2009-10-15
Madam Speaker Aagaard took the Chair at 10 am.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, we are deferring that item pending changes to some of the details. There will be an amendment to that motion.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move - That the following members be appointed to serve on the Sessional Committee of the Council of Territory Cooperation: the member for Fannie Bay, Mr Gunner; the member for Arafura, Ms Scrymgour; the member for Katherine, Mr Willem Westra van Holthe; the member for Port Darwin, Mr Elferink; the member for Macdonnell, Ms Anderson; and the member for Nelson, Mr Wood.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I acknowledge the communications we had from the Leader of Government Business in relation to this matter this morning. I want to state on the record that communication between the Leader of Government Business and our side has been substantially improved in recent times, and I am grateful to him for making those efforts. I believe it does much to oil the cogs of this parliament when that communication exists, and I express my gratitude to him for his forthrightness.
Motion agreed to.
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr HENDERSON (Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The main purpose of the bill to is to amend the Education Act to bring the Northern Territory’s legislative provisions regarding the registration of non-government schools into line with those applying in other jurisdictions. The bill also seeks to repeal and replace existing provisions in relation to the establishment of advisory councils to provide advice to the minister on matters concerning the administration of the Education Act.
The non-government school sector plays a key role in the education of Northern Territory children, and the sector’s role is expanding. In August 2000, there were 32 non-government schools with 8708 children enrolled. Since then, new non-government schools have commenced operations and a number of others have been given approval to increase the range of year levels they can offer. As a result, by 2008, there were 10 063 children enrolled in the Territory’s 36 non-government schools.
The current provisions for the registration of non-government schools are contained in Part VII of the Education Act. These provisions have not been substantially amended since the early 1980s. In that time, all other jurisdictions in Australia have reviewed their legislation and increased the legislative requirements for non-government schools in response to community expectations. The Northern Territory provisions concerning the requirements for registration of non-government schools are now, by comparison, out-of-date and in need of amendment.
Part VII of the Education Act currently provides for the registration of new non-government schools; for variations to be made to existing registrations for non-government schools to be inspected; and for applicants to seek review by the minister if they are dissatisfied with how the department has dealt with a registration application.
In seeking to register a new non-government school, applicants are currently only required to provide details of the school’s location, the method of management, the educational qualifications of teachers, the proposed school’s curriculum, the age range of students to be enrolled, details of buildings and facilities, the financial position of the school at the time of application, and the name of the nominated person for the service of notices.
The current requirements only cover the most basic requirements in relation to the registration of a school. However, it is now apparent the current provisions are no longer adequate. Various deficiencies in the legislation have emerged. For example, the bill now provides for clear power to be established in the act to ensure the school has an appropriate governing body with skilled directors of good character, and will operate with sound governance arrangements. The government is also seeking an improved capacity to ensure the assessment of ongoing financial management and viability, and performance management and accountability of non-government schools. Also, new registration requirements in respect of student health, safety, and wellbeing, and procedures to deal with complaints and disputes are now included in the bill.
The government provides significant financial and other support to the non-government school sector, and I am sure members would agree there is every need to ensure these resources are well used. Even more importantly, as minister, I have a responsibility to the wider community to see that the Northern Territory provides the best possible standard of educational services, whether government or non-government, for young Territorians.
By way of background, I point out the standards of performance, management and achievement required of government schools have steadily increased in recent years. The requirements outlined in the schools’ management procedures and schools’ policy documents have been expanded to address many issues in this bill which is seeking to address the provisions applying to non-government schools. My department has already had extensive discussions with representatives of the non-government school sector about the need to amend Part VII of the act, and they are very supportive of the reforms. In fact, the Non-Government School Ministerial Advisory Council, which compromises representatives from each of the non-government school sectors, has been the driving force behind this review of legislation.
My department has also extensively reviewed the legislation of other jurisdictions governing the registration and operation of non-government schools, and has sought to include provisions which will bring the Territory’s registration provisions into line with best practice standards.
The most important change proposed in the bill is that applicants will be required to address a more up-to-date set of criteria in applying for registration of a new non-government school. Operators of non-government schools will also have to comply with the new registration requirements established by the bill, and the conditions imposed by the CEO following registration.
In addition to the existing registration requirements in Part VII, the bill introduces further, more robust requirements. These include: consideration of the likely impact of the new school upon existing schools, both government and non-government in the catchment area to help assess the likely ongoing viability of a new school; adequate safeguards for the health, safety and wellbeing of students and staff; student discipline must be based on procedural fairness, and corporal punishment is not allowed; and, the school must have adequate provision for meeting the needs of any of its students with a disability; all school staff must be of good character; and schools must have appropriate procedures in place to cope with critical incidents, complaints and resolution of disputes.
The information which must be provided regarding the governing body of the school has also been expanded, and some of these topics are of particular note. For example, the bill will require schools to uphold certain values. In line with other jurisdictions that have recently updated their legislation, the NT will require the philosophy and objects of the governing body of a non-government school and the school’s education programs to be consistent with specified basic values. These basic principles will include consistency with the notions of elected governments, equality of all people before the law, and freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of association. In addition, there should be tolerance of diverse religions, political, social and cultural beliefs and practices to the extent they are consistent with civilised values. Respective governing bodies of non-government schools that cannot demonstrate a capacity to abide by these basic principles will not be eligible for registration. This requirement is a recent development and comes in response to increased concerns about the potential for divisive beliefs to be taught in our schools. The Territory is not the first to introduce such a requirement. The ACT and Victorian governments have introduced similar requirements, and it seems likely that other jurisdictions will follow. Western Australia has imbedded into its curriculum framework a set of core shared values related to respect and concern for the rights of others, and social and civic responsibility.
Possibly the most contentious of the new provisions is the requirement for an applicant to address the potential impact of a proposed new school on existing schools in the catchment area. This requirement is not an issue in areas where there is a growing number of school students. However, in more established areas, such as the northern suburbs of Darwin, we have a static or even falling number of children, and the challenge is how to ensure these children have access to the best education options available.
All not-for-profit schools receive government funding and, as I indicated before, it is in the public interest to ensure this money is used judiciously. Introducing a new school in such circumstances could significantly affect the ability of all schools in the area, including the prospective new school, to provide good educational outcomes and may jeopardise the continuity of education for some students.
In assessing the likely impact of the proposed school, the panel may give consideration to changes to the enrolments of existing schools in the catchment area, adverse changes to their curriculum offering, and their future viability. Consideration of these matters will also help verify the expected ongoing financial viability of a new entrant into the non-government school sector.
The bill provides for applications to be assessed by a registration assessment panel made up of representatives of the department and other government agencies, and also representatives of the non-government school sector. Division 6 of the act establishes government financial assistance may be provided to, or withdrawn from, a non-government school. It also allows for the provision of support in other forms, such as the use of government-owned assets or facilities.
This provision is intended to make best possible use of government resources by allowing non-government schools to use government facilities, or to receive in-kind support from time to time. However, the act specifies that government financial assistance will not be provided to a non-government school which is operated for profit. This has been the policy position of this government for some time and is consistent with the practice in other states. The aim is to prevent the opportunity for government funding, that is, taxpayer dollars, to be used for non-educational purposes, such as distributing any profits to shareholders or owners of non-government schools. This is not to say that a non-government school should operate at a loss. Prudent financial management is a must in non-government schools, as it is in any school business. To make this matter clear, a non-government school is deemed to be not operated for profit only if profits or surpluses made from the operation of the school are used entirely to advance the school’s philosophy and objects as stated by its governing body. I should also point out, there are currently no schools operating for profit in the Territory.
I now turn to additional requirements the bill has for non-government schools once they are registered. The proposed amendments to Part VII will modernise and enhance the requirements and conditions for the operation of non-government schools. In addition to non-government schools complying with the registration requirements, and with conditions imposed by the Chief Executive, the bill also requires more comprehensive reporting in keeping with the registration requirements. One of the reasons for this is the government focuses on the self-improved processes adopted by non-government schools. The process will involve an annual self-audit, a five yearly external assessment, and a capacity for the department to investigate any suspected breaches of registration requirements and conditions.
The bill also strengthens the capacity of the CEO to intervene in situations where a non-government school may not be complying with its registration requirements and conditions. These provisions build on and extend the powers currently available in Part VII. The bill strengthens the capacity of the CEO to suspend and de-register a school where the CEO is concerned there is serious non-compliance with the registration requirements and conditions. I trust these increased powers are never used but, of course, appropriate measures do need to be in place so action can be taken quickly if required.
Another aspect of the bill I want to comment on is the introduction of a register of non-government schools. The register will be open to the public, and will contain key information about each school, including the name and address of the governing body, the religious affiliation, if any, the years of schooling offered, and the specific conditions placed on the school by the Chief Executive Officer. The introduction of the register will increase the public’s knowledge of the various schools which make up the Northern Territory non-government school sector. For the first time, the public will be given the opportunity to make submissions on new applications.
The opportunity has been taken in this bill to enhance the provisions relating to advisory councils which provide advice to the minister on matters concerning the education of young Territorians. The bill proposes the repeal of Part III of the act, and its replacement with a new Part III setting out new provisions for the establishment of advisory councils, the procedures governing their operations, and the provision of support to those councils.
Members who are familiar with education issues will recall the Education Advisory Council. The council made a valued contribution to the general development of education services in the Territory. However, the advisory role played by that council in times past has been filled, in more recent times, by the Northern Territory Board of Studies, the Northern Territory Indigenous Education Council, and the Non-Government School Ministerial Advisory Council. It is timely to make new provisions for the administration of advisory councils, and the bill contains a clause to achieve this result.
Finally, there are some consequential amendments proposed in the bill, together with some minor amendments of the type normally dealt with in statute law revision legislation. These amendments do not affect existing legislative policy.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members, and table the explanatory statement to accompany the bill.
Debate adjourned.
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr HENDERSON (Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
Members will note this bill to amend the Education Act is called the Education Amendment (Youth Participation) Bill. The purpose of the bill is to amend the Education Act to require young Territorians to complete Year 10 of secondary education, and thereafter to continue in full-time education, training, employment, or a combination of those until they reach the age of 17-years.
The bill provides for the implementation in the Northern Territory of commitments by the Council of Australian Governments, COAG, and by my government. At its meeting in April 2009, COAG agreed to a series of education and training measures. These measures are designed to maximise young people’s engagement with education and training pathways. The proposals assist young Australians to improve their options for the future and their prospects of meeting the challenge of rising youth unemployment. They are also fundamental to broader long-term reform to increase the retention and attainment of young Australians in education.
A key initiative in this raft of measures is a national youth participation requirement; it makes participation in education, training or employment compulsory for all young Australians until they reach the age of 17 years.
The agreed commencement date for this new initiative across all Australian states and territories is 1 July 2010. A review of the legislation in other jurisdictions indicates that although there is a common purpose as agreed at COAG, each jurisdiction has adopted its own model to raise the compulsory participation age, and many jurisdictions have appropriate legislation in place to give effect to reforms. In the Northern Territory it is necessary to amend the Education Act in order to implement this requirement, and the appropriate amendments are set out in the bill currently before you.
Public discussion about these proposals has tended to refer to raising the school leaving age; however, this terminology is misleading because the reforms will only make it compulsory for a young Territorian to complete Year 10 or its equivalent. After that stage and until the age of 17, a young person will be required to participate, but will have a variety of options. They may choose to: continue their schooling; get other approved educational training; commence full-time work; or participate in a combination of any of these pursuits. After the age of 17 there will be no legislative requirements to continue. The intended effect of the legislative amendments will be to increase the numbers of young Territorians who continue in full-time education, training and/or employment and, consequently, reduce the number of unemployed young people.
Although it is difficult at this stage to determine the actual number of young people in the Northern Territory who will be affected by the reforms, ABS data indicates that in 2008 the size of the disengaged cohort was in the order of 530 15-year-olds, and 690 16-year-olds. The reforms will apply equally to all Territorians including: those in the government and non-government sectors; those with special learning needs; those in what is commonly referred to as home schooling; those who are living in remote areas; and those who live in urban areas.
However, the bill contains a transitional provision giving an exemption for young people who have turned 15 before 1 January 2010, the commencement date of the reforms. It is estimated there are about 250 Territorians who will have turned 15 by that date, but have not yet turned 17-years of age. The reason for exempting this particular cohort is these children and their parents will have made decisions based on the current legislation and should not be subject to amendments which would, in effect, apply to them retrospectively.
Of course, these young people may choose to participate voluntarily in additional education, training or employment, and they are strongly encouraged to do so. These reforms will require all young people, who might otherwise leave school as soon as they turn 15, to remain at school until they complete Year 10. At present, it is estimated that approximately 15% of students leave school in the Northern Territory prior to completing Year 10; some leave to take up a job, but the exact number of those students who will do so in each particular year cannot yet be known.
The act, as amended by this bill, will continue to allow young Territorians to seek employment after they have completed Year 10, whether or not they have turned 17; and continue to allow employers to employ these young people during the youth participation years.
The government is committed to ensuring that during the compulsory participation phase, young people in remote locations and young people with disabilities are able to access suitable education, training or employment opportunities. Approximately 44% of young Territorians live in remote and very remote locations. Remote students with access to a computer and broadband Internet connection are already able to access senior secondary and vocational education subjects and units online. These subjects are certified for the Northern Territory Certification of Education and Training, and residential components are included in courses which require hands-on laboratory and workshop learning and assessments. The government is also working to quickly establish, or improve, the education hubs in each of our A Working Future towns, which will provide senior secondary education, including vocational education pathways.
Government agencies are also addressing the issue of enhancing the participation opportunities for young people with disabilities. It may be that additional education and training programs will be developed to meet the needs of specific groups and communities. The bill provides for new programs to be approved by the Chief Executive Officer and published by notification in the Gazette.
To support these new participation requirements, the Northern Territory is implementing a range of initiatives aimed at:
improving literacy and numeracy outcomes through the Smarter Schools National Partnerships;
improving student attendance;
providing access to more flexible and meaningful pathways for young people, especially in the senior years of schooling; and
establishing a Beyond School Guarantee to encourage young people to complete their schooling so they are assured of a post-school pathway into further education, training or employment.
Whilst the Northern Territory’s youth reform will occur across the Territory, it is in remote locations that the most significant reform will need to occur. It is also in remote locations the Northern Territory and Australian governments are focusing significant investment and effort to reshape remote communities, improve service delivery and infrastructure, and drive major improvements in outcomes for Indigenous people.
Education and training is the most important commitment to this government. The Northern Territory government’s draft Territory 2030 strategy places it at the centre of our development as a community. It is also at the centre of our A Working Future policy. According the Commonwealth Grants Commission data 2006, over 40 000 people, or approximately 20% of the Territory population, resides in remote or very remote townships and communities. Under this initiative, the Territory’s 20 largest remote communities will be transformed, over time, into Territory growth towns which are properly planned and designed; have services, building and facilities like any other country town; and gain benefit from targeted investment in infrastructure.
Territory growth towns will become the economic and service delivery centres for their regions. They have been identified on the basis of a combination of community and regional population, geographic location, existing and planned government services, and potential for development of commercial enterprises. In partnership with other agencies, the Territory’s Department of Education and Training has already commenced developing implementation plans for an initial group of six Territory growth towns. These are Maningrida, Ngukurr, Angurugu/Umbakumba on Groote Eylandt, Gunbalanya/Jabiru, Ntaria and Lajamanu.
A Working Future is closely aligned with the COAG National Indigenous Reform Agreement which aims to improve outcomes for all Indigenous Australians. This agreement recognises that improving outcomes for Indigenous people requires adoption of a multifaceted approach to direct effort across seven key building blocks: Early Childhood, Schooling, Health, Economic Participation, Healthy Homes, Safe Communities, and Governance and Leadership. Whilst progress across the seven areas is critical to delivering sustainable improvements in participation and productivity, the areas which are most linked to youth attainment and transitions are Schooling and Economic Participation.
The Smarter Schools reforms will expand on existing good educational practice and provide the opportunity to trial innovative ways to address the challenges of delivering education in the Northern Territory. Existing school improvement planning processes will be used to ensure the Smarter Schools reforms complement and align with core business and other Territory and national reforms such as those under the Closing the Gap and Youth Attainment and Transitions National Partnerships. These reforms include:
Low Socio-Economic Status Schools Communities National Partnership Agreement which identify schools for targeted effort to address the complex and interconnected challenges facing students in disadvantaged communities, including the Territory growth towns;
The government has also recently launched A Smart Territory – the Education and Training Strategic Plan 2009 - 2012. This plan sets an ambitious program of reform for Territory government schools, and is driven by the objective of successful transition of students from their formal years of schooling to further training, employment and/or higher education.
In addition to what I have outlined here today, there are many other Northern Territory and national reform agendas which are working together to shape the service and support we provide young Territorians. These include:
Productivity Places Program National Partnership Agreement to increase Indigenous people’s access to employment and training services;
Remote Indigenous Public Internet Access National Partnership Agreement to provide Internet access and training in remote Indigenous communities, including Territory growth towns;
Indigenous Economic Participation National Partnership Agreement to set Indigenous employment targets for the public sector, and outline commitments for increasing Indigenous employment through procurement practices;
We need the reforms encompassed in this bill because too many young Territorians are leaving school early and not acquiring the skills, the knowledge, and the attitudes they need to get jobs and to be well prepared for later life. According to the ABS, in 2008, just over 13% of 15 to 19-year-olds in urban areas in the Territory were not participating in full-time education and/or employment. Anecdotal evidence suggests this percentage is significantly higher in remote and very remote locations, which has increasingly important economic and social implications for the future of the Territory.
We know technological advances, changing composition and organisation of the labour force, as well as other structural changes in the Australian and Northern Territory economies, will reshape and significantly reduce employment opportunities for unskilled or low skilled young people. The reasons for poor outcomes and early exit from school are multifaceted, but the characteristics of the population in the Territory give some insight into the serious challenges faced by many young Territorians, especially those young people who live in remote and very remote locations.
Education and training have major roles to play in delivering the Territory’s social and economic development and wellbeing. The Territory government believes very strongly in the importance of all young Territorians having the opportunity to undertake the education and training which will equip them with the skills to enable them to get jobs and a good income, and contribute fully to our economic, cultural and social growth.
Whilst national and international research show a long-standing and stubborn relationship between education outcomes and student background, more recent research demonstrates this is not an inevitable relationship. The research shows education systems which put in place coherent, consistent and comprehensive reform agendas that prioritise supporting schools to undertake whole-school improvement can disrupt this relationship, given time. This evidence also suggests that one of the most significant impediments to achieving this is the beliefs and expectations of teachers, parents, principals and system administrators. To this end, the Territory government is driving a culture of high expectations in Territory schools, and has a range of policies in place directed at increasing participation in education and training through strategies ranging from whole-school improvement planning, to increasing VET in schools, and school-based apprenticeships and traineeship program to establish a Beyond School Guarantee.
The Northern Territory clearly requires a significant and renewed focus on delivering a skilled and capable workforce ready to met future opportunities. Much work has already been done by schools to develop flexible, responsive pathways between school and work or further study. However, more work is needed, and this will be a focus area for many schools in their planning as part of the Smarter Schools National Partnership, and in their work to make youth engagement, attainment and successful transitions key priorities. Our schools will be required to position themselves as key drivers of change by better integrating vocational education and training programs into the senior secondary curriculum by encouraging and supporting partnerships between schools, business and industry; brokered and supported by effective policy change at corporate level.
The Territory government wants all young Territorians to have the opportunity and support to deliver the knowledge and skills they need to participate effectively in society, to be employed in a globalised economy, and to succeed in life, whatever their background or aspirations. The education and training sectors have key roles to play in skilling young people so they are well placed to meet the future needs of industry for a highly skilled workforce.
Fundamental to this are clear, high quality pathways for students between school, vocational education training, and university. To support this aim the Territory government has set the following systemic targets to be achieved by 2012: a 20% increase in NTCET completions; a 20% completion rate for attaining VET in Schools qualifications; a 3% increase in the proportion of non-Indigenous students at or above national minimum standards in all NAPLAN tests; and a 9% increase in the proportion of Indigenous students at or above national minimum standards in all NAPLAN tests. The Territory has also committed to achieving its contribution share of COAG targets under the Youth Attainment and Transitions National Partnership - that is to lift the Year 12 or equivalent attainment rate by 10% by 2015, and to achieve a 27.9% Indigenous attainment rate by 2020.
