjira not long after he arrived
Along with Albert and his sons Oscar and Enos, fellow artist Keith Gray and George headed out to Glen Helen soak in the Haasts Bluff area. There, Albert showed George how to dig a soak for permanent water, then, after building them a whirly, Albert left, promising to pick them up in a few days. Albert eventually returned some days later, whereby George and Keith had completed a couple of dozen paintings each and they set up an impromptu gallery by the riverbank. Albert was the critic as his relatives scanned the watercolours, thus began the love affair with Central Australia.
After this trip with Albert Namatjira, George exhibited his watercolours at Georges Gallery in Melbourne. In 1952, George returned to Alice Springs with two friends and opened the first gift shop in Alice. The three men, all in their early twenties, had been in Alice a short time when a shop in the Saucony building on the east side became vacant, so they decided to go into business. Preparing the shop, George painted a full mural based on Aboriginal art from both the Centre and the Top End, which was written in the Centralian Advocate as another indication of the continued progress of the town, this being the third new business venture in the town in six months.
The Alice Springs Art Centre duly opened and in the first days’ trading, most of the stock vanished. From then on, George and the boys had to work hard to restock the handicraft items such as George’s hand-painted scarves and cards and landscapes of the Territory.
George returned home to Melbourne, where he met Shirley at Paton Advertising, inner Melbourne, in the late 1950s. Shirley was keen to escape the cool winters in the south, so she went along with George’s suggestion to go to the Centre to live. George approached fellow artist Ralph Peverill about coming up with them.
In 1961 when they arrived, Woolworths had just opened in Todd Street and IGA Bros figured they could compete with Woolies by taking over (inaudible) shop. They approached George Brown and Ralph Peverill about signs; Eager Beavers was introduced to town through George’s sign, complete with Ralph’s beaver characters.
George, Ralph and Shirley lived on the east side in a rented house on the corner of Raggatt Street and Undoolya Road. It was here in late 1961 that George and Ralph started a signwriting business, which they registered as Centre Arts Studios Alice Springs or CASAS. Ralph was a former film animator who drew the characters, while George’s specialty was the lettering. At the end of 1962, Shirley gave up the dressmaking she was doing to travel south in a VW Beetle with a schoolteacher for the school holidays. A few weeks later George flew down and they arranged to be married.
They ended up getting married at St Stephen’s Presbyterian Church, where they were confronted by a stained glass window depicting the Flynn Church in Alice Springs. Convinced by fate, they were married in the church three days later on Thursday during peak hour.
Back in the Centre in 1966, George and Ralph were looking for permanent businesses. They bought a block of land in the newly-opened Wilkinson Street industrial area and built an unlined tin shed. The siting of the shed proved a mistake as it was adjacent to a hopper containing sawdust at the timber yard next door. The hopper frequently overflowed, and, when the wind blew, sawdust poured right into the signwriting shed, sticking to all the freshly-painted signs. George and Shirley, three years later, settled in the first privately built house in the new Gillen subdivision. Gillen was treeless in those days and a dust bowl.
Along with their friends, John and Kate Hawkins, Shirley and George became involved in compiling programs for the Alice Film Festival. They both enjoyed the solitude of Honeymoon Gap, where they and their small dog Churchie used to picnic on a rug in the middle of the dry river bed. George would have his sketch pad out and would draw to the accompaniment of thousands of chirping budgies in ghost gums and river gums.
In June 1983, Shirley had an exhibition of her pottery cats at their home, and then later in the year, in Ralph Peverill’s new gallery, the opening exhibition was a series of George’s watercolours entitled Boats. George had painted the boats from sketches he had made while working in Darwin in the early 1950s.
At the time of the opening, George had some doubts about the subject he had chosen for exhibition in the desert. The idea of being so far away from the sea made him wonder if people from the Centre would be interested in old boats and seascapes. By the end of the week, 18 of the 40 paintings were sold and he had commission for more.
George’s love for the desert was balanced by a passion for the sea, and this led to Shirley and George spending extended time at their new house in Copacabana in New South Wales.
George was a very active member of the Rotary Club in Alice Springs. He was inducted into Rotary on 29 January 1965 and was appointed President of the Rotary Club of Alice Springs for a 17-month term commencing in 1976 and 1977. He went on to hold every position within the Rotary Club, except for Treasurer.
In reflecting on the contributions a person like George and a club like Rotary makes to the history of Alice Springs, so much can get lost if it goes unrecorded. To this end I think George has done us and future generations a great service. Recording history is not the type of job that comes easily to many people. Painstakingly wading through documents, photos, etcetera, is a task many of us do not have the patience for. George is to be commended and remembered as the keeper of Rotary history for putting pen to paper.