To drive the changes necessary to reach these ambitious targets the Territory government, through the Department of Education and Training, is implementing a range of initiatives including:
the Youth Participation Requirement: from 1 January 2010, young people must participate in schooling until they complete Year 10, followed by the requirement to participate in full-time education, training or employment until they turn 17.
a Compact with Young Territorians, which provides 15- to 24-year-olds with an entitlement to an education or training place for a government subsidised qualification, subject to admission requirements and course availability;
the new Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training, which will ensure all students achieve sound levels of literacy and numeracy, are provided with clear, flexible pathways to university, further training or work in which both academic and vocational pathways and outcomes are equally valued;
VET in Schools, expanded access to high quality job aligned programs in all senior secondary schools, delivering real qualifications and getting students work-ready. This initiative will:
confirm the role of schools as deliverers of in-house training, providers of VET to other schools, and purchasers of services from external Registered Training Organisations;
align the focus of new Trade Training Centres to industry and employer need;
increase the number of school-based apprenticeships and traineeships; and
facilitate more students to complete Certificate II and/or Certificate III and get an NTCET;
Centres of Excellence in Maths/Science, Engineering, and Tourism and Hospitality Industries within senior secondary colleges to provide opportunities for students to access innovative programs, industry experience and fast-tracked university entrance;
Virtual Schooling: improved access to the South Australian Certificate of Education, approved academic and VET courses, using digital technologies to facilitate real time, quality learning for senior secondary students who do not have these courses available in their home school;
A Sporting Chance: expanded access to the Clontarf Academy programs across more schools and communities for a wider range of students, including young men in the senior years, as well as exploring options to be trialled with young women;
a Beyond School Guarantee and local Jobs Register ensuring students a pathway to work, university or further training when they fulfil base requirements, including attendance, participation and behaviour;
a Regional Focus: realignment of DET resourcing to provide a regional focus on early years schooling and post-schooling, to ensure the necessary support to drive youth engagement, attainment and successful transitions;
Personal Learning Plans requiring all Year 10 students to develop a personal learning plan;
Work-Ready Programs: improved access to and investment in training, driven by the skill needs of industry and leading to employment;
Outside School Hours Access to School Facilities to assist tertiary education and training; and
Smart Alignment of the effort of DET with other agencies in the Australian government, to achieve stronger outcomes for young people.
This bill is a fundamental platform for putting in place many of the strategies and government programs I have outlined, and it will frame a new future and new opportunities for the Territory’s youth. There are a number of minor amendments included in this bill to take account of changes in the Interpretation Act, particularly recent amendments to sections 38F and 65 of the Interpretation Act concerning subordinate legislation.
The bill also offers an opportunity to update references in the Education Act to the department of Education and to the Secretary of the department as those terms are now somewhat archaic, and the bill proposes they be replaced with current terminology: ‘agency’, instead of the current name of the department concerned, and ‘Chief Executive Officer’ for the officer leading the department. These amendments were of the kind normally attended to in statute law revision legislation; here they are included in the schedule of the bill.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members, and table the explanatory statements accompanying the bill.
Debate adjourned.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move – That, unless otherwise ordered, the days and times of the meeting and Routine of Business in respect of the 2009 Alice Springs regional sitting of the Assembly be as follows:
1. TIMES OF MEETINGS
Madam Speaker, as members would be aware, there was a timetable, or details, circulated about the times of meetings and routine of business in Alice Springs prior to today. I did receive a communication from the member for Port Darwin that the opposition would like a number of changes, and we have negotiated those; in some things we have come halfway to what we proposed, and I hope these changes are acceptable to everyone. Although it has been circulated, I will detail the changes to members now so people are aware of them.
Formerly, it was proposed the Assembly would meet at 9 am each day, and that has been changed to 9.30 am. On the first Tuesday there will be an official opening at 9 am with proceedings on the floor of parliament starting at 9.30 am on that day, also. The other change is because there is a knock-on effect due to the change from 10 pm to 9.30 pm, closing on Tuesday 24 November will be 8.30 pm, so now parliament will close and adjournments will run for 1 hours until 10 pm.
On Wednesday we go to exhaustion, either figuratively or literally, on adjournments; basically the close will be 8.30 pm and when all members have adjourned who want to adjourn, proceedings will then close. Also, on Wednesday, notices have been moved from 5 pm in the original schedule to 7 pm and Question Time will follow notices at 7 pm. Similarly, on Thursday close at 8.30 pm and adjourn until 10 pm.
I am very much looking forward to our sittings in Alice Springs. They are always very lively, and the residents of Alice Springs are not backward in coming forward with their criticisms of government and their feelings about the way things are travelling in Alice Springs. It is always robust debate and the citizenry of Alice Springs have made a feature of engaging with the parliamentary process and, as I say, letting their feelings be known and, in some instances, protesting outside the conference centre. I welcome that. It shows engagement by the people of Alice Springs, and government certainly takes on board the messages we receive from them; and I do not believe these sittings will be any different.
I did notice last time that attendance seemed to be slightly down, and I hope attendances will be very strong again this year. I am sure local members in Alice Springs will be endeavouring to get as many people as possible along to the sittings. I hope the amended times go some way to ensuring and facilitating the attendance at the sittings by people in Alice Springs.
Madam Speaker, I commend the motion to the House. I am pleased to say there are changes, but they have been done in collaboration with the opposition and the Independent.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, perish the thought that we should forget the Independent; there are actually two in this House, by the way, and I wonder if the other Independent was consulted in the same way, because that Independent has a seat which actually borders the town boundary of Alice Springs. I am interested to hear in summation whether the Independent with the seat in Central Australia was approached and negotiated with in relation to this issue by the government, or is it just the Independent member for Nelson who has a seat just south of Darwin. However, I acknowledge …
Dr Burns: The principal changes came from the opposition, member for Port Darwin.
Mr ELFERINK: I pick up on that interjection. You have made it a point, not I, to consult the Independent. I am just curious why the member for Nelson was high on your list of priorities, when the other Independent member has a seat in Central Australia. That is up to you to consider.
I acknowledge and thank the Leader of Government Business. In terms of the timetable being circulated, my desk looks not unlike a World War I trench so, perhaps, I missed it, but I am not entirely sure if it was circulated; I will check with the Tabled Papers Office …
Dr Burns: I did give you a copy.
Mr ELFERINK: Yes, I will have a look. In any instance, the Notice Paper today was the first time I have seen this document. I am not blaming anyone; it could well be my own level of organisation on this desk.
Having made that observation, I acknowledge and thank the government for negotiating this prior to us coming into the Chamber. It always makes for a smoother passage of material through this House when these details are nutted out and advice is given from both sides as to their intent. At least if we are going to have an argument, we know there is going to be an argument, and there is no entrapment involved.
It was our initial intent to move it to a normal sitting day starting at 10 am, with the exception of an hour-and-a-half lunch, and finishing at the normal times. By this system, having an hour-and-a-half lunch, we are actually get an extra half-hour of business done during the day. I have to point out it was in the forefront of my mind that finishing at 9 pm would mean government members may not go out on the town to various social functions which, undoubtedly, their $9m spin machine will be trying to arrange for them. I care about the members of government in Alice Springs, and I was hoping by leaving them in the House until 9 pm, they would not be exposed to people in Alice Springs who may want to do horrible things to them.
Madam Speaker, I thank the government for their negotiations, and we support this motion.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I have now heard everything from the member for Port Darwin in his sincere concern for the government facing up to the Alice Springs public. I actually enjoy going to Alice Springs; it is great to catch up with people in the southern part of the Northern Territory because they, obviously, have different points of view about matters pertaining to the Territory, and I always enjoy my time there. In fact, I am one of those who believe we should meet there every year; however, there may be cost implications with that. But, I would like to repeat that I believe we should have the sittings there every year.
I am also pleased both sides of parliament have come together on this very important issue of time. I hope it may extend to other things which happen in parliament from time to time. To be honest with you, even though the government spoke to me, I do not get excited over these things; whether we start at 9 am or 10 am, generally speaking, we will still have the same number of hours for debating matters. Obviously some people think one time is better than the other, and I am glad we have been able to accommodate people by coming halfway - if that is not a level of diplomatic manoeuvring, I will go he.
It is good to see both sides have agreed on what could have been a point of contention on this issue, and will mean, hopefully, smooth running in Alice Springs. I look forward to the debate and to meeting people, and also to going to the Firkin & Hound - pardon me, Madam Speaker, that is the name of the inn - for a good bangers and mash.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I thank members for their support, and I look forward to the sittings in Alice Springs.
Motion agreed to
Continued from 20 August 2009.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, the intention of this bill is to broaden the minister’s ability to approve interstate prisoner transfers. There are also minor amendments to remove gender specific language from the principal act.
It is appropriate for me to give something of the background to this bill. The Ministerial Council of Corrective Services Ministers requested the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General to agree to changes to national uniform prisoner transfer legislation to give ministers the ability to consider a wider range of factors when recommending or accepting interstate transfer requests from prisoners.
In 2004, and that is significant - and I will come to why shortly - an intergovernmental agreement set out the agreed terms of the amendments, and stated that while there were no time frames for the introduction of the amendments, jurisdictions were advised to implement them as soon as practicable. A very minor amendment to the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act commenced in 2007 to remove the word ‘and’ from section 3(7)(b)(ii)(B), which makes this bill the first time the changes recommended in the Intergovernmental Agreement of 2004 have come to pass. In other words, this government has again taken a very long time to get to this position; it should have done it several years ago. I will come to why that is of some significance shortly.
Interestingly, the provisions agreed to in the Intergovernmental Agreement have been attributed to a case in which the Territory has a very real involvement. That was the case with the Attorney-General of the ACT vs Daniel Heiss. The case resulted from Mr Heiss’ sentence to imprisonment for life for murder being denied his transfer request by the ACT Attorney-General for reasons outside the specified welfare scope of the legislation. On appeal to the Full Court of the Australian Federal Court, the ACT Attorney-General was directed to reconsider the non-approval of Heiss’ transfer without the irrelevant considerations.
The Intergovernmental Agreement was agreed to in June, I believe, of 2004. If its provisions had been introduced to amend the NT Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act sooner, it may have enabled the then Correctional Services or Justice minister to avoid the very loophole the current Correctional Services minister refers to in the case of Jonathan Peter Bakewell, because his transfer was not effective until 15 April 2005. Had government been more active in this area, the complaint about which the new minister makes much in relation to Bakewell, would not have arisen.
Unfortunately, we have seen it time and time again where the government is just too focused on spin and brochures and not, as it should be, on bringing before this parliament proper legislation. We saw an example of it earlier this week with the Attorney-General and the Justice Penalties amendment.
By way of a brief digression, I have had the opportunity to read the Hansard of that debate, and I note with enormous interest when the fine of $6500 in relation to begging was put to the Attorney-General she said she stood by that penalty, and that the Labor Party stands by its policies. Clearly, there seems to be some disagreement between the Chief Minister and his deputy.
However, coming back to this bill, I would like to make some other comments for the sake of the Hansard. In relation to clause 5, it is fairly straightforward and removes reference to the welfare of the prisoner and a few minor punctuation changes throughout section 5 of the act. Clause 6 changes the gender specific references throughout section 9 of the act; for example, ‘himself’ becomes ‘him or herself’, and about time too.
Clause 7 introduces a new section 9A to expand the factors the minister may have regard to when considering a prisoner’s request for transfer to another jurisdiction. Under the current legislation the minister can only have consideration of the welfare implications of the prisoner’s request to transfer. These have now been broadened to allow the minister to consider, inter alia, the administration of justice, the protection of the community, the prisoner’s welfare and safety and any other matter the minister feels is relevant.
Clause 8 amends section 21 of the bill and allows the minister to apply the expanded provisions introduced in the new section (a) to the consideration of prisoners returning to their original jurisdiction under section 18 of the act.
That is essentially what the bill is about. I made a note here in relation to the delay of government in regard to the Bakewell case; the government has closed the stable door after the horse has bolted. That is quite a poor way to govern, if I could respectfully suggest that to all members but, in particular, through you, Madam Speaker, to the minister for Corrections. I also respectfully suggest you very carefully go through the legislation and the changes to it that you bring to this Chamber. I do not know you well, but I suspect you would be minded to carefully consider the legislation, and I believe events evidenced in the parliament over the last couple of days certainly illustrates the point that, as a minister of the Crown, if you want to come into this Chamber and present legislation, then you make sure you have it right.
Having said that, you are not off the hook entirely, minister. I now turn to what you knew I would - in your second reading speech you plagiarised; you plagiarised quite a deal. I have a copy here. This is part of the first page of the speech, your speech, you gave here on 20 August this year. The green bits are the bits you copied and, on page two, all these green bits - and I see on my colleague’s computer, the member for Greatorex, the green is being picked up very well by the cameras. Is it not great the new cameras are working so well?
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! It is quite gratuitous for the member for Araluen to point to the similarities in language for a bill which is uniform throughout Australia. I would have thought in second reading speeches they need to be uniform. She needs to stop being so cute with people who are watching this broadcast, and who may not appreciate the particular facts.
Madam SPEAKER: Resume your seat, please.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! This is a House of communication, and a House of speaking, and if the member for Araluen wants to speak, so she may well speak! If the minister has a problem he can speak later on.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, resume your seat.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Araluen, I am a bit concerned about Standing Order 62 in relation to actually claiming plagiarism. Perhaps you could be vaguer; unless you want to do it by way of substantive motion. You are actually making a very strong point.
Ms CARNEY: I will come to the hypocrisy, Madam Speaker, because I will shortly be referring to some comments previously made in this House by the member for Barkly in relation to allegations of plagiarism by some of my colleagues.
I guess it is for others to ascertain from looking at this minister’s two-and-a-bit page speech that the green bits were copied from somewhere else. They were copied - plagiarised - without attribution. We all know the definition of plagiarism, and you know it quite well, minister; you took someone else’s comments, and you did not attribute them. Why is this of interest? Two reasons.
One, the opposition does not have the resources of government; we do our best to assess every piece of legislation brought to this Chamber. As a result of the minister being sprung copying someone else’s speech, we are now minded to go through, word by word, every second reading speech brought into this parliament by the government. Regrettably, we do not have those resources because we are focused on positioning as an alternative government to the people of the Northern Territory and, come the next election, whenever that is, to win that next election. If we had endless resources, like government, we probably would have someone - perhaps someone will volunteer - to check all the speeches; but it should not be the case and members of this Assembly should not expect a minister of the Crown to come in here to do a second reading speech copied from someone else’s speech. I believe that is an insult to the parliament, and it certainly says much about the minister doing it.
Second, and more importantly, the member for Barkly, the minister for Corrections, on 21 October last year, in adjournment debate, said:
He went on to quote the definition of plagiarism. Then, the member for Barkly, the minister for Corrections, whose second reading speech refers to the bill that we are debating, said and I quote:
The NT News published a story about this, and the minister’s lame defence was quite awful, and the Leader of Government Business touched upon it. The member for Barkly denied this was plagiarism, notwithstanding his own definition, but he denied it was plagiarised and he said all the speeches were given the same legal advice and, basically, we all use the same words. At my charitable best, even if I accept that, then the minister still makes a fool of himself because he said - no one else said - he said on 21 October 2008: ‘If someone before you had said it better, then give that person the credit deserved’. I have gone through the minister’s second reading speech and I cannot find anywhere he acknowledges the second reading speech made by the then Minister for Corrective Services in Western Australia in November 2007. I hope the minister is embarrassed - he should be - and based on his indignation on 21 October 2008, I hope he recognises the extent of his hypocrisy; as do his colleagues. We would like to hope this unfortunate business will not happen again.
Madam Speaker, we support the bill.
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I commend the Minister for Correctional Services for bringing this bill before the Chamber. I also recognise results from a federal court decision in 2002 which, two years later led to decisions of the Corrective Services Minister’s Conference and the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General in 2004; and I note this Corrections minister, in a very short time under his steerage of this portfolio, has brought this matter before our Chamber. I thank him for being so prompt in recognising the need for this legislation. Obviously, as Attorney-General, I have worked with him to support the carriage of this through the government processes to ensure it occurs, because it makes for a far better functioning system.
The bill provides for the minister to have regard to the broader range of matters that are: the prisoners’ welfare; the administration of justice; the security and good order of prisons; the safe custody of the prisoner; the protection of the community, and any other matter the minister considers relevant; applications for transfer for welfare purposes involving decisions by the minister in the state or territory from which the prisoner wants to transfer, as well as a decision by the minister in the state or territory to which the prisoner wants to transfer.
The changes, as I said, have grown out of the federal court decision in 2002, Corrective Services and SCAG in 2004. The problem is the existing legislation, prior to these changes, only allowed the minister to consider welfare transfers in a relatively narrow and unclarified manner. Therefore, opening up this discretion to consider broader policy objectives such as the general administration of justice, as well as other important matters such as the prisoners’ safety and the safety of the community in general, is very important.
The changes in the bill made in relation to welfare transfers may provide increased opportunities for inmates and their families to develop and foster relationships during the prisoner’s period of incarceration. The bill ensures the minister has the same discretion in considering prisoners’ applications for interstate transfer as the corresponding ministers in all other participating jurisdictions. It is important to have broader regard to matters of the prisoners’ welfare, the administration of justice, the security and good order of prisons, the safe custody of the prisoner, the protection of the community, and any other matter the minister considers relevant.
As Attorney-General, and in the hot seat currently under the Administrative Orders, I am very pleased to see this coming through. I have a very close working relationship with our Correctional Services minister; he is doing an outstanding job. Despite all the theatre of the shadow, the reality of model amendments as agreed by Corrective Services ministers and SCAG, sets down a form of words which are relevant to be used across the jurisdictions when they are introduced in second readings. While the shadow flops around in her theatrics and accusations of plagiarism, second reading speeches are quite different by their nature to normal debate. They need to specify very clearly the requirements as agreed to in the model legislation, in this case an amendment to the transfer of interstate prisoners.
Madam Speaker, I congratulate our Correctional Services minister who, very quickly in his role as Correctional Services minister, brought this matter to us. It is contemporary practice and it is good to see it introduced here in the Territory.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I am very curious about this legislation. I say that because, up until recent times, according to the minister’s second reading, the Northern Territory has consented to nine prisoner applications for transfer to the Territory since July 1995 – and 52 Northern Territory prisoners have been transferred to other jurisdictions under the welfare provisions of the act.
What that says is, up until now, there has been no difficulty with the existing act. What has changed to bring on these so-called new amendments to the bill? Well, it is the case of Mr Bakewell, which has been discussed and debated in this House before. In fact, it was debated here on 8 May 2008 to try to stop Mr Bakewell being released from a South Australian prison. As I said, there has been no problem up until now; and I believe there may have been other prisoners serving long sentences who had been sentenced interstate. Again, there had been no fuss about it.
I should remind the parliament this has actually has come about because the Attorney-General at that time, Peter Toyne, wrote a letter to the Hon Terance Roberts MLC, Minister for Correctional Services, Adelaide, South Australia, and I will quote from my speech on 8 May 2008, where he said this:
That was not correct. Prisoner Bakewell was due to have a 25-year non-parole period, but the Attorney-General wrote a letter to the Minister for Correctional Services in South Australia, saying it was a 20-year non-parole period. Obviously the South Australian government accepted that as the sentence and, working on that date, that sentence then initiated re-integration programs. In fact, Mr Bakewell is said to have been a model prisoner, who went to Yatala, Mobilong and the Adelaide Pre-Release Centre, and I believe he has now been released.
I do not think there is anything particularly wrong with our existing law. What our existing law is being brought in to do is to cover up, and I do not use that in a corrupt sense, but to mask the fact that there was a mistake made by the Attorney-General at that time to the South Australian government. I believe if the prisoner Bakewell had been sentenced to 25 years, and the South Australian government had been informed of that, this would, possibly, never have come to this House, and there would not be changes to the rules. I reiterate: there cannot have been too much wrong with this legislation because it does not just apply to murderers, it applies to everyone. It could be Joe Blow, a bank robber, who is in for 10 years, and would rather be close to his mother who is very old; or there might be other reasons a transfer is wanted. It is not just for murderers.
The change is simply because a murderer was given an incorrect sentence because the Attorney-General wrote the incorrect sentence in a letter to the South Australian minister.
I reiterate that from July 1995, 52 Northern Territory prisoners have been transferred to other jurisdictions under the welfare provisions of the act. I have not heard anyone complain about that, but I have heard a complaint about Bakewell. What I am saying is, there was nothing wrong with the existing rules; there simply was a mistake made which created a furore in the press. I remember the Attorney-General getting up and, I believe, she made statements like: ‘This will never happen again.’ This is a reaction to a headline in the newspaper which was caused by the government itself making a mistake. I ask: does this make a good law? Or is this a ‘my laws are tougher than your laws’? Because there does not appear to be anything wrong with the existing law.
I ask the minister: now there are additional requirements for a minister to take into account, is it going to be harder for a person in gaol for a lesser offence to go through all these steps to get a transfer? Transfers are not uncommon throughout Australia; it is not as though it is something new to prisoners throughout Australia. Many of the prisoners in our gaols in the Territory are from interstate. If you look at the figures I believe it is somewhere around 8% to 10% of prisoners come from interstate so it is obvious a number of those prisoners will ask for a transfer.
I do not necessarily say the legislation is bad, what annoys me is I believe it is more a reaction than something brought to this parliament because there is a genuine need.
During the debate on Thursday, 8 May, I made this statement in the committee stage:
As I mentioned before there is Yatala, Mobilong and the Adelaide Pre-Release Centre. When a prisoner is transferred, his sentence stays exactly the same. If it was a 25-year non-parole period, the South Australian Department for Correctional Services must abide by that ruling; but the manner in which the prisoner is managed within the South Australian correctional facilities and the decisions about parole are all done under the jurisdiction of the South Australian government. The Attorney-General at that time, the member for Sanderson, said: Yes, member for Nelson, that is correct.’ As I say, it is still under the umbrella of the Northern Territory Sentencing Act.
What has come out of that is that the High Court did not agree. In the unanimous decision the High Court considered that by operation of prisoner transfer legislation applicable in the Northern Territory and South Australia at the time Mr Bakewell was transferred to South Australia, three outcomes resulted: the life sentence imposed on him in the Northern Territory ceased to have effect in the Territory; a life sentence was deemed to have been imposed on him by the Supreme Court of South Australia; and the 20-year non-parole period fixed under Northern Territory legislation, was deemed to have been fixed by the Supreme Court of South Australia.
That put the Northern Territory in a bind. I understand that, but considering this was the only case which came to court, I believe, was caused simply because the Attorney-General wrote the incorrect parole period in his letter, and I am concerned we have rushed this legislation through. Sorry?
Mr Elferink: It is likely they would have referred to a Warrant of Imprisonment, not to a letter of a minister.
Mr WOOD: Well, this is what appears to have happened, and I raised …
Mr Elferink: I would be very surprised.
Mr WOOD: I raised that at the particular time.
It does also raise some questions. I am not opposed to the system of 20 and 25-year sentences, but there is a whole range of questions which still need to be debated in that area. In fact, if what I read here is right, it says the life sentence imposed on Mr Bakewell in the Northern Territory ceased to have effect in the Territory. I ask the minister if that was the case, and the prisoner came back to the Northern Territory and committed an offence, would he immediately be put back in prison? My understanding is once he has left the Territory, the life sentence does not apply anymore. I was always of the understanding life is life. Whether you are in prison or out of prison was not the argument. The way I read it there does concern me. Once you have left the Territory, does it mean your life sentence still applies if you come back to the Territory? That is one issue I noticed when reading that.
There are some other matters I have concerns about. The minister quoted all the parole boards and, obviously, the parole boards are all very different; in fact, I think we probably have the strictest parole board of any state. We have 10 members of the parole board, and it has to be unanimous. Whilst it has to be unanimous in most states, except the ACT, generally speaking they are much smaller parole boards. The question which has been asked of me is: we have a Victims of Crime representative on the Parole Board - and so we should - but in this case where we are applying a whole range of considerations the minister may have regard to, is there a prisoner representative to argue his case?
First, the parole board requires a unanimous decision; and, second, the minister now has to take into regard six particular matters, and I do not know whether there is a representative to argue the prisoner’s case. I am not necessarily talking about murderers; I am just talking in general, because this act applies right across the board to any prisoner wanting a transfer. I do not know whether the government has considered this, or whether it actually happens at the moment.
Another area I have spoken about a number of times is the numbers of prisoners still in our prisons for murder, but not officially classified under this act. I believe it is beholden on this government, especially in light of the recent court case regarding parole for Daniel Heiss and his partner. It is not about whether they should be released or not, but if we are to look at releasing prisoners, there has to be a reintegration program set in place. Reintegration programs take a number of years, so there needs to be some clear indication for prisoners found guilty of murder before the Labor Party changed the laws, that they are classified. Some people say they know what their offence was and they know how that would be classified but, as we have seen, there has been some debate over whether a person should be in for 20 years or longer.
It is not about whether I believe someone should be in for 20 or 25 years, it is about the process. If a prisoner is going to eventually be released, we need good reintegration programs so they fit back into society, and that takes time to set up. To get the time, we need a date by which the prisoner is able to apply for parole so we can work back from there with a reintegration program. It is something I believe needs changing; Mr Rex Wild has said the same in times gone by and other people have said the same. The area of our system relating to the classification of people who have been sentenced to prison for murder needs reviewing so there is more certainty in the sentencing of those prisoners.
I will support the bill. I do not see anything particularly wrong in it, and if it is in line with other states, I can see benefits in that. I am concerned about the clause at the bottom under ‘Matters the Minister may have regard to’, which says: ‘any other matter the Minister considers relevant.’ That is very broad and could mean anything. If a decision is to be made about whether a prisoner can be transferred or not, that particular section, if used, should be clearly stated so we know the reasons why a prisoner was either transferred or not transferred. That is a very broad clause like we have in the Planning Act: ‘any other matters that are relevant’ - I do not know where that particular clause finishes.
Madam Speaker, I will be interested to see whether our existing laws were so bad they needed to be amended; is it purely because of the Bakewell case which, I believe, only occurred due to an error or a mistaken belief 20 years was the sentencing date. I will also be interested in what the minister has to say in relation to parole board prisoner representation, and prisoner classification in relation to knowing exactly when they can be considered for parole.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I support the bill. The bill is about amending a range of matters within the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act, regarding how a decision is made in transferring a prisoner from one part of the country to another; to or from another state or territory.
We are looking at amendments which have emerged as part of nationally agreed changes, and go to matters the minister takes into consideration when assessing a request from a prisoner to be transferred to or from another state or territory. To be clear, that is when a prisoner asks if they can move from the prison cell in the Territory to another state or territory in Australia, or when a prisoner in another state or territory of Australia wants to move here.
We need to stay tough on crime and make our communities safer, but we also need to consider the welfare of prisoners. While we want to ensure the time fits the crime, as it were, we cannot ignore what happens to our prisoners while they are in our corrections system. I know times are changing within our corrections system, and the Henderson government knows we have to do more to break the cycle of reoffending. We are determined to provide a much stronger rehabilitation basis for the prison. We want proper training and education facilities built into the prison.
We know we have to build a new prison. I know the minister for Corrections and the Independent member for Nelson are working closely on locations and options with the shared aim of having a better system - one that can offer the right services in the right place, so an offender can leave prison with skills and reasonable job prospects. I believe that is not just about the welfare of the prisoner, it is about the welfare of society, and this is something we have a duty of care for, as the government. If they have these skills, they have a much greater chance of contributing to the community and obeying the law.
Prisons in the Northern Territory have come a long way, and I look forward to seeing what the next era of Corrections will involve. We have come a long way from the old Fannie Bay Gaol. It is a beautiful part of the world, but I am sure prisoners these days are glad they are not in a prison with a long drop. I know there are members of the community who find it hard to reconcile the importance of prisoners’ welfare; they have committed a crime and they are doing time. We have a responsibility though, a very human responsibility, as a government, to have a duty of care for the welfare of people who are incarcerated.
The impact of being in prison can, as it should in many ways, live with someone forever. I remember a story historian, Mickey Dewar, related about a former prisoner at Fannie Bay Gaol, Butcher Knight, and a peer of hers - I believe he was a peer - Robert Levictus, who was interested in the history of Butcher Knight. They were driving past Fannie Bay Gaol in the 1980s when it was closed down and had become a museum, around the Ross Smith Avenue bend into East Point Road, and Robert suggested to Butcher they drop in and do an interview on-site. Butcher’s reply was to the point - and you can imagine the language used - under no circumstances was he going to set foot back in that gaol. Robert said: ‘But the gates are open, it is a museum, you can walk in and out. Come in’. ‘Open now’, said Butcher Knight as if he was expecting a trap, or there was a warder waiting around the corner to nab him. Prisons can have a very permanent effect on someone.
With this bill, we are looking at an expansion of things a minister can consider when making a decision about a prisoner’s transfer, and what a minister has to take into consideration when making those decisions: the welfare of the prisoner involved. Sometimes it is quite simple; sometimes it is obvious what the issues of welfare are. After the bombing raids on Darwin in February 1942, Judge Wells was quite certain what was in the interests or welfare of the prisoners, and freed all the prisoners at old Fannie Bay Gaol in a general amnesty. That may not be something you want to consider, minister.
I imagine the prisoners were worried about their welfare during Cyclone Tracy in 1974 at the old Fannie Bay Gaol. The prisoners in the cells, I understand, survived in pretty good nick. There was some damage to the watchtowers and the gaol wall, and a few roofs were lost, but the prisoners and cells were okay. I doubt they were writing out requests for transfers in their cells though, they were probably thinking there were safer places to be.
The bill also amends those areas within the act where gender specific language has been used. I understand those amendments are only minor and take into account amendments made to the Interpretation Act. Just as these amendments we are looking at today are part of nationally agreed changes, the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act, when it was introduced in 1983, was introduced as part of a national cooperative legislative scheme. Things have changed somewhat since 1983, and I agree it is time we looked at the terms of the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act. As the minister explained, the current act provides for the minister to consider welfare transfers only within a relatively narrow and unqualified spectrum. As a result, the bill we have before us proposes to increase the amount of discretion the minister has, and allows the minister to include, as part of his consideration of transfer, broader policy objectives.
So, broader policy objectives can now, if the bill is successfully passed today, be part of the decision-making. The minister provided a couple examples: the general administration of justice, prisoner safety, and the safety of the community in general - that all seems very reasonable to me.
I am sure members of the wider community will expect there to be a considered process when a minister makes a decision about the welfare of the prisoners and the transfer of prisoners for welfare reasons. The minister does not make his decision on a whim, there is a considered process, and I appreciate the efforts by the minister in his introductory remarks to go through the practical workings behind the operation of legislation. I appreciate the minister taking his time to outline the process that once a prisoner makes a request, a Correctional Services Welfare Officer prepares a comprehensive report with relevant information on the prisoner and whether the request has merit. That recommendation can include documents which support the request from the prisoner, and you can imagine that would often be letters from the family. I was not surprised to hear the minister say one of the main reasons people seek to move is to be close to family.
That is why we are here today: to close a loophole in the current legislation which allows the minister to take into account other issues and matters when determining whether an application for interstate transfers should be approved. The minister’s discretion is now not limited only to the welfare of the prisoner when viewing an application for interstate transfer - under the current act the only relevant consideration is the welfare of the prisoner - it is broader than that under this bill. The minister can now also consider such things as the welfare of the prisoner; the administration of justice in the Northern Territory, or any other state or territory; the security and good order of any prison in the Northern Territory, or any other state or territory; safe custody of a prisoner; the protection of the community in the Northern Territory, or any other state or territory; and, any other matter the minister considers relevant.
Knowing the minister and the considered way he approaches issues, I am sure he has no problems abiding by that and making very considered decisions about the transfer of prisoners. I believe I have summed up what the minister said in the second reading speech about those issues which he is considering, which he now has to take into consideration, and this is in line with all the other states and territories; other jurisdictions have made these same legislative changes.
Madam Speaker, this bill will ensure the minister the same discretion when considering prisoners’ applications for interstate transfer as every other minister in other states and territories, and is one reason why this legislation, in many respects, is mirrored around the country, and would inform some of the reasons behind the minister’s second reading speech and the comments he made. This is very much a national approach to the bill to ensure we are operating on an equivalent basis with all other states and territories when making these decisions.
I commend the bill to the House.
Mr McCARTHY (Correctional Services): Madam Speaker, I thank members for their contribution to the debate. As the Minister for Correctional Services, and as a minister in the Henderson government, it is always valuable to learn from colleagues on both sides of the House.
The purpose of this bill is to amend the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act to broaden the range of factors the minister may have regard to when considering a request from a prisoner to be transferred to or from another state or territory. The legislation is part of a national scheme to permit prisoners to be transferred between participating jurisdictions. The changes incorporated in this bill have been agreed to at a national level by the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General and the Correctional Services Ministers Conference.
The NT is the last jurisdiction to introduce these amendments. They ensure I have the same discretion in considering prisoners’ applications for interstate transfer as the corresponding ministers in all other participating jurisdictions, and I believe it is very important to harmonise our national legislation.
The key feature of this bill is it provides a non-exhaustive list of factors the minister may consider when a prisoner makes a request to be transferred to or from another state or territory. These factors are:
the welfare of the prisoner,
The bill amends the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act as part of a national cooperative legislation scheme. The amendments to the principal act have been agreed to by the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General and the Correctional Services Ministers Conference. The NT is the final jurisdiction to introduce the agreed amendments.
I hope that answers some of the questions raised today. We are joining our national counterparts which will make it better for all correctional services jurisdictions, and for ministers to make these very important decisions. The key difference between the current law, and the law after the enactment of this bill, is the bill provides a much wider range of factors for the minister to take into account when considering a prisoner’s application for interstate transfer. The current law provides where the application is not for trial purposes, the only relevant consideration is the welfare of the prisoner. The new, wider criteria allow the minister to consider broader policy objectives, and to ensure the NT minister can consider the same factors as the ministers in all other participating jurisdictions.
Regarding the questions that have arisen, I would like to refer to each of the members’ contributions individually. I will take up the issue of plagiarism to start with.
My second reading speech is, in many ways, almost identical to those made in New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australian parliaments where identical legislation was introduced. The first jurisdiction to introduce the legislation was New South Wales, then Victoria, Western Australia, and now NT speeches have followed the New South Wales speech very closely.
Ms Carney: Then why did you not say so?
Mr McCARTHY: There are a number of reasons for this, member for Araluen. The legislation is identical; the explanation of the content of the legislation using words from the legislation can therefore be expected in each of the second reading speeches.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr McCARTHY: When detailing the new factors to be considered by the minister, of course the wording is the same in each speech, because the new factors are the same in each amending act. The NT News of 27 August 2009, page 4, contains an excerpt from each of these four second reading speeches. Each second reading speech states the scheme, as it was, allowed for transfer for two purposes: to stand trial, or for welfare purposes. This is exactly what the scheme did provide for, and there is really no other way to say it than to use those words.
Given the legislation is part of a national scheme of identical legislation, and given second reading speeches are tools which can aid in statutory interpretation, it would be foolish to use different language to explain, in particular, the details of the clauses. It could lead to a situation where there was a legal argument that since the explanation of the legislation in one second reading speech was so different from the near identical wording in other speeches, the legislation should be interpreted differently than one in the other jurisdictions.
Mr Styles: Do you believe that?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, cease interjecting.
Mr Elferink: Does that stop you from acknowledging it?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, cease interjecting.
Mr McCARTHY: I thought I would bring it back to a grassroots level to try to put a personal explanation on it as well.
Ms Carney: You should give a personal explanation.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr McCARTHY: As the member for Araluen quotes, the ripping off of words from a website is plagiarism; and as the member for Araluen also quotes I am a school teacher, and I do deal with that, so I brought along an example to try to demonstrate what I am talking about.
From a website I downloaded a traditional song; it is a good one called Botany Bay. I go to the last verse of that song, and I would just like to share it with you:
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr McCARTHY: I am no writer, I do a lot of writing, and if I were to incorporate those lyrics and claim them as my own then I would be plagiarising. However, as I have outlined, when dealing with the intricacies of legislation, as the member for Araluen would be well aware, it makes it very apparent you have no licence to work with words. You have to stick exactly to the script, and we have all agreed, in terms of the national jurisdictions, that this legislation is important and we will get it right.
I can see over there that the member for Araluen is very convinced by my argument and …
Ms Carney: Rubbish!
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member for Barkly has wrongly suggested I am so stupid that I would be convinced by his flimsy argument - that is not the case.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Araluen, resume your seat. This is a bill for an act; this is a very serious debate. Resume your seat. Cease interjecting, honourable members. Minister, you have the call.
Mr McCARTHY: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I feel it is a good day when I learn something and, member for Araluen, I always learn something from you, in more ways than one, which I do not have time to go into in this summing-up; but I do thank you for that.
I would like to explain the legislation in terms of the considerations the minister has in this legislation. Under the current legislation, there have only been nine prisoners transferred into the NT since 1995, as the member for Nelson cited. Even if there is a slight increase under the amended provisions, there will still be a negligible effect on the NT prisoner population. It is noted, in the same time period, 52 prisoners were transferred out of the NT.
If NT prisoners are transferred to other jurisdictions, do they serve their sentences under the same terms and conditions as they would in the NT? If a prisoner is transferred to another jurisdiction, their sentence, including non-parole period, is not affected. Also, their security classification at the time of transfer goes with them. However, at the end of a prisoner’s non-parole period, if he or she makes application to the parole board of the receiving jurisdiction, the decision to release on parole, and on what terms and conditions, is a matter for the parole board of the receiving jurisdiction. The amendments have no effect on this part of the operation of the act.
I have been advised, member for Nelson, and I asked a similar question about life, and to put it colloquially - life means life - and it is deemed to be the sentence imposed, and a life sentenced prisoner when released, is released on licence. So it does not matter to which jurisdiction you go, it still remains that classification.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, do you mind if we just pause and acknowledge these students?
Mr McCARTHY: Certainly, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Year 8 Palmerston Christian School students, accompanied by Mrs Anna Abbott and Mr Tim White. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr McCARTHY: I would also like to put on the record today that in the second reading speech introducing the legislation and commenting on the divergence of how parole boards operate, any suggestion in my second reading speech that this bill will have any effect on how parole boards in other jurisdictions deal with prisoners who have been transferred from the NT, is wrong. The purpose of this bill is to widen the scope of the discretion of the minister in making decisions about the transfer or receipt of prisoners who are still in custody.
In response to the member for Nelson’s valuable comments, I would like to comment on the administration of justice. The administration of justice would include matters such as whether the prisoner has lodged an appeal and, if so, whether the appeal process is finalised; whether there are any outstanding matters regarding the prisoner that have not yet been dealt with in the NT courts; that the prisoner has long enough time left to serve to make the transfer worthwhile; that the transfer is not going to advantage or disadvantage the prisoner; that issues regarding victims would be dealt with similarly in the receiving jurisdiction.
In relation to my time in the portfolio, member for Nelson, and your valuable comment about advocacy for prisoners, there are a number of advocacy areas for prisoners who are proposing a transfer. It starts with the Northern Territory Correctional Services staff and the associated support staff; there is also the official prison visitor program which also can advocate for prisoners. There is good channel of communication available now for a prisoner to make their application for transfer, which comes back to the minister.
The additional factors considerably broaden the range of factors a minister may consider. In essence, the interests of the community, rather than only the welfare interests of the prisoner, may be formally considered, and I find this a desirable change in the legislation. Once again, this legislation is harmonising Northern Territory legislation on a national scale, and it refers to both transferring out of the Northern Territory and also prisoners who apply to transfer into the Northern Territory.
I believe I have addressed the member for Araluen’s concerns; they were very straightforward. The comparison of legal-speak is something I would like to talk to the member for Araluen more about; I am sure I can learn much from her.
Member for Nelson, I thank you for your support and your understanding. This is not trying to make things harder; this is broadening the aspects for decision-making by the minister. I hope the question of life in relation to life sentencing in the Northern Territory, is answered. However, we have some very qualified people, member for Nelson, and members on the other side, who can brief on any of these questions in much more detail, and I would be really comfortable sitting in on that because, in this area, there is so much to learn.
The last point I make is to the member for Fannie Bay. Thank you very much; I very much enjoyed that supportive speech. There was a great deal of history, and I love Territory history, even Correctional Services history. In your electorate, you have that fine museum, the old Fannie Bay Gaol. What you brought to the debate today was very important; it was subtle, but it was powerful, and it related to that colourful gentleman, Butcher Knight. The member for Fannie Bay’s main point was that Butcher Knight did not want to return to the Correctional Services facility - he did not want to go back to gaol.
Madam Speaker, that is what this government is on about. We are trying to reduce this cycle of reoffending. We want Butcher Knight’s story to get out there. We do not want people coming back to our prison system, and we are working tirelessly to deliver that.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr McCARTHY (Correctional Services)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Mr KNIGHT (Housing): Madam Speaker, this government is committed to housing Territorians. In particular, we have a strong commitment to housing those who otherwise cannot afford to put a roof over their heads. That is why, in the time we have been in office, we have been working hard to build more public housing in the bush, having boosted repairs and maintenance programs and focused on obtaining more funding directed at Housing from our own sources and from the federal government.
Members should be in no doubt about the size of the issues faced by this government. Our population has been growing at a rapid rate since 2004, and urban drift has increased significantly over the last 10 years. Our population is ageing and, today, more than ever before, people living in Territory Housing dwellings are remaining in them rather than transferring through government housing to privately purchased accommodation.
Today public housing is very much about social housing, something which changed when the government of the day correctly placed access limits based on income and assets. It is a combination of factors like these which has led to demand for public housing increasing significantly over the last 10 years. The Territory is experiencing high levels of economic and population growth, and there is a demand for more housing right across the board.
In relation to public housing, it should be acknowledged that the 2009 report on government services, produced by the Productivity Commission, found the Howard government reduced real expenditure on public housing between 1998 and 2008 by 24.1%. This has placed a real strain on all public housing systems right across the country. Every jurisdiction is now trying very hard to catch up after 10 years of lost opportunities.