George maintained a long association with the big events in Alice Springs: the Bangtail Muster, Henley on Todd, Melbourne Cup Sweep, the Education Trust Fund and the John Hawkins Memorial Scholarship. These events, in some way, have helped to define the town.
I have enormous respect for George Brown, not as a dedicated Rotarian, cricketer, artist and nice guy, but for his quiet attention to detail.
Sport was also a big part of George’s life. George was a big Cats fan, not only because Shirley made them – the pottery variety – but because of his birth place in Geelong. He shared this love with his father.
In 1986 George was still playing cricket with the Verdi Veterans, the team of older cricketers who have played in various teams in Alice over the years, and want to continue to enjoy their cricket. He had amazing longevity as a cricketer.
George is survived by Shirley and you. There is no shirking our responsibility to hold his memory and value his contribution to the community of Alice Springs.
He saw community through the same eyes that enabled him to capture the light, colour and grandeur of the landscape he loved and painted over his lifetime. As Michael Palin says, ‘It is the specialness of this extraordinary ordinariness that makes these people special’.
My deepest sympathy goes to Shirley and the family for the loss of George, a great man and a great Territorian.
Mr KURRUPUWU (Arafura): Madam Speaker, I wish to highlight some of the key issues I have been faced with in my electorate, with a focus on infrastructure and economic development on the Tiwi Islands under the CLP government.
Many Tiwi people are very disappointed that there seems to have been no progress in economic development on the Tiwi Islands. The Country Liberal government promised the Tiwi people employment, but they have not done anything about it. This government has provided false hope to the Tiwi people. There must be far more work on economic and infrastructure development than simply talking about it. The government has signed an agreement and a memorandum of understanding that do little more than provide false hope to the Tiwi people.
It is tragic to be let down by the government once again. The Tiwi people want to know why the government is not prepared to spend money on infrastructure, such as roads, and to assist with expenditure and project development that would create more jobs and better lives for our young people. Not only will the government not assist with real expenditure on the ground, it is not doing enough to ensure the banks undertake their economic development responsibilities by lending money to viable businesses. It is the responsibility of the government to ensure main organisations in an economy, such as banks, operate in a responsible manner for the benefit of all Territorians. Currently the banks will not even lend to secure development backed by the Territory government. What does that say about confidence in the current government?
The Tiwi people want to know why the port project has not gone ahead and when it will happen. What is the point of government attempting to have traditional owners sign over their land through leases when it cannot guarantee essential funds for development? The Tiwi people are worried they will lose their land to the government land bank with no prospect of any development occurring and no benefit to them.
I left the CLP with my colleagues, the members for Namatjira and Arnhem, because there was no real plan and no follow-through to achieve outcomes for the bush.
The Palmer United Party would like to ensure money is spent properly and fairly in regional and remote communities in the Territory, as it is currently untied. I have been talking directly to Clive Palmer and our Palmer United Party senators to highlight the key issue of funding that is not reaching areas within my electorate.
Clive Palmer has offered his full support to me and is standing up for the people of my electorate and the Territory bush by ensuring funds are spent as intended. We will deliver real economic development, employment outcomes and improve the quality of life for the Tiwi people and other rural and remote communities in the Territory.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I place on the record some of the great events that have happened in my electorate, as well as some of the achievements of my constituents.
I had the privilege of being invited to a very special graduation ceremony at Galiwinku on Monday 28 May. It was held in the afternoon on the church lawns with a welcome from traditional owners and an introduction by the Master of Ceremonies for the afternoon, the lovely Mavis Danganbarr, a terrific lady, an incredibly hard worker, elected regional councillor and Deputy Chair of East Arnhem Regional Council, as well as being employed full-time as the Indigenous engagement officer.
As is always the case at such important occasions, graduates are escorted into the ceremony surrounded by proud family members in clan groups, with Manikay and Bunggul. In total, 21 graduates received a new qualification that day. These qualifications will provide the graduates with improved opportunities to secure employment in positions that have the potential to greatly benefit their community and families.
I offer my sincere congratulations to the graduates and acknowledge the incredibly hard djama – hard work – they did to complete their qualifications. They study while also working and looking after their families and are wonderful role models for not only their peers but also the younger generation; there are certainly a lot of young people on Elcho Island.