Madam Speaker, I table the public housing wait list.
Housing assistance in the Territory is provided for those on low to middle-incomes, families, and individuals with special needs. Other jurisdictions only provide housing to priority clients alone.
A major influence on demand for public housing in the Northern Territory is our population makeup. Around 30% of our population is Indigenous; over 40% of public housing tenants are Indigenous, as is about half of the waiting list. This is a clear indication of the level of economic and other disadvantage Indigenous Territorians experience. Combining these facts with the Territory’s growing population of just over 2% per annum, much of it within the Indigenous population, it is clear that demand for public housing is unlikely to diminish until the socioeconomic status of Indigenous people improves. We know there is significant gap between public and private markets, so we need to improve housing and rental affordability to ensure people can transition out of public housing into their own homes.
Our population is ageing rapidly, with the number of people in the Territory aged 65 and over expected to treble in the next 30 years. More people are also choosing to stay in the Northern Territory after retirement, and while this is good for the Territory, it has already represented an increase of 60% in applications from seniors over the past two years, and will bring considerable challenges to our public housing into the future. Nonetheless, this also represents an opportunity to find new and innovative ways to look at housing for our senior residents. I am confident, over time, there will be housing options for all seniors which is appropriate and safe. We have already delivered new seniors’ villages at Leanyer and Fannie Bay, and work will start on the construction of Bellamack seniors’ village early in the new year, which will provide an additional 44 units of seniors accommodation.
Recently, public housing wait times have received particular attention in the media. There has been the suggestion this is primarily due to housing stock being sold off. This notion is, quite frankly, simplistic, and in recent years, simply wrong.
Madam Speaker, I table the Sale of Public Housing from the year 1995 to 2008-09. I should also advise I have been using an incorrect figure for the CLP sell-off of public housing. I had been using the figure of 1300 properties sold off between 2000-01 and 2005-06 - the figure is actually 2036. So, the CLP sold off 2036 properties in their last six years in office. It is fairly disgraceful.
It is true, over time, the Northern Territory public housing stock has decreased through the sale of stock. This government has dramatically slowed the sale of public housing the previous government had embarked upon - a massive sell-off. In fact, that tap has been turned off in this current financial year, with less than a handful actually sold. It must be remembered the vast majority of stock which has been sold off, some 67% from 2001 onwards, have allowed former Territory public housing tenants, people on low to middle incomes, the opportunity to own their own home. Many would simply not be able, otherwise, to have the opportunity to own their own home.
There is no argument that wait lists have increased over the past three years - they have - but it is also true that 63%, almost two-thirds, of new allocations in the last financial year were to applicants who had been on the wait list for two years or less.
It is not possible to categorically compare public housing wait times across other jurisdictions as each state has its own method of calculation, and most jurisdictions do not publish wait list times; any information that is published is inconsistent. However, based on the limited national data available, our wait list times compare very reasonably, with 15% of new households waiting less than a year, compared with the national figure of 14%. This means that members of the community on public housing wait lists in other jurisdictions are waiting a comparable amount of time for allocations as those in the Northern Territory. Wait lists for public housing are increasing around the country. At the last Housing ministers conference, I was informed the Victorian and Western Australian housing wait lists grew more than the entire wait list of the Northern Territory just in the last 12 months.
Providing new and refurbished public housing to address wait lists in the Northern Territory is a priority for this government. It is difficult to compare wait lists across jurisdictions due to the vast differences in eligibility criteria. However, in light of the recent debate, I table a jurisdictional comparison of wait lists across Australia from the 2007-08 Commonwealth State Housing Agreement. I acknowledge this provides little comfort for those on our public housing wait list; however, I can assure you we are working very hard to alleviate this situation. Reducing public housing wait times is an enormous challenge due to a range of interconnecting issues on both the supply and demand sides.
On the supply side, it is not just about making more land available or building more public housing. There are complex issues in relation to some of our existing tenancies. For example, this is where family circumstances have changed and people are living in dwellings above their entitlement. This is not an easy matter to resolve as many of our seniors continue to live in public housing despite no longer being eligible to do so based on income, assets, or household size. This situation is the result of past policy decisions, and we are looking at those issues very closely. We know that our highest demand is for one-bedroom properties and that makes up approximately 60% of our wait lists. This group is largely made up of seniors, and that is why we are planning more seniors’ villages to appropriately house this group in the later years of their lives.
Also on the supply side, there are a significant number of old dwellings in our public housing stock, and before these can be allocated, they need to be upgraded to standard. We are fast-tracking this work to ensure repairs and maintenance are carried out in the shortest time frame.
The additional funding stimulus through the Nation Building and Jobs Plan agreement with the Commonwealth is delivering for Territorians in need of housing. To date, more than $2.6m has been spent in updating and repairing 289 public housing dwellings. This has had the combined positive effect of improving housing amenity for residents of these homes, and retaining and creating jobs in the Territory’s building sector.
I acknowledge there are properties which have been vacant for an extended period because of the extensive repairs and maintenance required to bring them back to a habitable standard. This is not acceptable, and my department is focused on improving vacate turnaround times. We are succeeding in this challenge, and I had great pleasure in meeting with one of the families over the weekend who had moved into an upgraded house in Malak. This house was one of 84 recently renovated, and it was great to hand it over to that Territory family.
New public housing construction is under way and will significantly increase over the coming months. However, demand for supported accommodation is increasing at an unprecedented rate. Our population growth is presently the third highest in the country, and the Northern Territory has been characterised by high population growth for several years, including seven-quarters of growth in the last two and one-quarter years. This trend is set to continue for some time due to high birth rates, positive interstate migration, and the Territory continuing to attract business investment.
Our strong economic growth has lead to strong demand and limited affordable housing in the private housing market. While this is good news for homeowners and investors, it places strain on the private rental market. As housing stock in general becomes tighter, the low to middle income members of our community, who might otherwise access the private market, must look to the government to provide public housing as their last chance of obtaining accommodation. This, again, is putting pressure on our wait lists.
Recent rises in the private market have increased significantly and led to an increasing gap between private and public markets. Not unexpectedly, there has been a significant increase in applications for public housing over the past three years; in fact, demand has risen by almost 50% over this period of time. This represents 3522 applications as at 30 June this year. With this comes further complication. There are basic eligibility criteria for public housing applicants, and this is primarily based on numbers of household members and income. However, applicants who are in need of greater assistance - the homeless, those who are experiencing family violence, those with medical or other social issues or disabilities - are appropriately housed ahead of general applicants. This is, as it should be, a humane and egalitarian society.
Over the last three years the number of priority housing applications has almost doubled; a more rapid rate of increase than of the waiting list as a whole. There are unique factors in the Northern Territory which compound this particular issue, but in most jurisdictions there is a large sector of non-government organisations whose primary focus is the provision of accommodation services and community housing options, particularly for members of the community with complex and crisis needs.
Community housing options also include provision of medium- and long-term accommodation and housing at low cost rents. For example, Tasmania has around 50 of these non-government organisations; in Western Australia, there are around 230; and in Victoria there are 31 organisations and agencies providing these services. In the Northern Territory there are non-government organisations which do provide accommodation support options to service a range of community needs, and they do a great job; I have seen them working. As yet, non-government organisations in the Northern Territory have limited ability to extend their services to the provision of medium- to long-term housing and accommodation support.
This means many clients who would, in other jurisdictions, be housed by these non-government organisations are, in fact, public housing clients and therefore on public housing wait lists. It should also be noted these organisations in other jurisdictions have their own housing and accommodation assets and do not need to draw on public housing stock. For example, the 230 organisations in Western Australia manage approximately 5400 dwellings, which is equivalent to the entire Territory housing stock; in Victoria the number is 8347 dwellings, and in Tasmania it is around 1000 properties. We do not have that luxury in the Northern Territory. Non-government organisations now, and in the past, necessarily rely on the provision of stock from the public housing asset base. At present, this represents around 370 dwellings, including housing provided to government agencies such as the Department of Health and Families for short-term and crisis accommodation.
This government wants to encourage and foster non-government organisations to increase their presence in the social and community housing sector in the Northern Territory. This will mean a greater diversity of stock and housing options for those Territorians who need it, and we are committed to growing our non-government sector to provide greater housing options for Territorians. The national partnership agreement and the stimulus package, with the Territory government, are delivering dwellings for non-government organisations to deliver and manage. I have had positive discussions with a range of non-government agencies, and I am confident, with this government’s continued support, we can build on the gap between the private and public housing markets.
We are also establishing the affordable housing company which will provide affordable rental properties. Similar companies already operate around Australia, and I have met with several of them. The sooner the company is established, the sooner we will have affordable housing on the market for those in need. Looking ahead, there will be increased pressure on public housing, and we are embracing the issues with a range of policies, programs and innovative ideas to ensure all Territorians, now and in the future, have access to a safe, secure housing and accommodation options that best meet their needs.
It is clear the answers do not lie in quick fixes, which is why back in March I was pleased to join the Chief Minister in announcing the most comprehensive overhaul of our housing system in the Northern Territory. As I said then, and I say now, this government is committed to ensuring there is more affordable housing available to buy and rent, and the Housing the Territory strategy is a package of reforms which will get the balance right with more land, more places to buy, new places to rent, and new public housing stock.
A record $390m is being invested in housing programs this year; this excludes the strategic investment in public housing to meet the requirements of those most in need. For example, as I have said, our ageing population will mean more seniors’ accommodation will be required, so we are increasing the supply of seniors’ housing through the planned construction of seniors’ villages at Bellamack and Larapinta. At Bellamack, this will consist of 44 one- and two-bedroom units, and details for Larapinta will be released when they are finalised very soon. I have already mentioned the Homeless National Partnership Agreement and this will deliver an additional 32 homes for families on our public housing wait lists.
Addressing the past practices of building vast public housing estates, which ultimately create urban ghettos and impacts on our public housing wait lists as these estates are redeveloped and their residents rehoused - which is a short-term flow-on effect - will result in the redevelopment of a far more appropriate mix of community, public and private dwellings, which will ensure safer and sustainable housing outcomes for the communities involved.
The public housing asset base will also be improved by the Parap Gateway redevelopment, which is the first major redevelopment of public housing, and is a long-term investment in the future of Parap. When completed, Parap Gateway will be a mixture of blocks of public, private and affordable units with investment by the Affordable Housing Rental Company. The affordable housing rental company will be a semi-commercial operation operating at arm’s length from government and providing rental housing for low to moderate income households at an affordable level and will increase the range of available housing options for Territorians. A tender was recently awarded; work has gone ahead at a rapid rate and is, I believe, just about complete. Redeveloping the old Wirrina site will get the balance right between the private and public housing, and also means less antisocial behaviour, better conditions for renters, and makes Parap a much safer and better place to live and visit.
This government is also committed to the National Rental Affordability Scheme, or NRAS. The Northern Territory has not done well in this area with only two applicants in the last two rounds, both of which were ineligible. Our private sector can do better, and I am sure they will; we must do what we can to ensure they have access to this initiative. The NRAS scheme will deliver new rental stock at 20% below the market rate; and I am looking forward to organisations coming forward to receive the assistance they need to submit a successful application. For this reason I have asked the department to appoint a dedicated officer whose sole purpose will be to identify potential applicants and assist organisations in the development of their submissions to NRAS. I look forward to advising the House of the successful applicants as they are awarded in the future.
Construction of 22 new public housing dwellings is also being funded through the Commonwealth government’s Operations Stimulus, a $505m package to the Northern Territory designed to boost economic activity and support jobs for Territorians in these dark economic times; and contains almost $60m for public and community housing. Construction of four new homes has commenced in Darwin, Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, and the first dwellings are anticipated to be complete as soon as next month.
As I said, transition out of public housing must be a focal point to address the public housing wait lists. One successful approach is for the government to assess homebuyers through shared equity arrangements. Since 2004, 1208 households have been assisted in purchasing their own homes, and last year 101 households were assisted through $25.8m in loans and shared equity purchases. This year, Homestart NT was introduced on 1 June and has already attracted a great deal of attention from buyers in the low to middle sections of our household market. So far this financial year, 44 households have been assisted to purchase their own home, and a further 27 households are awaiting settlement. This is a great endorsement of our policy, but there are many more in our community who need ongoing support. We know some members of our community are better supported in their accommodation needs through non-government organisations, and we are investing in programs to improve their availability. This will also help reduce the demand for public housing.
For example, a component of Operation Stimulus aims to address homelessness across the Northern Territory. Three applications for projects under this program have been approved by the Department of Local Government and Housing which will allow the Salvation Army, the Catholic Diocese, and St Vincent de Paul to assist with providing options for the homeless. This assistance comprises two major projects for the Salvation Army, and one each for the Catholic Diocese and St Vincent de Paul on Dick Ward Drive in Coconut Grove.
The first of the Salvation Army projects will be constructed in Stuart Park at a cost of $1.6m, and will provide crisis accommodation for women suffering domestic violence. The second Salvation Army project will be the construction of crisis accommodation for homeless men at Goyder Road in Alice Springs, at a cost of $1.4m. Collaboration projects under Operation Stimulus between the Catholic Diocese and St Vincent de Paul will be constructed on Dick Ward Drive in Coconut Grove at a cost of $5.2m, and will provide 20 units for homeless.
In Alice Springs we will deliver a number of projects under Operation Stimulus, including 35 units for renal patients, four apartments for public housing, and 24 units for transitional accommodation. The Salvation Army will also be constructing eight units on Goyder Road for homeless men, which will significantly increase accommodation options in Alice Springs.
Public housing wait lists will also be eased by programs delivered under the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness. Under this agreement, the Northern Territory will invest over $2.5m this year on capital expenditure under the new A Place to Call Home program, along with funding for new homeless services across the regions. Over the life of the program, 32 new homes will be built or purchased and made available to people experiencing homelessness, along with a range of support services to help them break the cycle of homelessness.
Other initiatives under the National Partnership Agreement currently being facilitated by the Northern Territory government include: street-to-home initiatives for chronically homeless people, support for private and public tenants to sustain their tenancies through tenancy support, advocacy, case management, financial counselling and referral services. Assistance is also is being provided for people leaving child protection services, correctional and health facilities to access and maintain stable, affordable accommodation.
Recently, I announced $1m for expressions of interest from the non-government sector to provide transitional accommodation options before Christmas. I have been pleased with the level of interest and enthusiasm shown by the sector which has been working very hard to come up with innovative ways to have transitional housing in place quickly with support services available on-site instantly, I look forward to the outcome of the EOI.
The Northern Territory government is committed to tackling homelessness and social housing issues, and additional funding will continue to be rolled out to assist community-based agencies to provide accommodation services for those with special needs who require ongoing support. This funding will provide community groups with capital funding so they can purchase, upgrade, or renovate accommodation for people in need, and will assist those organisations to provide supported or unsupported accommodation services to expand their existing services.
Two weeks, I ago travelled to Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs to hear firsthand the ideas of non-government organisations in those regions for accommodation options for people in need. I was impressed with their dedication and ideas and, in future, I would like these groups to continue to meet on a regular basis and provide feedback directly to me so we can consider what assistance can be provided. We have a bigger group here in Darwin, and it will serve to inform them of regional needs.
If we are to improve access to affordable housing, the gap between the public and private housing market must be bridged. Improving affordability will reduce the demand for public housing. We are addressing this by fast-tracking land release and ensuring affordable options are available with all new land released.
This government has set aside 15% of new land releases for affordable housing and public housing in Bellamack and Palmerston East. This means approximately 550 new houses and blocks for affordable public housing will be entering the marketplace - that is 550 options for low to middle income earners to enter the housing market. Another example of this government supporting low to middle income earners to purchase their own homes is the recent sale of units at Emery Avenue. This initiative will ultimately allow 16 families who might otherwise be on the public housing wait list, to enter the housing market. I was pleased to advise the House all the units there have been sold, and final settlements will take place at the end of this month. That was a great option put forward for those low to middle income families.
Working on reducing the public housing wait list is a significant challenge, and I will report to this House every October on the wait lists. We know we cannot fix our waiting lists overnight, and we know in the last three years they have grown rapidly. We are on the right track, and with significant support from the federal government, we are undertaking a massive social housing construction program to deliver hundreds of new public housing dwellings.
It must be recognised it is not just about spending money. A wide-ranging review of public housing across the Northern Territory, including the type of housing and the role of non-government organisations, will need to be undertaken. This will inform future policy, and further announcements regarding this will be made later in the year.
We need to do everything we can to get our wait lists down to ensure Territorians who need public housing assistance get it as quickly as possible. It will take some time to resolve the issues, and this government is working hard to find solutions. We are committed to delivering new social housing stock, increasing housing affordability, addressing the gap between the private and public markets and rental markets, and increasing the non-government housing sector.
The Housing the Territory strategy sets this government’s policy for the future, and I look forward to announcing further initiatives to ensure all Territorians, no matter where they live, have access to appropriate, affordable and safe housing.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, this feels like dj vu talking about public housing, in particular the public housing waiting list. I am sure it was only yesterday we spoke about this and highlighted the problems we have here in the Territory. They do not appear to be getting any better; in fact, they seem to be getting worse. I will say again - this government has failed to plan or to develop a public infrastructure investment program for the continued growth of the Territory. This failure has resulted in pain and suffering for many Territorians, and makes the Territory an unfavourable place to stay, invest and bring up a family. It has placed additional financial burdens on industry as they struggle to find accommodation for employees they recruit from interstate. This has resulted in many situations of employers resorting to fly-in fly-out situations which, as we know, does not always bring the best or the majority of benefits to the Territory.
There is considerable strain on the housing sector which services people with special needs. There is a limited amount of this type of housing, yet there is an enormous growth requirement in this area which forces these people into situations which would be unacceptable in any other part of this country.
Under this Labor government we now have the lowest level of home ownership. People cannot afford to buy a home or unit of any shape or size and, if they do, will be struggling to keep up their mortgage payments if interest rates continue to rise. We have the highest rental levels in the country. The average cost of a house to rent is $560 per week - and that is an average! We have the highest level of homelessness in the country. We also have a new type of person here - the working homeless - people who have a full-time job but cannot get affordable accommodation, so they are forced to live in their cars or their vans.
We have almost the highest cost of housing in the country, higher than the cost of housing in Sydney, which used to be one of the more expensive places to live in Australia. Now it is Darwin. We have the highest waiting list for public housing in the country - up to 55 months in Darwin and Casuarina for three-bedroom dwellings. Families have no chance of moving from public housing to private housing and, this in itself will place extra burdens on the public housing system. What normally happens, as I said before, is people use rental public housing accommodation as a stepping stone to get into the private market. However, given the high cost of getting into the private market, more people are staying longer in the public housing system; yet we know we have greater demand on our public housing system. And that is just for starters.
This government has been in government for nine years and the minister says today they have been working hard to build more public housing in the bush. Well, that is a bit of a joke as they have not built one house in two years under SIHIP, and yet they say: ‘We are working hard.’ I do not think so. Minister, you have not delivered one single new house in the bush under SIHIP, but $45m has been spent, so far, on this program.
Yes, our population has been growing rapidly since 2004, and this government has been ignoring that for the last nine years, which is why we are in the current crisis situation. I draw members’ attention to one of the graphs I have here which details our population growth. Does this government not do population growth projections? Surely they would somewhere in their departments. They would have known in 2004 what was ahead, they would have known what population growth would have been expected after ConocoPhillips completed the LNG plant. And, of course, we all know about our ageing population; experts have been saying for nearly 10 years this country has an ageing population, yet the minister, only today, says we have an ageing population.
Let me tell you some other facts which may have escaped the minister’s attention: we also have an ageing workforce; we have ageing infrastructure; we have roads coming to the end of their economic life; we have a power station which has serious issues with maintenance of turbines; we have hospital waiting lists growing exponentially; law and order is out of control, and we are losing skilled workers due to the lack of affordable accommodation in Darwin and elsewhere.
The minister says there is a need to improve housing and rental affordability - high on rhetoric and low on detail. Only recently it was announced the Territory had the lowest take-up of the federal government’s first homeowners’ boost. Out of approximately 150 000 recipients of the first homeowners’ boost since October 2008, just 1147 were in the Northern Territory. To put that figure in perspective, the Australian Capital Territory had 2400 first homeowners accessing this grant scheme in the same period. So, despite the Australian Capital Territory having a population just 50% higher than the Northern Territory, it had 100% more homeowners taking up the grants. With 1% of the national population, the Territory should have been receiving 1% of the grant, which would have seen around 1530 successful applications. The minister said, when this became public, he did not know why we had not been successful. I am not even sure if he knew about the applications. The minister should have known how many applications had gone in to try to access these grants, and he should have been in Canberra helping these people, helping the consortiums, to be successful. Now he says: ‘I will have to work harder to help us get these grants.’ Well, it is a little too late.
I have no issue with the provision of accommodation for seniors. In fact, it is a good thing and we should clearly have more of it with our ageing population. We will need much more of this style of accommodation in the near future. The key item with seniors’ accommodation is it needs to be very close to the services, given the nature of the residents and their age. So, where is the planning for seniors in the rural area? What planning has been made for the ageing population in the rural area, which you know is a big group of people? Why does the government not let the unit complex near the Humpty Doo Shopping Centre expand, despite applications? Perhaps the minister does not know about this housing requirement in the rural area; which I find surprising, given he has a rural electorate. Public housing stocks have decreased and this government has failed to keep pace with the demolition of blocks. Over the last nine years of Labor we have seen very little new housing stock come onto the market.
The waiting lists are almost the worst in Australia – which is unacceptable - but to be expected from this Labor government which purports to care for the socially disadvantaged, but not reflected in their policies or their outcomes.
I have an 81-year-old woman in my electorate who lost her husband last year. She has been approved to receive public housing, a one-bedroom unit. She is an approved priority one tenant and has been told it is a 12 month minimum waiting period before she can get into her unit in an urban area. This woman is not particularly frail, but she is old and she is alone. I say this is not good enough.
Then there is the case of an 18-year-old woman who requires special housing due to her mental health issues. Her carers have been told that she cannot get anything under 12 months, despite being a priority person, as well. So she is forced to live in respite care while she waits and waits for public housing.
The minister compares us to other jurisdictions, and I ask for what purpose? It is like comparing apples with oranges. How can you compare the Territory with its population demographics, geography, high Indigenous population, and high turnover in population with states such as Western Australia or New South Wales which are far bigger and far more established? To my way of thinking, it does not relate. We need to look inwards at our self, at our own issues, and not compare ourselves to our neighbours. Even when the minister compares the Northern Territory with other jurisdictions, he uses raw data rather than adjusted data which give a more accurate picture.
One of the problems with this government, as I previously mentioned, is their inability to plan, and they have planned to fail. The classic example is they have unilaterally forced public housing into single dwelling suburbs taking away community purpose land, and this has been seen across Palmerston and the northern suburbs. That is unacceptable and goes to the core of what this government has been caught out trying to do - play catch-up slowly - along the way, mucking up zonings across town. Why is it okay for the government to change zoning at the drop of a hat but, when a resident seeks to do something similar, they are told they cannot do it even though it is the same size block?
I turn my attention now to the vacancies in some public housing which, by the minister’s admission, are for extended periods of time because of ‘extensive repairs and maintenance that is required to bring them back to a habitable standing’. My question is: what type of tenant has been in that public housing and not been checked so it has to have extensive repairs to make it habitable? Why is the damage so extensive and to such a level that it has to be off the market for a long period of time? Surely, there is a contract to repair and maintain these houses, and surely in that contract there are KPIs to know whether the contractor is keeping up; and there would be reviews of this contract. So why are there extended periods, when there should not be? This is not acceptable, and the minister, and the government, needs to do much more work in this area, so we get a speedier turnaround.
I have written to the minister about properties in Nightcliff which have been vacant for two years. Surely, it does not take two years to make a three-bedroom house habitable. There are houses in Essington Avenue which have been vacant up to three months. When you drive past these houses, it does not seem there is anything particularly wrong with them - they are fenced, locked up, they are clean and tidy; yet, they are empty. I cannot understand why this is so when we have a housing crisis and public housing waiting lists of up to 55 months.
I also want to ask the minister about establishing the affordable housing company which will provide affordable rental properties. This is not a bad idea; however, the tenders closed on 30 July and, it is my understanding the tenders have to be reviewed and go through the Procurement Review Board. I would not expect this company to be set up within six months, which takes us well into the Dry Season next year. Then, who knows? The way this government dilly-dallies around, it could be much longer than that. I am not sure this company will be established as quickly as it should be. I urge the minister to keep a very careful eye on it so it is established sooner rather than later.
There is much in here about affordable rental companies and building seniors’ villages at Bellamack and Larapinta. My understanding is not much has been done at Larapinta, but I will leave that to my colleague from Alice Springs to talk about.
The minister talked about the homelessness national partnership agreement. That is all very well, but how will this agreement – and this NT government - bring down our high level of homelessness? It is written about in our papers daily and we see photographs of people living on excavated ridges in the Darwin area, and it is just not acceptable. We know we have people living on our beaches in their vans and cars, and living rough on the Esplanade. Whilst we have a high homeless rate, I hazard a guess it is actually much higher than the statistics and data tell us.
Some weeks ago, the Country Liberals suggested transitionary housing accommodation on the old ConocoPhillips construction site. It had the support of non-government organisations which could manage this, and we had the support of families who would be happy and willing to live in this style of accommodation, albeit temporary. Then we found, after we made the announcement and it was well received by the community, the minister summoned the non-government organisation to ask them for ideas to help with this crisis situation. Rather than say: ‘This is the idea which I believe should go forward’, the minister has given them $1m to come up with ideas. That tells me the minister does not really have any idea how to tackle the current crisis we have with public accommodation and accommodation generally.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I might leave it at this stage because, really, the rest of the statement is not worth commenting on. It is very light and it has many typos in it; but I will not go there. The minister also did not read it correctly; he said something was excluded when it should have been included. I feel for the people who are living rough. The member for Nelson said in one of his adjournments that the Bloodwood Caravan Park is closing down and around 30 tenants will be turfed out onto the street. These are low income people. They will probably have to go into public housing, but we know they will not be able to because there is no public housing available for couples, families, individuals or anyone. They are just going to have to do it tough, and that is a very sad and tragic situation. The statement is high on rhetoric, but low on substance, and that is a tragedy.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Deputy Speaker, I believe one of the good things about the housing debate we are having is that we are actually having a housing debate. I know that might sound curious, but for a long time when we talked about the homeless, the opposition would call those people itinerants. It was like there was a forgotten cohort of Territorians, and the whole issue around their housing needs was actually a blame and divide issue. I am really pleased to hear that we are debating housing needs, and including in that debate the issue of homelessness.
Homelessness comes about for many reasons, and in many forms. We know there is a great deal of homelessness around our urban centres as Territorians come in and out of those urban centres to access services. This is why we need a range of housing models to deal with those particular needs, whether it is transitional housing or short-term accommodation. What we have seen is an evolution in housing policy from 2001 onwards with the Labor government, which inherited a housing policy of bricks and mortar only, to a housing policy which now looks at how we handle the needs of people through public and social housing, and how that fits with the supported accommodation models within the housing remit.
I know the policy evolution has been significant in how we handle clients within our housing stock. Obviously, we are talking about public housing, in this instance, because that is what this statement is about. I will pick up on the broader issues of public, private and affordable housing. In the context of public housing, there are a range of clients and they all need to meet the income criteria. They are the lower socioeconomic members of our community, and they range in needs. Many of our housing clients have highly complex needs, and many of them require the supported accommodation model. An example of the supported accommodation model was talked about in Question Time today regarding Team Health and what they are doing with mental health clients.
Similarly, we have a range of programs in place with funding organisations to assist Territorians coming from remote communities to urban centres with the living issues they find in an urban environment which is quite a different structure to the communities from which they come. Also dealing with Responsible Behaviour Agreements, putting security in place in the large complexes where, traditionally, there have been problems with behaviours of some residents. I say some, because there are many people living in those large complexes who are trying to quietly get on with their lives and do not want to be disturbed by the element and poor behaviour, to say the least, of their worst neighbours.
It is, sincerely, good to be raising public housing, and I am delighted the agreement the member for Nelson struck with the Chief Minister will report on public housing waiting lists because we will be able to track whether we are making progress and, if we are not making progress scrutinise why not, and continue this critically important housing debate.
The housing debate rages equally in terms of bush needs and urban needs. We know we have a significant deficit in bush housing, and SIHIP is specifically about housing to deal with those needs. We know five years alone is not going to get the Territory to the point of meeting the deficit of housing needs in the bush. That is why we are working so hard and collaboratively with the Commonwealth government on SIHIP to get further funding agreements beyond five years, which have been discussed, into at least a decade long program and beyond for housing in the bush. I have always said we need to do both, and if you only take one aspect, it just will not work. We need to fix and create good, healthy, living environments across all our communities, and central to that is appropriate shelter. Equally, we need to address the shelter needs in our urban centres.
Where have we come in housing stress existing across the housing market, public as well as private? We have come through very strong population and economic growth, which has placed enormous pressure on housing in those strong growth and urban centres. We recognise we have a deficit of housing in the bush. There was already housing pressure out there and that is also putting pressure on a range of government services to support this client base.
Australian Bureau of Statistics population forecasts have been round 1%. The member for Goyder asks: ‘How can you get your forecast so wrong?’ Well, the Australian Bureau of Statistics got their forecast so wrong; equally, Treasury got their forecast wrong. The Australia Bureau of Statistics is an authority the opposition, on one hand likes to quote; on the other hand, is very dismissive of what their forecasts are. Try to have your cake and eat it too - quite a hypocritical approach. Forecasts are forecasts. Governments rely on forecasts. We rely on the experts and statisticians who provide those forecasts, and we plan according to those forecasts. However, we have seen growth far outstripping those forecasts. Yes, we are now playing catch-up in housing stock because population growth forecasts have been outstripped by reality.
The reality of population growth has meant the Territory is providing services for an extra 26 000 people more than was forecast. Clearly, we are planning for this growth. We have the Housing the Territory strategy which brings together all the elements to address housing across the spectrum - private and public housing and rental stock - bringing in rental assistance schemes for low to middle income earners, and also ensuring we have recognition of the supported accommodation needs in the Housing the Territory strategy for high needs and disadvantaged people in our community. Housing is not one thing: it is all these elements working together, with the core of government land release ensuring housing stock has land to build on.
The opposition would like to believe we have being sitting back and doing nothing. That is absolute nonsense; it flies in the face of fact and reality. We are the first government in the history of the Territory to mandate 15% of lots in new Crown land releases are provided for social and affordable housing. Put simply, land that the government has control over, Crown land, land not in private hands, we are mandating for affordable and social housing. You might ask the question: why do that? Because it creates a seamless stream of ongoing new stock for people in the public housing area, for social housing, and also, importantly, a stream of stock coming onto the affordable housing market for people who need assistance into the housing market and home ownership.
That has been a seismic policy shift, not yet quite grasped by the opposition. When they see what that does in Bellamack, Johnston, Zuccoli, and Mitchell, they may start to understand the concept. What I have been delighted with is, in negotiations with Palmerston CDU, with Professor Barney Glover and his board, they have accepted the government mandating 15%, and they have picked it up and included it in their Palmerston CDU land turn-off, which is about 500 lots. So mandating 15% of lots in new Crown land release for social and affordable housing is a seismic shift in housing policy in the Territory - and it took a Labor government to do it.
We are establishing the first affordable housing rental company at Wirrina in Parap which will provide a better mix of public, private and community dwellings. Getting a mix right is critical in terms of housing policy. Research shows the need for percentages of public housing to be spread through the community - the term is salt and peppered. Having enclaves of only public housing creates social problems the Territory has seen in the urban centres for too long. It is not exclusive to the Territory. Enclaves of social and public housing anywhere - Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide, Hobart – create social problems because they condense the most disadvantaged members of society, and that breeds the problems we live with daily, here and elsewhere. It is an outdated, outmoded and poor approach to housing which we have inherited. The previous government that did it was not alone. Practically every government everywhere did that. So I am not saying in a political sense it is their fault and we are dealing with it now; every government, everywhere built concentrations of public housing.
There was a shift in research and understanding through the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s about what occurs in these enclaves. The United Kingdom has led this research, they have been phenomenal at it, and jurisdictions in Australia have picked it up. In the Territory we are going to get into that better space, too. We will not create enclaves. We will spread the public housing mix, salt and pepper it through our communities, our suburbs, so we do not have hot box areas where there are the horrible social outcomes we have seen, and are still experiencing.
Wirrina is our first example in a density environment - public, private and community dwellings together. Decanting Wirrina was the first step, and we have done that. It is now bulldozed, as you heard the member for Fannie Bay say, and that project is actually ahead of time. We understand the importance of getting the Wirrina project right, because it is quite iconic and holds out hope to the enclaves of public housing that exist. I know, because I have one in Malak, in my electorate, where the density is far too high; Shiers Street has been raised in debates in this parliament, and we know where they exist in our suburbs. As the government progresses and correlates the resources, post-Wirrina, which is the next one to be redeveloped in this way? We have said this is the start of a change of policy so, not only are we creating new public housing stock which will be spread through the community rather than concentrated in enclaves, we will go back and deal with the enclaves which currently exist in a systematic way which provides for a range of stocks and a range of mix. So, contrary to the member for Goyder’s aspersions that we are getting rid of public housing tenants in Parap because we do not believe it fits the social mix - that is wrong. Wirrina actually includes public housing.
To do any of this in public housing, the government must work with the non-government sector. They are very good at providing client and management services to public housing tenants, and it is the intention and aim of this government to work with the non-government sector. So, for the member for Goyder to say the Minister for Housing calls in the non-government sector and asks them for ideas - that is what we should be doing. If we want real outcomes in supported accommodation and crisis accommodation, if we are not engaging the sector which actually delivers crisis accommodation, then we are ignoring their expertise and their capacity. I have seen the result of the minister’s engagement with the crisis accommodation providers - Anglicare, the Red Cross, the Salvation Army. These are all experienced crisis accommodation providers, all very good non-government and not-for-profit organisations. They have ideas, and it is a wise way to invest $1m in that sector to deal with crisis accommodation, where we have a need. I congratulate our Minister for Housing for that initiative.
Whilst we have a seamless stream of new stock coming online through the policy shift to mandate 15% for affordable and social housing in government land turn-off, whilst we are dealing with existing enclaves - Wirrina is an example of that – and the non-government sector regarding crisis accommodation, we also need to build transitional housing, seniors’ housing, and the short-term accommodation housing. There are real resources going into all these areas - a mix of Territory and Commonwealth government resources.
An example of that: Budget 2009-10 delivered a record $390m for housing, a 92% increase on the previous year. If you believe the spin of the CLP that we are not doing anything and we are ignoring housing stress, the reality is we are making a $390m investment in housing to tackle the stress - a 92% increase in housing funding. We are building the new suburbs at Palmerston East; Bellamack is selling off-the-plan, 3700 new lots to potentially house up to 15 000 people or more. Bellamack, Johnston, Zuccoli and Mitchell, as I said, have 15% mandated for public and affordable housing, which is critical. That will provide for something like 550 new homes over the next five years in the public and affordable sectors. That is significant new stock coming into the area of need.
Bellamack already has lots reserved for public and affordable housing. Territory Housing will manage the establishment of housing on those lots, working with Urban Pacific and Brierty on affordable housing packages which will meet the Homestart NT price points. We are working with the Rudd government; we could not make this significant investment in bush or urban housing without the Rudd government; there is no doubt about it.
It is no secret the Howard government reduced its real expenditure on public housing between 1998 and 2008 by 24.1% – a 24.1% cut in housing funding under the Howard government. That is what the states and territories all had to struggle with. We were not on our own - we all had to struggle with that. It is an absolute disgrace. It was a decade of lost opportunity and all states and territories are now playing catch-up.
Operation Stimulus from the Rudd government gives us that catch-up; an almost $60m package for public and community housing. Under this stimulus spending 22 new public housing dwellings will be built, and 289 dwellings upgraded, which are in too poor condition to be in stock, coming back into stock, and 22 brand new ones. Congratulations. More than 80 of those renovations have been completed and, as you heard from the Minister for Housing, he was with a family in Malak moving into their new home. The opposition likes to close their eyes and ears and pretend this is not happening, but we have real families moving into real homes which have been refurbished under the stimulus package and this government’s emphasis on housing.
Construction of four new homes has commenced in Darwin, Alice Springs, and Tennant Creek, with the first dwellings anticipated for completion as soon as next month. The package is also providing targeted funding to address homelessness, working with the Salvation Army, the Catholic Diocese and St Vincent de Paul. In partnership with the Commonwealth, the Territory will deliver a $15.81m package, A Place to Call Home, building 32 new homes and including services to reduce homelessness and rough sleeping - thank God we are calling it homelessness now. I have been welcoming the change in language for years, it is important and I hope you stick to it. I hope you continue to refer to people as homeless rather than itinerants, because it is important.
Mr Giles: We will change our language if you change your policy.
Ms LAWRIE: We are improving and evolving our policies.
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms LAWRIE: The affordable housing rental company is innovative, it is new, and the Minister for Housing is working hard on bringing it into the Territory.
As I have said, our seniors are critically important - they are a specialist group. We have seen the success of the seniors’ villages, started by the CLP - I tip my hat to that - and continued under Labor, and we will continue to construct seniors’ villages. We are constructing a 44-bed seniors’ village at Bellamack which will be built on the same model we delivered in Fannie Bay, Leanyer and Coconut Grove - because it works. Works are under way on a proposed new seniors’ accommodation at Larapinta in Alice Springs.
Homestart NT has been a fantastic package and, as I said, it has evolved.
Mr KNIGHT: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move an extension of time for the Deputy Chief Minister, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LAWRIE: I thank members for the extra time; I will try not to take up all of it.
Homestart NT is about tackling affordability and ensuring that Territorians get assistance into the housing market, because we know there is strength in the growth of housing prices, so we need to continually evolve this loans program to ensure it keeps pace with market requirements and demands.
How are we structuring these low deposit home loans and shared equity schemes to help low to middle income earners come into home ownership? The income thresholds and the purchase price points are being amended. Currently, we have structured it to make it affordable for low to middle income earners to access about 40% of the housing market, and for people to use only 30% of their income for loan servicing. That meets the affordable test, and means this formula is an affordable measure for housing. Commencing on 1 June this year, 44 families have benefited and purchased homes under Homestart NT - a total of over $13m in loans.
We have continued Homestart from previous reforms which we had under the HomeNorth scheme. We looked at how the HomeNorth scheme helped; I do not have the figures with me, but I recall at one stage we were tracking at well over 1000 home loans. HomeNorth was very popular. We looked at improving the Homestart NT scheme because we saw many singles benefiting from HomeNorth, and we wanted to gear Homestart to help more families into this scheme. This is for people who may not necessarily be first homebuyers, but people who currently do not own their own home. We know people face difficulty when there is a family break-up, for example, they go into renting after the family home break up, and they are not first homebuyers, and they really struggle to get back into the marketplace. Homestart NT is a scheme which recognises relationship breakdown occurs in our community, and helps people get back on their feet and into home ownership.
Homestart NT is also available to current public housing tenants. This is a really beautiful part of the policy, and I have seen it happening in my electorate where I have high density public housing. I have long-term public housing tenants, people who have been in their homes for 20-odd years; it is their home, they are public housing tenants, but it is their home. Over that time they have gone from struggle street when the kids were little, to the kids growing up through the school system, and they are starting to make a better path for their family income. However, they are still low income, they are still the battlers, and the big banks will not touch them. They have used the government’s HomeNorth, and then Homestart NT schemes to buy into public housing stock, to buy their own home. Yes, it is stock coming off the stock list, but they have lived in it for 20 years, they have raised their kids in that home; many of them are raising their grandkids in those homes. They will not necessarily be able to come straight in; they need 100% equity, which is why this shared equity is so critical to these housing tenants.
Here is an example of how innovative this scheme is: a Territorian who recently accessed Homestart NT is Debbie Barnett. She is a small business woman and I know her business and how hard she works - she is a fantastic woman. She is quoted as saying: ‘The Territory government’s Homestart NT scheme provided us with what we needed to make the transition from renting to home owner. I would definitely recommend it to anyone looking to buy their own home’. These are words from a hard-working, small business woman, and a Territorian.
There is no simple, silver bullet solution to housing. As you heard in my speech, there are many things which need to happen across the spectrum, across the range of housing required, and underpinning that, of course, is government land release. We have fast-tracked land release, but I recognise Bellamack took too long. Bellamack was what I call a controlled area; we put in a whole range of conditions there and went through a two-phase expression of interest process to get that control in place. What we saw, and why we went with Bellamack, was land banking occurring. We had a development without controls in place on the number of blocks people could buy. Time lines were required and there was land banking; that is what we saw occurring in Palmerston. The Buildstart NT scheme helped address land banking by giving incentives to people sitting on their land to actually go in and construct.
Mr Mills: Oh, come on.
Ms LAWRIE: New stock is new stock - and I hear the Leader of the Opposition say: ‘Oh, come on’, but he does not get it. Talk to the builders and listen to the builders; they say: ‘Thank God for Buildstart, because it has brought on new construction.’ I have seen land which had been land banked, and I have figures upwards of 500 lots land banked across the Darwin/Palmerston area - 500 lots sitting there empty - nothing built on it.
Buildstart has bought 300 - tick. We need to continue, that is why we have a roll-out of land released, new suburbs, that is why we are working with the Commonwealth government and the DHA to get the large division of Muirhead under way. There will be a great opportunity there.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! In this new age of technology I just received an e-mail from one of the Treasurer’s fans. The fan would like you to be closer to the microphone so they can actually hear what you are saying. They are having trouble hearing you.