I would now like to place the names of the graduates on record. In the Certificate IV in Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander Primary Healthcare (Practice) – they study through Batchelor Institute, and gaining a Certificate IV is a considerable achievement. Congratulations to:
Leandra Natini Bukulatjpi
Sarah Mariyalawuy Bukulatjpi
Gwen Gaykungu Dhamarrandji
Noreen Leti Dhamarrandji
Stephanie Yikaniwuy Dhamarrandji
Elizabeth Rrapa Dhurrkay
Karen Manala Gondarra
Stella Mintjapuyugu Gondarra
Wanamula Dorothy Gondarra
Yvonne Latati Bukulatjpi,
Caroline Djinnganbuy
Susan Malpunhdharr Ganambarr.
One young woman achieved her Certificate II and III in Business, also through Batchelor Institute. I offer congratulations to Rachel Baker; it is quite an achievement to attain Certificate II and III.
For achieving Certificate IV in Community Services Work, studying through Charles Darwin University, congratulations to:
Dorothy Yurngirrna Bukulatjpi
Helen Guyupul Wunungurra
For attaining Certificate III in Community Services Work, also through Charles Darwin University – there were four graduates in this area – I congratulate:
Dorothy Yurngirna Bukulatjpi
Elizabeth Gurimangu Bukulatjpi
Glen Dhalirri Gurruwiwi
Helen Guyupul Wunungurra
For attaining Certificate II in Community Services Work through Charles Darwin University, congratulations to Beth Djarupi.
The final graduate of the evening was very special; an Honorary Doctorate, a Doctorate of Letters, Honoris Causa, through Charles Darwin University was bestowed upon Dr Elaine Lawurrpa Maypilama, an incredible woman who has given years of devoted service to her community.
On a final note on the graduation I acknowledge Belinda Wethers, who worked tirelessly to pull the event together and made sure everything ran smoothly. Belinda is employed as a tutor to support health students, and I know she is admired and valued by her students. Well done, Belinda.
On 7 August I attended the 31st Telstra National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Art Award at the Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory, representing the Leader of the Opposition. I was accompanied by my colleague, the member for Nightcliff, who is the shadow minister for the Arts.
It was certainly a great honour to attend the preview evening to see the 65 exquisite pieces in a range of mediums on display from around the nation, noting this was the first time a photographic work – by artist Tony Albert – took out the main prize and $50 000 with it. Of the 65 pieces that made it through to the finals, several were from my electorate and represented by Buku Larrngay Gallery at Yirrkala. Arguably – I might be biased – it is the best art centre in the Northern Territory.
I offer special congratulations to Garawan Wanambi from Gangan, whose work, Marrangu, a depiction of country near the homeland of Raymangirr near Gapuwiyak, won the bark painting award – a fantastic achievement.
Other artists who made it through to the finals from the Buku Larrngay Gallery were Burrthi Marika with the work Ngarripya; Mr Djambawa Marawili, the traditional owner from Blue Mud Bay, and his work entitled Tsunami; and Gunybi Ganambarr with his work Ngalkan, an incredible piece of work. Gunybi is a very innovative and talented artist and his work was most impressive. There was also the work Lightning and the Rock, by Nonggirrnga Marawili.
There was a new youth art section introduced to the Telstra art awards this year, and I was delighted to see that Ruby Djikarra Alderton had a piece in the exhibition, a beautiful print titled Rulyapa. She is an outstanding young artist and to get through to the finals of this new section was quite an achievement. I congratulate Kieran McTaggart from the Merrepen Arts Centre, who was the winner of this new youth art award with his beautiful textile design called Yerrgi – well done to Kieran.
Gove Country Golf Club is an important club and hub in our community; it is doing it tough at the moment, as many of our clubs are, with losing so many members; when we lose members we lose volunteers and the membership base, which is part of the financial base, so it is quite tough. That said, the Gove Country Golf Club Championships, held in June, were very successful and it was positive to have 44 competitors register and compete in the event.
I have sponsored the Gove Country Golf Club for a number of years, as have a number of our businesses and individuals who continue to support the club as best they can. On the championships weekend the following people were champion or runner up in their divisions on the day, so congratulations to the following:
A-Grade Men’s Champion – Wayne Jago, a young man I used to teach many years ago
A-Grade Men’s Runner Up – Gus Gomez
B-Grade Men’s Champion – Paul Kearney
B-Grade Men’s Runner Up – Errol Boyd
C-Grade Men’s Champion – Steven Spears
C-Grade Men’s Runner Up – Bob Small
D-Grade Men’s Champion – Morgan Chrzanowski
Morgan is turning out to be quite a talented young golfer. He is only in his teenage years. Congratulations also to:
D-Grade Men’s Runner Up – Shannon Moyle
A-Grade Women’s Champion – Katelyn Rika
A-Grade Women’s Runner Up – Liz Pickett
B-Grade Women’s Champion – Serema Jackson
B-Grade Women’s Runner Up – Ripeka Dargaville.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016