Ms LAWRIE: Madam Speaker, I appreciate the interjection from the member for Port Darwin. Often they tell me I am talking too loudly or shouting; so there you go.
Mr Elferink: I am just passing on a message.
Ms LAWRIE: I will do my best.
So, ensuring we have a range of products across the marketplace to deal with housing needs is critically important. Buildstart has been a product; Homestart NT is a product; new suburbs are a product; new public housing stock and affordable housing to seamlessly flow through that is a product; an affordable home rental scheme is a product. Ensuring we work with the non-government sector is critically important for crisis accommodation. All these things are happening together under this government’s Housing the Territory strategy.
We have built from a very low base. There was no mandated policy for affordable and public housing …
Members interjecting.
Ms LAWRIE: … government Crown release, there was none; we had to put that in place. We had to come off a deficit of the CLP selling off 2000 public housing stock. Everyone around at the time remembers the advertisements in the paper; public housing stocks being flogged off by the CLP when they were scrabbling for cash. Well, we are wearing the consequences of that. You lose 2000 out of your stock, and you wear the consequences of that forever.
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms LAWRIE: Contrary to the CLP who flogged it off, what we did with our public housing stock was to sell it to the person living in it to assist them into home ownership through the HomeNorth scheme and the Homestart scheme. The only other stock we sold in that time was inhabitable stock. We changed the policies we inherited. Now we are turning off land to ensure we are able to meet our growth. As I said, our population growth has far outstripped the forecasts: 26 000 extra people here putting stress on our housing market. As I have said to people, and you have to understand …
Mr Conlan: Three years ago the market was talking about lack of land.
Ms LAWRIE: … living in the Territory to get this - I know we have many newbies, Johnny-come-latelys on the other side - defence movements have a critical impact on housing markets in Darwin and Palmerston with significant numbers of people coming in and out. For example, with people re-deployed from Timor, no one stops and says: ‘What is the housing market like? Is it already tight? Can we re-deploy to Darwin, or shall we do it to Perth or Adelaide?’ or wherever. They redeploy here, and we get an enormous flood of troops. Defence is critical to our economy and they play a great role in our economy.
I am a sister of defence personnel. I have lived on base and I understand defence. I love defence and I will stand up for defence any day. But the reality of managing stock is the need to take defence into the picture, and in the past, governments have not worked with defence to ensure we understand their housing needs as well as understanding the broader public housing needs and the private housing needs. They have to be in the picture which is why I have been in discussions with DHA to ensure we understand their stock needs and flow needs through the years. They have to be in the picture so we can avoid the influx stress.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Deputy Speaker, if this document is not the biggest excuse for bad planning, then I do not know what is. I am absolutely amazed. It is true the Housing Minister has taken a caning this week, in both this House and, of course, the media. You would have expected the Chief Minister to have come out and saved him. Instead, he feeds him to the wolves by getting him to try to explain to Territorians that he is a successful minister and all he does glistens with gold. Well, it certainly does not glisten with gold. In fact, it is a wonder we can keep the lights on in this place with his management. The Chief Minister, yesterday, said that he supported the minister - the word was ‘yes’ - so I can only assume that is full support for everything the minister has done. Therefore, the Chief Minister trades at the same level as the Minister for Housing.
Today we listen to more gloss and more excuses. All the way through this document there are excuses for why we are where we are. That is all it is - excuses. And we are supposed to believe you are going in this new direction and you are going to solve all the problems, and we are to trust you.
You had had a couple of ministers walk out of this government recently because they did not trust this government to deliver and actually put money where it should be going; they did not trust the Cabinet. We know one has come back, but here we have another ex-minister, who is now an Independent, who walked out due to the lack of trust. What frightens me in this place is what happened to that ex-minister, what happened to the Independent member - she was targeted personally for walking out, rather than the reasons why she walked out. Why was the media not interested in investigating the reasons why? The reason someone would walk away from a party they grew up with and loved. Basically, most people are rusted-on Labor voters in society, and then you have the wonderful conservative side. But you have people born into this religion, if you like, the Labor Party, yet you have someone so fed up with mistrust and bad management they are prepared to walk out on that institution. I say that is a failed government. Yet the media here concentrated on trying to undermine - with the help of the government, of course - the minister, without even a look at the reasons why she walked out.
I have a number of issues with this document and I wondered how to best address this today. I thought maybe the best thing is to relay some of the issues which have come into my office in recent times. They are all to do with public housing and other issues this minister has been in charge of. I have had complaints about the small Bellamack blocks - bad planning - overturned because you are now doing something different. I have had residents coming in who need the THA bond assistance due to the long waiting time for THA homes, but they are only allowed to look at homes for $300 a week; they cannot get a place in Palmerston for $300. What is really sad is when they went back and asked: ‘Are we able to put our own money in, additional money above $300 a week?’, they were told: ‘No, you are not allowed to use more that $300 a week’ - no flexibility in your department even though it is your own policies which caused rents to skyrocket.
I had a lovely young lady come in with a small family, including a child with disabilities. Territory Housing finally agreed, after I wrote to the minister and the minister was good enough to allow this young lady to go on the waiting list. However, that waiting list is getting longer and longer, and this family is forced to live in caravan accommodation and travel great distances each day, which is not fair on their family. In fact, they lived in a tent for a while because they were told it would not take long to get into a Territory Housing home. That family, now they are on the list, make contact now and again with Territory Housing. Recently, I was advised they had a break-in at the caravan and feel threatened living there, so they contacted Territory Housing to see where they are on the list, only to be told: ‘If you keep ringing you might slip down the list a little more’.
Is this the kind of caring government we have, where they do not want people to ring up and check? They just want people to go back to their trees, and the complaints and issues will go away? Sadly, they do not go away; they go back to their caravans, their cars, or sleeping on couches at friends’ and families’ houses because they cannot get a damn home - whether it is Territory Housing or private rental.
Yesterday, a lady contacted me for a letter of support because THA want a letter of support or any evidence she can provide to help her get on the priority list. It is a bit sad the day has arrived where people need to go to their local members for support just to get on to a priority list. You would expect the evidence or whatever they can provide to Territory Housing would be enough for a decision to be made one way or another. But, no, they have to get further support now, just to get on to the damn list. That support has been given, and I trust THA will be able to assist.
There are other issues where people have returned keys to THA homes, which they have left in good condition, I must add, only to receive bills at a later stage and they are not allowed back on the waiting list until those bills are paid. Surely, if inspections are done at the time and they are signed off and everyone is happy with the property, there should be no additional bills after that.
Another issue: I had a family come in who were sick and tired of complaining to the neighbours next door - this was a THA home - where they had dog issues, and there had been a number of complaints these dogs were getting out. I know THA is not responsible for people’s dogs - you are housing people, not housing dogs. However, in this case, the house was bordered by a chicken wire fence, and the chicken wire was not up to what is considered standard - the standard was provided to this family by a THA employee. What has happened since is the people have moved out and the house has remained vacant. A couple of THA people came around and said the fence would be fixed because it was not to standard. Now, months down the track, there is no one in the home, and still the fencing has not been done. On the latest call to THA, the same person who had given them the advice it was not up to standard said: ‘Oh yes, it is up to standard, so it will not be replaced’.
We have a lovely, elderly lady in a THA unit in Bakewell - I am sure the minister is aware of this lady - she is complaining about water flowing off the roofs and down into her yard. The way it is constructed is that she is in the lowest unit and there is a retaining wall at the back of the property out to the roadside. The problem is, there are three units there, all with downpipes running onto the ground and into her property, which fills up every year like a great lake and can sit there for a long time. The water can actually get under her back door on days of big rains and storms. There is no drainage, no decent planning, and it needs to be addressed. I will be writing to the minister about that.
There are young mothers staying in spare rooms, sleeping on people’s couches. In the holiday period, at Christmas time, we all have family and friends around, but we all look forward to the day they actually leave. We all know what it is like to have additional people in our home; it is lovely for a short while, but when it is ongoing it becomes very difficult and people’s stress levels rise. That is happening all over the Darwin and Palmerston area at the moment and, I believe, in Alice Springs and Katherine, where people cannot get into the housing market.
There are a number of other issues we could talk about: people with issues of getting into THA, and many other issues to do with what this government has said they would do, and have not done.
I have one here, and this one is going to come back: 87 Hutchison Terrace. A number of people in that area are very concerned about that lot at 87 Hutchison Terrace with DCA processes in place at the moment, and the zoning of that lot likely to be changed from Community Services to a THA development - which will be a block of units. We have new suburbs being developed like Bellamack and Johnston, years late, but it is great they are finally being done. Why in the world could this block of units not be put in one of these new suburbs? The problem is, when you use land zoned for Community Use, and there are already investors who have invested in properties around those blocks, you are left with misleading people, because they start to distrust planning level, they start to question government’s motives; and we all know it is another sign of absolutely bad planning by this government.
We all know cities are designed, as I said the other day, with schools, with parks, with gardens, with areas for hospitals, and a number of other uses, and we have zoning for Community Use. So when people are buying in an area they expect that block, some time in the future, will become Community Use; but to then find out it is now going to be a Territory Housing block, you can understand why people are frustrated. First I need to say, we need more units and I commend the minister for more development, but I question why you need to use a block that is zoned Community Use.
We have spoken about people sleeping in cars, sleeping at friends and families houses because the cost of rents are going up; people coming to the end of their leases and finding dramatic increases in rents, and they are forced to either pay up or, if they cannot afford it, get out.
Another issue I have sent a letter to the Minister for Planning and Lands about is in regard to a rather large Indigenous camp which has grown up next to the health clinic at Palmerston, adjacent to Roystonea Avenue; in fact, they are camped right behind a sign that says: ‘Crown Land No Camping’. The police are there on a daily basis due to antisocial behaviour and a number of other issues. Why are they there? Is this another group of people who do not have housing under this government? Some of these people have caused antisocial behaviour, not only in that area, but in the back areas of Gunn and other places, where they have been found jumping yards, looking for alcohol and other things in people’s back yards. The bottom line is that this is growing because people do not have places to live.
Let us look at the actual statement. The minister says he has a strong commitment to housing those who otherwise cannot afford to put a roof over their head. A commitment is one thing; delivering is certainly another. Everything we have heard here today does not demonstrate you are even keeping up with the demand you are suggesting we will have. Further, the statement says you are going to work hard to build more public housing in the bush and boost repairs. Well, I can give you photos, I can give you evidence of Territory Housing properties left vacant for months and months at a time. I do not know where you have boosted repairs. You talk about 81 or 84 homes you have brought online, and I notice the statement uses the excuse that it has taken so long to get people back into these homes because of the condition of the homes, and that it presents an enormous challenge because of the condition of the homes.
My question is: how did they get that way? Did they get so bad because of bad management? Did they get so bad because you are not keeping an eye on the ball and you are driving from the back of the bus instead of being up the front and leading the charge? This statement is full of excuses - growing at a rapid rate since 2004. Well, that is something you knew and something you could have planned for.
The statement says something that has changed is the government of the day has correctly placed access limits based on income and assets. They are saying it is right they did this; but the thing is they have used that as an excuse in one of the factors; that should actually have reduced the level of people. If you check people’s incomes and what they have, and you take a whole group of people away from accessing Territory Housing, that should have freed up housing and dropped waiting lists but, because of the way things have gone, they have increased.
It reports under the Howard government, between 1998 and 2008, a 24.1% drop in public housing spending. After eight years most people are sick of the blame game. You have had $1.3bn extra in GST - you could have done something with that. Most people expect you could do something with that - $1.3bn, $1300m additional revenue above what you expected, but you are blaming the Howard government for dropping 24.1% in public housing across the country. You have been in charge for eight years and look at the mess we are in.
Your statistics here say 5560 public housing dwellings is 5.4% of the population – I have done a few calculations and that would suggest you would need at least 112 new properties each year just to keep up with the 2% increase. That is just in public housing, and we know how many homes you have built recently.
When you look at these continued excuses – and that is what this document is, do not think it is not – there are excuses all the way, but there is no practical evidence you have done anything to actually fix it. It says here: our population is ageing rapidly with a number of people aged 65 and over. The population is ageing rapidly. There are 365 days in a year. You would have aged by 365 days last year and you will next year. People do not age any quicker. I am being facetious here, but I am just trying to point out you can plan for these things. If you have statistics that tell you that the population is ageing rapidly, then you plan for that.
It says here: ‘I am confident that over time there will be housing options.’ Confidence - that is just another plea that we trust this minister being able to deliver when he does not have a good track record. And it says here: ‘This government has dramatically slowed the sale of public housing which the previous government had embarked on.’ If you had all the statistics to say we were going in the right direction, if we were increasing the numbers of our population, why did you not stop it? You did not; you sold off 2000 homes. I will read that again: ‘This government has dramatically slowed the sale of public housing which the previous government had embarked upon.’ You blame something which happened more than eight or nine years ago; you had statistics to say the place was growing, but you still sold off 2000 homes. This is not rocket science.
There is something in here that I do agree with. The minister says there is no argument that times have increased over the past three years, and that is the only thing I agree with. Down here further is a statement, and if this is not a true reflection of this minister’s …
Mr BOHLIN: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be granted an extension of time, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Leave granted.
Mr CHANDLER: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and member for Drysdale. I will not keep going too much longer.
But if this next statement is not a true reflection of the competence of this minister: ‘At the last Housing Ministers’ Conference I was informed that the Victorian and Western Australian housing wait lists grew more than the entire wait list of the Northern Territory in the past year alone’. What are the sizes of Victoria and Western Australia in population, minister? That is absolutely ridiculous given the size of those two states, and the numbers you are talking about reflecting the size of the Northern Territory is just an absolutely ridiculous statement to make. And over the page: ‘Reducing public housing wait times is an enormous challenge due to a range of interconnecting issues on both the supply and the demand side.’ I read that again: ‘Reducing public housing wait times is an enormous challenge due to a range of interconnecting issues on both the supply and the demand side.’ That is rocket science, is it not? There are two things there - demand and supply - absolute rocket science.
There is a statement in here which says: ‘I acknowledge that there are properties that have been vacant for an extended period because of extensive repairs and maintenance that is required to bring them back to a habitable standard.’ Again, my question is: why? How did they get that way? How do these homes get to the stage where they require massive investment if they are maintained every year? We put oil in our car every three months, or every six months.
Mr Bohlin: There is a sticker on the window that says if we do not, we get into trouble.
Mr CHANDLER: That is true. We maintain things, and obviously you have not maintained the stock. You have not had to build any; all you had to do when you took over government was maintain what was there.
Dr Burns: Well, it had not been maintained for many years.
Mr CHANDLER: No. No. You just had to maintain what was there - you did not have to build anything - just maintain it. But, no, you keep selling them off, you sold off 2000 of them, and you are left with properties you need to have a strong investment with.
It says here: ‘Our strong economic growth has lead to a strong demand and limited affordable housing in the private housing market.’ Why? Because of a lack of planning, and you have not released any land. Rocket science! Over the page: ‘Rent rises in the private market have increased significantly and led to an increased gap between the private and public markets. Not unexpectedly, there has being a significant increase in applications for public housing over the past three years; in fact the demand has risen by over 50%.’ Not unexpectedly! Your own policies have left you in this position. You are a moron, minister.
I still cannot believe the Chief Minister only yesterday said he supported his minister and basically gave him a gold stamp for everything he has done in his time as a minister in this place. Yet, he is not here today, and he is pulling out after he had an absolute caning in the media this week, an absolute caning from this side of the House, and the Chief Minister puts him up like a lamb to the slaughter, because what was this document going to do? It is just giving us more fodder to throw at you and give you more evidence of what is going on; what is really happening out there - because you do not have a clue! You are not there. You do not know some of the things that are going on there and, if you do, you are a miserable person.
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! The member for Brennan should be addressing his remarks through you.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, member for Brennan, if you could address your remarks through the Chair. Thank you.
Mr CHANDLER: Madam Deputy Speaker, I apologise, I was getting slightly excited.
I will finish by saying: this document and the decision by the Chief Minister to put the minister out to be finished off, has to be full of the biggest excuses I have ever seen to try to explain, in a rational manor, how we got to this position. It is full of excuses when, in fact, they could have come here with an absolute plan. They have not done that; they have failed.
Dr BURNS (Business): Madam Deputy Speaker, this is an important statement and timely this House is debating it. It is important the opposition, apart from its criticism, puts on the table its strategies to address this issue.
The Treasurer outlined some of the measures taken by this government, with the assistance of the federal government, to address this issue. There is no doubt we acknowledge, as a government, we were tardy in land release. We have come forward and said: ‘Yes, that is correct’. However, we also said we have embarked on a very ambitious process of land release, particularly in Palmerston East. As the Treasurer said, there are 3000 new lots to house up to 15 000 people, just in Palmerston East.
There was a whole range of other issues the Treasurer outlined, and my colleague, the Minister for Housing, also outlined. Before I start to speak specifically on this issue before the House I have to say, since I became local member in 2001, I have doorknocked a lot. In fact, I have been around the former electorate of Johnston, before the redistribution, about six times - five-and-a-half to six times; and I have almost completed Millner in the year since the election.
Millner, from memory, is about 1700 or 1800 people. There are quite a number of people and quite a number of dwellings in Millner, with many Housing Commission houses. Let me say from the outset, the majority of people living in Housing Commission properties, some of whom raised families there for many years, are very productive and engaged members of our community, and have made a big contribution to our community.
Many people living in Housing Commission homes have beautiful gardens and many have received prizes for their gardens. Their houses are beautifully kept and, even with very small and meagre means, they take pride in their very neat and tidy houses which have a lovely feel when you walk in. So, many people who have lived in Housing Commission houses for a long time are a credit to the community.
In response to what the member for Brennan said about houses run down to the level they are uninhabitable and need to be sold off, when I doorknocked prior to the 2001 election, one of the strongest themes from Housing Commission tenants was the lack of maintenance - some of them have been tenants for 20 years – houses had not been painted inside, and there was a whole range of things. I clearly remember when Jack Ah Kit was the Housing minister he embarked on a very large-scale program of refurbishing those houses and fitting them out with security screens and security doors. I remember doorknocking and people remarking to me how fantastic it was to have a lick of paint and security screens on their house.
I believe I have been a good advocate over time for Housing Commission tenants, particularly now I have a housing complex, Litchfield Court, which has very particular and long-standing challenges, in my electorate. Before me, Matthew Bonson had that complex in his electorate, and Phil Mitchell before him, and they both engaged very strongly with the deep-seated issues and clients with very complex needs there. There is no doubt, Housing is a difficult area. I have had some very difficult tenants who have had to be moved on because they were a hazard to themselves and they were a hazard to their next door neighbours, and made their neighbours’ lives a misery.
One of the consistent issues which comes to me as a local member, and I am not scared to stand up in this Chamber and say it, is the ever lengthening public housing waiting lists which are cause for great concern, and it is fit for this House to be debating this issue. Unfortunately, we have reached a stage now where the emergency waiting list is as long as the general waiting list, which is of great concern. We have people with very acute needs coming to see us, and we know they are on the list and they are going to have to wait for some time.
The measures outlined by my colleague, the Minister for Housing, and the Treasurer, I believe, address those issues. In short, I am saying we, as a government, acknowledge there is a problem, and it is a growing problem with housing waiting lists. We also acknowledge we could have been, or should have been, quicker with our land release. However, we have a comprehensive set of plans to address a range of issues in relation to housing and I believe those strategies and policies will bear fruit in calendar year 2010, particularly land release, as the Treasurer has outlined, and it is important to lay that on the table.
We have heard from the shadow Housing spokesperson, the member for Goyder, and I am interested to hear what the member for Braitling has to say because, during the sittings this week he seemed to take the mantle of the shadow from the member for Goyder. It was quite pointed, looking at it from this side, that the member for Goyder was given a token question to start with, then the running, if you like, on housing issues was done by the member for Braitling. So whether there is a reshuffle in the offing on the other side, we will have to wait and see. They are talking about reshuffles on this side but, given the e-mail the member for Goyder sent out around Estimates time about her colleagues and her lack of performance, as indicated by the faith shown in the member for Braitling during the last week or so to try to prosecute the case for housing, points to the fact the opposition believes their shadow is not really performing; but I digress.
A member: I was wondering when you were going to get that in your topic.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: Well, it is a debate about housing and I believe I stuck to that area, as well.
As the Treasurer outlined in Budget 2009-10 we delivered a record $390m for housing, a 92% increase on the previous year and, as I have said, there is recognition we need to do a great deal more; but I believe that percentage increase says it all. Calendar year 2010 will see the fruits of the investment and the efforts government is making in a range of areas.
The Treasurer alluded to the fact there was a real expenditure cut of 24.1% in public housing by the Howard government between 1998 and 2008, and Operation Stimulus, overall, provides a $60m package for public and community housing. The Commonwealth and the Territory are looking to deliver a nearly $16m package, A Place to Call Home, which will build 32 new homes by 2013 for approximately 2000 people, and this is also a very important element.
The Treasurer also alluded to the fact that in the new suburbs of Bellamack, Johnston, Zuccoli, and Mitchell there will be a 15% provision of land for public and affordable housing - that is 15% of 3700 new lots. There will be a flow of public housing stock available in Bellamack, Johnston, Zuccoli, and Mitchell, as they are constructed and, as the Treasurer rightly pointed out, this is a rolling program and as those suburbs are turned off and those lots are turned off, 15% will be for public housing.
The minister also pointed out the reliance on public housing in the Territory: 8.3% of all Territory dwellings are public housing, which is double the rate in the rest of Australia. There is a greater reliance on public housing in the Territory for a range of reasons. It is very important the government expends and provides public housing. We have the message on this and we are moving to rectify the situation.
The Minister for Housing also talked about the Bellamack Seniors’ Village which should start construction early next year to provide an additional 44 units for seniors’ accommodation. That is very important, and I know the seniors’ accommodation in Leanyer and Fannie Bay has been very welcome. I know people who live in those complexes and they enjoy the life they have there and the fellowship with other seniors.
In terms of homelessness, Operation Stimulus also addresses some of those issues. The assistance provided by the federal government comprises two projects with the Salvation Army and two in the Catholic Diocese. The Salvation Army project in Stuart Park will be crisis accommodation for women suffering domestic violence at a cost of $1.6m; and the Salvation Army is also looking to construct a facility in Alice Springs, at a cost of $1.4m, to provide crisis accommodation for homeless men. The St Vincent de Paul project on Dick Ward Drive will provide 20 units for homeless men, at a cost of nearly $5.3m. I have had a great deal to do with St Vincent de Paul over the years, particularly Ozanam House, and they have done a fantastic job for homeless people for a very long time, and will continue to do that. It is great to see them getting involved with the Salvation Army in these particular projects.
In Alice Springs there will be a number of other projects funded by Operation Stimulus which will include 35 units for renal patients, some apartments for public housing, and 24 units for transitional accommodation. So, there are advances, there are developments happening in both Darwin and Alice Springs in relation to homelessness, in particular.
I believe it is important to realise that homelessness and problems in public housing, as I have noticed in the Litchfield Court complex, is that some of the people who live there, not many, but some, have complex needs in terms of alcohol and drug issues and also mental health issues, and it is important we try to support those who have mental health issues to stop them becoming homeless people.
The Papaya Subacute Residential Facility, which is in my colleague, the member for Arnhem’s portfolio area was opened, and I was part of that opening last year. It is a stepping stone for people coming out of the mental facility at Royal Darwin Hospital, before they re-enter the community, where they get support in a homely and welcoming environment. Residents have their own rooms and share communal bathroom, kitchen, dining and recreation spaces. The staff supports clients not only with mental health issues, but also with basic life skills training. That is a wonderful support for people who are experiencing problems in that area. I commend the work my colleague, the member for Arnhem, is doing, and the support her department and her officers give to people in this situation. Since opening 12 months ago, Papaya has assisted 46 clients and has received very positive feedback from clients in the broader mental health sector.
There is also Kurrajong apartments, in Coconut Grove which is a block of former Territory Housing units now managed by Team Health; and we heard something about Team Health during Question Time today. Those residents live independently and they can access appropriate supports, if they require them, through the Team Health Recovery Assistance Program. This service provides excellent accommodation for people living with mental illness.
They are some of the supports going on in those particular areas but, more can be done, and I believe it is important always to keep that in mind.
The minister mentioned the homelessness partnership agreement, and that 32 homes will be built or purchased and made available for people experiencing homelessness. There will be an expression of interest process of approximately $1m for non-government organisations to provide transitional accommodation options before Christmas. That is another aspect, another development going on in that area.
The Treasurer mentioned Homestart NT which, as we are all aware, provides low deposit home loans and shared equity schemes to help low to middle income earners into home ownership.
There has been much debate in the public realm about Bellamack Gardens, and two weeks ago I made some announcements about a reconfiguration of that development. Instead of 32 units there will now be 28 units with much more open space; approximately 55% of the development will be open space and will provide large setbacks onto the road from the front, and a capacity for gardens at the front. There can also be gardens at the sides and particularly in the back yards, which are all fenced independently from the next property with the capacity for people to have their barbecues and spas and whatever. The actual footprint, the total area of these units is quite large compared to equivalents in Darwin and Palmerston …
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! I move an extension of time for the minister to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS: I thank the member for Port Darwin for his charity.
Back to Bellamack: basically, there is a lot of open space and there is a range of products, from memory - 18 detached two-bedroom units, two one-bedroom detached units which can be expanded into two-bedrooms, and a number of attached one-bedroom units. As I said, the floor area of these units, and the footprint, are quite large.
The other thing is people with Homestart are eligible to apply; that is the eligibility criteria. The type of repayments people would be making on a loan to purchase these properties is equivalent and, in some cases, less, than the rental they would pay in equivalent accommodation in Palmerston. In other words, the repayments people would be paying is equivalent to the rent for a two-bedroom unit in Palmerston, but they are actually getting equity in that property. It is giving people a start, a foot in the market, and giving them equity. As their family and their circumstances change, they can use the equity they have built up at Bellamack Gardens to get equity, for instance, in a three-bedroom home in the wider Bellamack development.
We wanted some green initiatives at Bellamack Gardens, and the design to include space between dwellings, flow-through ventilation, large overhangs with the eaves, and very high ceilings in every room with fans to allow people to live without air-conditioning; this was criticised by some people who call them hot boxes, and ask: ‘Where the air-conditioning?’. It is really up to the people who purchase these units if they want to install air-conditioning; all the circuitry will be there for them to do that. We are not precluding air-conditioners, but in this development we are aiming at a very cool, green and friendly environment.
Already submissions has been made to the consent authority, and we are expecting to sell those units off-the-plan early next year, with completion in October, although I would be happier - and I have made this plain to the Land Development Corporation - if we can have an earlier finish time for this development - August would make me a lot happier.
I realise it is 28 units and there is a big demand for this type of housing at these prices. The research we did engaging particularly with young people trying to enter the housing market, suggested these are the price points they are interested in, and the size and layout are the type of development they are looking for. I see Bellamack Gardens as being the start, a test of the market not really occupied by any private developer to any large degree, particularly in Darwin, at this stage. Depending on the success of Bellamack Gardens, we will look to expand that model to other developments in Palmerston. In discussions with the Land Development Corporation, we will also be looking to see whether we could have similar developments in Alice Springs also.
I am very excited about Bellamack Gardens. As the member for Brennan said when he quoted the ministerial statement, there is a complex set of supply and demand within this whole housing equation, and it is very important, in my view, that many of the problems we are experiencing now are actually problems about growth - growth in the Territory economy, growth in the Territory’s population and, as Christena Singh said during the October Business Month functions I attended in Alice Springs and Darwin, the problems the Territory has, or the challenges of growth, are unique in Australia. Her words were something like: ‘We would much rather have the problems of growth or the challenges of growth than the problems of decline or things remaining static’.
I have paraphrased Christena Singh, but that is essentially what she said to the business people gathered in Alice Springs and Darwin. There would have been 200 people at the breakfast I attended in Alice Springs. At the evening function at the Darwin Entertainment Centre there probably would have been 250, possibly more, business people assembled; not only to hear Christena Singh talk about Sensis business projects she has undertaken, but also, as I said previously, to listen to Mr Ahn Do talk about having a go and his experiences. He is a very motivational speaker.
Government recognises we have much to do. We have a big job to do across the whole spectrum of housing challenges that face the Northern Territory, from Indigenous housing and SIHIP, right through to land release, affordable housing in Darwin, and specialised housing to support people with very complex needs. We recognise we have a lot of work to do. We recognise we should have been quicker to respond to the growth and the patterns that were emerging. What I am saying here today is we have a plan, and we have a number of strategies to address these issues. I reiterate what I said before: I believe in 2010 we will see a marked improvement in many of these very important issues. I believe the Territory will continue to grow right through 2010, and there is a pattern of growth evident for the next three years, particularly in the Top End with the INPEX project. That is why it is very important we consolidate our position and improve it in 2010.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend the minister’s statement to the House.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, yesterday and the day before I spoke about housing in relation to the Chief Minister’s Growing the Territory, opportunities for challenges with growth, and it is very fine to encourage all this growth - but it is about planning. I hear the government say they have this plan and that plan. But, for quite some years I have stood, not only here, but as a member of the public prior to being elected, and I have heard the government expound all these fantastic plans about what they are going to do, and how they are going to do it. The problem is it is all talk and very little action.
I go to the Ministerial Statement, Public Housing, by the member for Daly who is the Minister for Housing. The first line says: ‘This government is committed to housing Territorians …’. I find that quite amazing given they have sold off so many Territory public homes. When the member for Brennan was speaking, I believe it was the Housing Minister who interjected and called across the Chamber that it was, in fact, 2000 houses that we sold. In fact, in his own statement he claims we sold off 1300 homes in our time, and that that was a disgrace. There are figures here - and if the government does not have them already I am quite happy to provide them - which show between June 2001 and the end of financial year 2007, this government sold off 2117 Territory Housing properties.
Dr Burns: I would like you to table those, member for Sanderson.
Mr STYLES: No problem at all.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Are you going to table those, member for Sanderson? You need to seek leave.
Mr STYLES: No, they have my personal notes on them. However, I will undertake to provide documents which do not have my notes on them to the Leader of Government Business.
Dr Burns: Thank you.
Mr STYLES: No problem. So, the number of houses which were sold off and I accepted that he said we sold off 2000, but I would like to make sure we get it right. There were 2117 sold off between the times just mentioned. The Housing Minister makes great mileage from saying how terrible it was that the CLP sold off 1300 homes when we were in government. I wonder what he would say, given the opportunity, about selling off 2117.
Mr Knight: Prove it. Table it.
Mr STYLES: No, I am quite happy - you will get them - and if you have not looked at these, then I am extremely disappointed the Housing Minister is not aware of these documents. They are very telling.
The Treasurer claimed today the Howard government, the Coalition government, reduced the amount of federal money for housing by 21.4% whilst they were in government. She also said that was a lost opportunity and the stimulus catch-up …
Mr CONLAN: A point of order Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! I call your attention to the state of the House.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Ring the bells. A quorum is present.
Mr STYLES: Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker. So here we have a supposed, claimed reduction by the Treasurer and a lost opportunity; then a claim that the Rudd government’s stimulus catch-up package is going to resolve all the problems.
I would like, at some stage in the very near future, to find out how the Housing Minister proposes to do that. The federal government gives the Northern Territory $672m for Aboriginal housing programs under SIHIP and we have yet, after two years, to see one house finished. So, when the Treasurer claims we are going to have all these fantastic things happen as a result of the Rudd stimulus catch-up, I wonder when we are going to see any houses out of the emergency housing package given to the Northern Territory government to build houses for some of our most disadvantaged citizens, and they are still not happening. How long will it take him to do the stimulus catch-up?
The Treasurer also mentioned they will have no enclaves. I ask the question: what about seniors’ villages? A seniors’ village is an enclave. Are we going to have seniors’ villages as the Housing Minister mentions in his statement? They are, in fact, enclaves. The Treasurer says we are not going to have enclaves, so there seems to some confusion on the government benches as to what they are going to do and how they are going to do it.
The Treasurer also makes a statement and, I believe, the figure was around $200-odd million for 289 upgrades of properties coming back online. I just ask the question, a rhetorical question, of course: does that mean at the moment there are 289 properties off-line? Because that is what she said - there are 289 houses to be upgraded so they can be brought back online - and 22 new houses, of course.
That seems remarkable when the Chief Minister said in a previous statement we need 1700 house blocks each year just to keep pace. So, when you look at the housing lists and how long they are, I do not see they actually give you the figures of how many people are on these lists. We have 289 homes which appear to be off-line at the moment, and I have people walking into my office who are living in cars and tents. I have people who are about to be evicted from homes because, unfortunately, due to medical conditions, owners have to sell the home and this person is going to be tipped out in the street. They have been on the housing list for four-and-a-half years - an absolutely terrible situation so many Territorians find themselves in.
It becomes quite tedious after a while to hear the Treasurer say: ‘We have put more money than the CLP has into everything.’ My understanding is, first of all, the Territory budget has doubled over the last over eight years, and they have had enormous amounts of GST. I would imagine any government in the Northern Territory, given the rivers of gold which have flowed into the Territory and a doubling of the budget, could put more dollars into things than any previous government had the opportunity to put in. So when you have this massive increase in the budget of the Northern Territory, and you have this great windfall called the GST, and my understanding is it is generally about $1.3bn, of course, you can put more money into anything you choose. Then to stand up and claim you have put in more money than the previous government, I believe, is just slightly misleading, because we are not comparing apples with apples; we are comparing apples with oranges. It would be better if the Treasurer was to actually compare it percentage-wise of the total gross income of the Territory in today’s dollar value; then we might get a better indication.
I move to page 2 of the minister’s statement, which says: ‘We have high and complex needs in terms of the Territory’s population and, I want to be clear, public housing wait lists are complex issues.’ Well, the people who come into my office and sit at my desk crying their eyes out because they are living in tents, living in cars, or about to be evicted from private homes that have to be sold - I do not believe these people think it is too complex at all. What they are looking for is somewhere to live, a safe place to live and a safe place where they can actually lock a door and keep their children safe so they can get a decent night’s sleep. These people do not want much.
But what happens when you sell off at a time when the government is claiming it is their policies and it is they who have created the economic activity in the Northern Territory - as opposed to business and private enterprise and gas - they are creating all this economic growth and economic stimulus, and it is through their actions that we find ourselves in this fantastic economic situation, as they describe it today. Surely if you are going to do that and have confidence in your ability to do these things and to create this fantastic economic environment, you would also have the ability to plan - plan for sufficient land release, sufficient medical staff, and all those things that go with forward planning.
I would suggest the government, if through some miracle all this does occur, and by the Treasurer’s own admission they were planning for a 1% increase in population, and then she says: ‘Well, they are the ABS figures’; if I was sitting in a closed room with all my colleagues and said: ‘We are going to do this, and we are going to have this fantastic development in the Northern Territory, and everything is going to be wonderful, everyone is going to come here because of the fantastic lifestyle and the jobs’, I would be suggesting we have to house them, provide them with medical services, good law and order - education, health and law and order are the three main ones for a start. Then you need to do other things, like recreation, for them and provide a good community infrastructure where everyone can enjoy the fantastic lifestyle they are selling. However, what we have is a government which has failed to release enough land, to the point where middle class workers in the Northern Territory appear to have been pushed out of the housing market by other people who come in with sufficient money.
I also heard the Treasurer say: ‘We have built 2000-something units in the CBD’, and that is fantastic, but not everyone needs that. I heard the Housing Minister, or it may have been the member for Fannie Bay, say the priority is seniors and singles. I will talk about the singles. Of course, we need to relate to everyone in this particular discussion because everyone needs a safe place to live and a roof over their head. However, singles might be able to get a room or bunk up somewhere. It is probably easier for singles in a very tight accommodation market to seek a safe place to live with either family, friends, or just a bit of carpet somewhere to roll your swag out.
When you are dealing with seniors and families with kids, kids cannot – well, they can live in high-rise apartments - but the trouble in the CBD is the high-rise apartments are enormous and the kids who come into my office need a bit of grass and somewhere they can kick a ball around, even if it is a small back yard.
The actual type of housing the government is claiming is helping to resolve the issue, is for a different market. Many people sell their homes in the northern suburbs and move into units, and that is great, but the problem is because insufficient land is being released, the price is jumping enormously. On page 2 of the minister’s statement it says:
I have people coming to my office on a daily basis for appointments who, I believe, have special needs. A lady came to see me on one of my mornings at the supermarket, and she has special needs through circumstances beyond her control. She found herself in a situation where she needed to sell her family home. As a teenager she got into her first home; she is a hard worker and she has always owned her own premises. She has two young children. Unfortunately, she had quite a severe accident a couple of years ago which left her with a leg problem. She had her family home modified, at her expense, so she could actually get around and get into the shower and things like that. The problem, as a result of this accident, is if she breaks her leg again, she will have to have it amputated. That is a condition I quite felt saddened by. She has difficulty getting around with her two young kids, but she manages.
Now she has to move out of this house which has been modified, and she went to Territory Housing and said: ‘I am, basically, out on the street. I do not know where I am going to live as a result of this situation, and I have to leave this particular house. I need to go on the emergency housing list’. ‘Sorry, cannot help you’, was the answer. She told me she has trouble getting in and out of a many properties, and she, with the two young kids, are staying with friends, and just getting in and out of a bathroom situation is dangerous for her to the point where she is now paranoid about getting in and out of showers and washing because, if she breaks this leg she loses it.
That is just one of numerous situations I am confronted with in my electorate office almost on a daily basis, and I find it terrible to go out there and say: ‘Well, the government sold off 2000’. How many are on these waiting lists? If we still had 2000 premises, I believe it would make a huge difference. When you say, in the first line of the statement: ‘The government is committed to housing Territorians’, and you sell 2000 properties, then you choose places where you can get a good return for the taxpayer, you sell ones in areas of high return and, instead of not replacing those units, you build replacement units in areas where land is a lot cheaper; so when you do put people in through schemes the government has brought out and other initiatives, young people can actually buy these premises and get a hand up. When they do that, you build other premises to replace that one. I would have thought that would was quite basic to a government committed to housing Territorians - the opening line of the minister’s statement.
What happens to these 2117 places that were sold off? Do we see 2117 dwellings replaced? And, if they were selling houses, and my understanding from the advertisements I saw in the paper at the time the government was selling off quite a number of these places, is they were three-bedroom, as the member for Johnston explained, boxes, hot boxes they called them, but they were three-bedroom units. I have to say, I lived in one of those three-bedroom hot boxes for about 12 years, and I survived, and we had three kids. And I was very grateful for the fact I actually had a home, as opposed to some people out there who do not have anything except the back of a car.
If you are really concerned about housing Territorians, you would have replaced these places with something suitable. I note the minister has said the greatest percentage, I believe 60%, are looking for one-bedroom dwellings. If you sell all these houses off …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! I move an extension of time for the member for Sanderson, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr STYLES: Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, and thank you to the member for Fannie Bay, I appreciate that.
Then we move a bit further down the page where it says:
To go on with the quote:
I applaud the minister for saying that, it is great. First of all, we have a 2% increase in population, which they obviously have not identified along the way. I do not believe this happened yesterday, this has been going on for some time and they have been running the programs to get more people here. So people come up from down south, and we hear them say day in and day out: ‘We come up here, we are looking forward to a great lifestyle, great weather, employment opportunities, earn a bit more money than I did where I came from, but the problem is we cannot afford to stay here because we cannot afford to buy or rent a home’. These are not low income people. These are people from middle class Australia and have public service jobs; they are our essential services people.
If these people cannot do that, I do not know how the government is going to go ensure that people can transition out of public housing into their own. There are so many people out there who need a hand up and cannot even get into public housing, so I do not know how they are going to even save a deposit for a home. Given the recent global financial situation and the banks tightening up on who they lend to and the type of deposit or percentage of deposit needed for homes, many of these people are going to find themselves in dire straits, if they are not in dire straits already.
So, it comes back to the price of housing, which comes right back to the actual release of land and not doing that. I reiterate something I said in this House recently: I spoke to a project manager who builds homes and he enlightened me that they are slowing down because they cannot get land to build homes on. So what does that say? Does that say we have builders here in the Territory who want to build homes, but they cannot buy land to build the homes on? This guy is saying to me that his job is now in jeopardy because they cannot buy the land. They know there are people who want to buy homes, but he is talking about the cost of the land and the cost of the house and he is wondering how these young people who want to get into the market will ever be able to afford to buy a home - even a simple home - we are not talking about the five-bedroom, three-bathroom, two car/three car garage, and a pool and spas and all those flash things. We are talking about basic homes - that is what they need. They need the government to actually release land at a greater pace than they are at the moment.
Again I say that here is a government that has absolutely failed to plan. I mentioned this yesterday, and I use the same analogy again. If one is going to increase the size of the family you normally take into consideration, if you are living in a one-bedroom bed-sit and you are going to increase your family from two to three, the need for extra space. You can get away with it in a bed-sit, but once you start having extra family, one has to plan to actually move out and into a home. So many young people come into my office have say: ‘When we got married we put name on the list because we are going to have kids’ - and four years later they are still waiting for something.
I note in this statement the minister claims there have been reductions in waiting times, and so many percent of people have been housed in two years, and that is wonderful compared to the rest of Australia. The problem we have in the Northern Territory is that we are not the rest of Australia. The reason so many of our tradespeople are leaving now is because they say - and low income people also say this - it is cheaper to live in another state. It is cheaper to go to Adelaide. You can buy a home there; you can rent a home there. Some homes are half the price and you get a fabulous home in a nice place and the cost living is reduced for obvious reasons. So, they can actually get these things and not try to survive on very little money left over from paying high rents or high mortgages. I wonder when the minister tries to compare us to the rest of Australia if we are actually comparing apples to oranges, as opposed to apples to apples.
Let us move down the page; we are only on page 3. It says:
It will be interesting to find out how many people are on that waiting list. If the number of seniors who come into my office looking for accommodation, and the seniors’ meetings and forums I have been to, and I look around those rooms, there are many people out there wanting to obtain seniors’ accommodation. Many people have been in the Territory a long time and they may or may not be responsible for the predicament they are in, not owning a property or whatever, but there are people out there who, as seniors, still need a hand up from the community.
It says here:
Well it may be that in recent years they have not sold off as much stock; maybe they have actually woken up and realised, a couple of years ago, that they have a problem. Well, if you woke up a couple of years ago that you have a problem, then why are we not seeing urgent and emergency planning put in place to actually release some land?
Here we have a statement, and the figures are here - 2117 at the end of year 2007 - and the minister is saying: ‘In recent years we have not done that.’ Well, in recent years, if you are not selling off the property, maybe, perhaps, one could hope the minister has woken up, and previous ministers have woken up to the fact that - they have a problem. Yet, we still do not see any action.
We hear about plans, and we hear we have spent more money than anyone else - I might remind the Treasurer that money and expenditure is an input - it is not an outcome. Putting more money in does not necessarily equate to greater outcomes. It is about planning, and it is about leadership. It is about the direction you take your policies to actually give people a roof over their head. Quite frankly, we do not see too much of the action. A lot of planning, a lot of consulting, for instance, SIHIP - two years down the track and we do not even have a design. I do not know how they are going to solve the housing crisis; if they cannot deal with an emergency in two years, how long is it going to take to solve it?
The Treasurer very proudly says: ‘In the next five years we are going to release 6000 blocks of land’. Fantastic! The problem is the Chief Minister and the Treasurer are saying we need 1700 blocks just to keep pace. So, 6000 blocks in five years, - and the Chief Minister says we need 8500 - we are still going to be in dire straits in five years time; we are still going to be 2500 blocks of land behind the eight-ball.
Mr Bohlin interjecting.
Mr STYLES: Maybe the government’s plan now is to make it so expensive that everyone leaves. And if everybody leaves the Territory …
Mr Bohlin: That is one plan.
Mr STYLES: … you do not have a problem any more, because you have no people to house.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Excuse me, member for Sanderson. I ask the member for Drysdale to keep his comments to himself. The member for Sanderson is on his feet talking about an important issue. Thank you.
Mr STYLES: Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker. So, if we are going to boast proudly about 6000 blocks when we need 8500, I encourage the minister and the government to take a serious look at where they are taking the Territory and what they are doing about housing.
There are 16 pages of this statement, and I have only reached page 3; given extra time, I am sure we could stand here for hours and pick holes in this you could drive a Mack truck through.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, it might be good if the government actually had another look at some of the statements they have made in this, and at least try to do something for Territorians who are living in tents, living the back of motor cars, living in half-finished rooms under houses; and people who find themselves in dire straits as a result of policies of this government.
Mr HAMPTON (Local Government): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I wish to contribute to this most important statement. Listening to speakers on both sides of the House, it has been a really passionate and important issue members are expressing in the House today.
This week, housing has been the centre of attention in our parliament, not only in this afternoon’s debate on public housing waiting lists, but also the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program; housing in our remote regions of the Northern Territory, particularly Indigenous housing; also during Question Time; and the member for Goyder’s MPI on housing which was brought to the House this week. It certainly has been a topical issue.
I acknowledge it is an important issue, we have discussed it at great length and so we should, because it is probably right up there amongst one of the biggest issues and challenges we face in the Northern Territory. I also acknowledge the contributions from all members of the House.
My focus is on my personal experiences within the public housing system, but also on the way forward. I acknowledge that the minister, and the minister for Planning, and the member for Johnston have all focused on the way forward in understanding there is an issue, and huge waiting lists – and also acknowledge what the member Sanderson said. I have met with people in Alice Springs who have said to me the focus is not just public housing waiting lists, it is also finding housing and accommodation for staff, particularly in Alice Springs; and I acknowledge that is also an issue …
Mr BOHLIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I am sorry. This is a very important statement from your government and, unfortunately, there is not a quorum in the House.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Ring the bells. A quorum is present. Continue, Minister for Central Australia.
Mr HAMPTON: Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker. As I was saying, I have people come to my electorate office in Alice Spring and talk to me about their issues and the hardship they are facing in trying to find accommodation in Alice Springs to take up employment. We know what the challenges and the issues are: they are about social housing; SIHIP; remote housing; town camp accommodation, particularly in Alice Springs, which is such a topical issue as well; and it is also about the people who have come into Alice Springs to take up jobs and are looking for accommodation. I acknowledge that is a big issue for us.
We need to stop the blame game. Both sides of politics have failed in some regards in the past and, from our side, we could have done things better. The Minister for Business said we accept some of the blame for this in not planning for the appropriate release of land, and the roll-over of future housing. It is all on the public record - we have all made mistakes - and we need to focus on the way forward. In Alice Springs, we have the Planning for the Future Committee, which I co-Chair with our Mayor, Damien Ryan, and that has grown out of the planning forum held in June 2008, and the report which came out of that planning forum.
Turning back the clock a little, my time in public housing goes back to growing up at The Gap in Alice Springs. I recall looking through the archives online some time ago at the old Gap cottages back in the 1940s and 1950s, the first public housing built in Alice Springs which targeted many of the Indigenous families - the original Indigenous families of Alice Springs - then there was an issue in public housing. If you look at the old records in the archives there was something like 15 to 20 people in a house - it is not a new problem we face. Back then, in the 1940s and 1950s, my family was included with many of those large Indigenous families at The Gap cottages with 14 and 15 people per house. It is all there on the NT Archives website. So, it has been going around in circles, which is a reflection on all sides of politics, particularly our housing policies and our failure to plan. As the saying goes - a failure to plan, is a plan for failure.
For me, 1988 was my personal experience with public housing. Having been recently married with a growing family, I lived in public housing myself and my kids grew up in a public housing dwelling. The government at the time quite rightly, I believe, changed some of their rules for eligibility and brought in income and asset limits. It was around 1995 or 1996 when I had to make a very hard decision. At that point in time I was working in the CES and earning too much to live in public housing. It was a choice of: do I move out, or do I pay market rents in my current dwelling, or do I look elsewhere and buy a private home? My decision was to buy the house I was living in, and back in 1995 and 1996 there were probably another 40 families who made that decision; they were living in public housing dwellings and they had to buy the dwelling they were living in.
I believe the government of the time made the right decision and had to bring in those limits, because that is when the pressure became much heavier for governments; pressure was being placed on public housing way back then, and I believe that was a good choice by the government at the time.
I made the decision to buy the house I was living in, a public housing dwelling, and I am still there 18 years later. Many families who did take up that offer back in 1995-96 to buy their public housing dwelling are probably still there in Alice Springs. At the time, I was about 19 or 20, and it was really hard because we had the ATSIC home loans program and there was a myriad of forms and papers to go through to purchase your own home.
Now we have the Homestart program and there are many other home loans around. As a government, we need to make it easier for young families wanting to buy their own home, because I know through my own experience back in 1995-96 having to go through ATSIC and their home loans program, it was just a minefield of paperwork. It took something like 12 months for me to get approval; so I certainly understand, from a personal point of view. Public housing for me was very important, not only in the 1970s when I was brought up down in The Gap, but when I was raising my own family in a public housing dwelling in Sadadeen. Public housing is important and it is something that will be around for a long time and continue to provide an important part of people’s lives in the Territory.
One thing the Minister for Housing said that really did touch a chord with me was: today, public housing is very much social housing. While reflecting on what I said about how the needs in the Territory changing with staff accommodation and people with middle to higher incomes looking for accommodation, I really believe that is the thrust of it - it has become social housing and that is where the challenges are.
It has changed because, obviously, the demographics of the Northern Territory have changed. Today, in 2009, around 30% of our population is Indigenous, many from our remoter regions and towns throughout the Northern Territory who are now wanting to make their life in places like Alice Springs - and quite rightly so. So the demographics have changed, and that is why the focus of public housing has shifted to social housing.
Other statistics the minister mentioned was over 40% of public housing tenants are Indigenous, and about half of those on wait lists are also Indigenous. That is where the shift has been - urban drift - where many of our Indigenous people from remote communities are now making themselves at home in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Katherine, as well as Darwin. That has seen the shift of focus and has brought with it challenges for public housing.
As I said, I also acknowledge the issues around accommodation on town camps. We know the Alice Springs transformation plan is there with $100m to go towards building 85 new homes on those town camps. While we are on the public record, we support that, and we understand the challenges of that. And those challenges are currently in the High Court. This government certainly wants to the see the lives of those people in the town camps improve, and a very important part of that is building new homes for those town camp residents. That is a challenge. It is a great deal of money, and it is something this government really does want to see occur, and the lives of those town camp people improved particularly through housing.
In the three years I have been the local member for Stuart, I have had a number of representations from people at Ti Tree wanting to buy their own land and build their own homes on their own country. My colleagues know that I continually bang away about land release in Ti Tree and I will continue to do that because I know there are genuine Indigenous people, and people in Ti Tree who have worked in the public service, in the school, in the council office for 20 years or so, who would be able to go to a bank and get a loan because of their work history.
In our regional centres like Ti Tree, and in my electorate I probably have all of them - Pine Creek, Mataranka, Timber Creek - these regional centres are very important areas that need to grow. We need to lift our game in terms of releasing land in these regional centres to provide those opportunities, not only for Indigenous people, but the non-Indigenous people who live in those regional centres, to be able to buy their own land and homes and build their futures in those regional centres. We can focus on Darwin, Palmerston, fine, Alice Springs for sure, but we should not forget those regional centres.
As I said, from the planning forum held in Alice Springs in June last year we have a Planning for the Future Committee, of which I am co-Chair with our Mayor, Damien Ryan, and we also have the native titleholders represented by Darryl Pearce; business and industry represented by Julie Ross, Brenda Meaney and David Forrest, and we also have Fran Kilgariff, who is well-known to everyone in this House. It is a great mix of Central Australians, who really want to drive this report forward. There is a list of actions that we work on together every month and discuss ways forward, and we do put things up to the minister. It is a bottom-up approach and that is what we need to get these solutions through and get land released. As I said, I believe we can do better.
In terms of Alice Springs, it is a long time coming, and I acknowledge that. I have had many representations in my electorate office from people from all walks of life in Alice Springs saying they really do need land released, and it has to be affordable land, not just for the high end of town. There are many working class families who come to Alice Springs for a job who just cannot buy accommodation. As Minister for Central Australia, I acknowledge that and I understand the important work the committee is undertaking, and I will be working with my committee members to progress land release as quickly as we can, because that is really at the heart of our problems in Alice Springs.
When the Treasurer spoke about the budget she said in Budget 2009-10 a record $390m was delivered; a 92% increase on the previous year. We need to acknowledge that. This includes $23m for more public housing, and I will be making sure all of that money comes down the track to Alice Springs. Regarding more public housing, it really does rely on more land release and that is something that the Planning for the Future Committee is working on and driving forward with a bottom-up approach. In Operation Stimulus there is $60m for public and community housing which will go a long way but, once again, we need land released.
The planning committee has been working on the AZRI site, and in talking to the Treasurer I understand that the AZRI site will incorporate 15% affordable and social housing policies. That could provide, at this stage, around 180 new homes for affordable and public housing based on the development of about 1200 allotments. The proposed rezoning for AZRI will go out in November, and headwork studies will also be undertaken. I am pleased that work is progressing, particularly on that site. We all know about the Melanka developments in Alice Springs which are a good example of urban densification, and will provide around 100 units to fill that particular part of the market.
As I said, we need to provide more opportunities for young families to buy their own home and, obviously, land release is an important part of that, so they have more options. I understand the Homestart price point for Alice Springs is around $300 000, and I believe that is promising as well.
In terms of seniors’ accommodation, the Treasurer mentioned that part of Larapinta Stage 2 will see the seniors’ village accommodation developed, and that is certainly something I will keep my eye on. I have had many representations from seniors in Alice Springs about the need for more seniors’ accommodation. I know Loraine Braham in her time in this House talked about providing opportunities for seniors’ retirement villages, and that is something the Planning for the Future Committee has talked about: getting retirement village providers and developers to the committee to present to us what they may be able to offer. That type of market is certainly on our radar.
Talking about seniors, I acknowledge the positive effect the old Gillen House site has had on seniors’ accommodation. I believe there is something like 22 units there which have been built in the time of this government. Before the site was quite ugly, but now it is a fantastic addition to that part of town. I know some of the residents there and they are very happy with the amenities, and the overall accommodation and units are very nice and fit in well with that part of town; it is close to the bus stop and close to Flynn Drive, which is really important in planning, and we need to make sure those services are close, particularly for our senior residents.
I recall sometime ago the old Cawood Court flats in Alice Springs were all public housing dwellings, and the flats at Bloomfield Street; they were places where there were many issues. Cawood Court, on Nicker Crescent, was sold off some time ago, but they look really fantastic now and they have filled that gap in the market for units, and it was a good move to do that. The Bloomfield Street flats had a lot of problems, as well, which I am sure the member for Araluen would recall. I believe Housing at the time did some fantastic work in the design of the units and employing a house manager there - I do not know if it is fulltime anymore - and security as well. Part of that redevelopment had a place where it could be managed, and that is something we need to consider with a much of our public housing dwellings, because it really has made an impact on those flats on Bloomfield Street. They are a couple of examples, when we look at future planning and future public housing dwellings, we should look at that type of model.
Going back to the stimulus package, Stage 1, Mount Gillen Hostel on South Terrace and 9 Priest Street have been provided to Aboriginal Hostels to provide short-term accommodation to homeless people.
Mr GUNNER: Madam Speaker, I move that the member for Stuart be granted an extension of time, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr HAMPTON: Thank you. members. I noticed the other day Mount Gillen Hostel on South Terrace is still vacant; in Stage 1 of the stimulus package that has been identified as getting back on its feet, so I am certainly looking forward to that happening, and I understand Aboriginal Hostels will provide that service to that accommodation venue. The other one includes ASIAS; they are providing a transitional housing program for youth aged between 16 and 21 years who are at risk of homelessness, with four two-bedroom units on Priest Street. That is a welcome addition to the community of Alice Springs.
Under the stimulus package No 2 - I am sure the Minister for Housing mentioned this - we have 35 units for renal patients at risk of homelessness, and I believe that is one area where this government can hold its head up proudly because we have provided many more beds for renal patients in Alice Springs through the extra rooms at Topsy Smith Hostel on Lindsay Avenue, and also the extra units at Yeperenye Hostel. We have eight units on Goyder Street managed by the Salvation Army, which have been spoken about already in this debate, four apartments for public housing, and 24 units for short-term accommodation.
This is a huge issue and I acknowledge everyone’s contribution. I believe we should move on and see what we can do for the future. The need for housing has changed due to our population, particularly our Indigenous population and many of those Indigenous people becoming homeless. We need to lift our game. As Minister for Central Australia, I will be watching carefully the Planning for the Future Committee and the land releases, particularly at AZRI, ensuring that those sites, under the stimulus packages get up and running as soon as possible.
It is pleasing the minister recently issued a media release regarding rents not rising for the pensioners in the Territory because, in many public housing dwellings in Alice Springs, our seniors find it hard - my father struggles with the cost of living - and that will go along way in easing their pain.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will be relatively brief because so many issues have been raised on both sides of the Chamber, and I believe more of my colleagues would like to raise some issues also. I am talking from an Alice Springs perspective, and want to raise some issues that were not in the housing statement which, having considered it, I regard, for the most part, as an excuse why government has not done many things. However, I will not pursue that.
Government has talked about social housing and, in so many ways, there is nothing more social than housing. It is where people live, where friends and family come in and out. There is something decidedly social about housing. My concern, on behalf of my constituents, is those people in public housing who are problem tenants. Let me make it clear: as we well know, most public housing tenants are terrific, but there are some who are absolutely dreadful. Some of those people are my constituents and they affect other constituents of mine. Those constituents ring me up as their local member; many of them tearing their hair out, asking me what can possibly be done to get rid of the atrocious tenant next door or up the road. In Alice Springs, I suggest the stories are much worse than in Darwin. The things some of my constituents have to put up with are just awful, and I wish I could help them. Thank you - I see the member for Stuart nodding his head - I believe he does have an appreciation of the problems in my electorate and in other electorates in Alice Springs.
What was not included in this statement was the number of evictions there has been from public housing. I remember sometime ago I wrote to the then Housing Minister - perhaps 18 months ago or two years ago - and asked how many people had been evicted. From memory, the figure was remarkably low. That is just not good enough. I looked at the Department of Housing and Local Government website and I cannot see that there is a section on it – certainly not on the first page about housing. I suggest to government they make it easier, while always maintaining a balance of ensuring that tenants are not thrown out just because they happen to be bothering someone, however, we all know the tenants we are talking about; they are the problems and they make people’s lives a misery. I believe the department needs to tidy up the website and make it more accessible for people. If the department does not have it already, the minister should introduce a hotline for people to ring in and say: ‘I am at the end of my tether’. Sometimes these people need counselling they are so distressed.
As local members, of course, we say: ‘You have to do this and you have to do that’. We facilitate that; we help them write their letters and so on. I cannot speak more highly of the staff in Alice Springs. They are hard-working and terrific, but working in difficult circumstances. That is a given, we acknowledge that. But it has to be made easier for the people whose lives have been made more difficult by the problem tenants.
I would like the minister, in his reply, to tell us how many problem tenants have been evicted in Alice Springs. I remember the debate in February 2006 when the alcohol bill, which was one bill and was introduced cognate with the antisocial behaviour bill. Peter Toyne was Attorney-General, and Elliot McAdam was the Housing Minister. From memory, numerous press releases were issued, and both of those men thought this legislation they were bringing into the parliament just about addressed all of the problems - they reckoned it nailed it. In fact, Elliot McAdam said: ‘This legislation package tackles the problems of antisocial behaviour head-on’. He then went into some detail about Acceptable Behaviour Agreements.
I am fairly certain I have written to a previous Housing Minister asking how many Acceptable Behaviour Agreements have been issued since their introduction. I believe it was the member for Johnston who was Housing Minister. In a letter from him, again, the figure was remarkably low. It is not unlike the Parental Responsibility Agreement; it is really easy for governments to come into parliament, issue the press releases and the glossies saying: ‘We have this great strategy to tackle various problems’, and come up with these things called Acceptable Behaviour Agreements or Parental Responsibility Agreements, and so on. It is much more difficult for those agreements to come into play in a meaningful way, and I acknowledge that, but you have to make it work. You cannot let tenants off the hook, scot free, when they are impacting so terribly on the lives of their neighbours and other people in the street.
I remember again writing to the present Housing Minister, asking him or, from memory, I invited him to reconsider the legislation because, on balance, my view on behalf of my constituents who come to me, and we are their humble servants, it just was not working. It certainly was not working in the way it was intended when two good men, Elliot McAdam and Peter Toyne, came in here, presumably went through their internal party processes to get to the position, and I believe they were well meaning. We did have some problems with the legislation at the time when we made our views very well-known, but I am sad to say it seems to be the history of this government to get all fired up about something, fire everything off, and then walk away and it is up to local members such as myself to say it is not working. Then we just get really deafening silences.
I invite the minister to undertake a review of the antisocial behaviour bill; have a look himself how many Acceptable Behaviour Agreements have been issued Territory-wide, and what else can be done about problem public housing tenants, because it really just is not enough. I believe we do have to make eviction easier, and certainly make the process easier for people to contact the department. It is very tough for people who want to make a complaint; surely government can make it easier for them.
One final thing: some time ago, perhaps a few years ago, there was what is called a good neighbours policy. I would like the minister to advise the House on its status. Does it still exist? I remember reading it many years ago, and it sounded great. It declared that everyone had a right to the quiet, peace and enjoyment of their home, and it went on and espoused wonderful principles. I believe, if it still exists, it should be revisited because there is no point having a policy if it is not implemented and, if the policy is not working, any government worth its salt needs to go back to the drawing board and have another look at it. I invite the minister to review it.
In relation to one of the documents the minister tabled, ‘Region by dwelling size and wait times in months’, I was genuinely surprised. I knew the wait time was significant. Why? Because my constituents tell me. I did not have an appreciation, I am not embarrassed to say, that it was so significant. Region by dwelling size and wait times in months: one-bedroom non-pensioner, 58 months; one-bedroom, 35 months; two-bedrooms, 31 months; three-bedrooms, 41 months; four-bedrooms, 62 months. That is just horrendous. That is certainly nothing to be proud of - and I do not suggest the minister is, and I am sure he is not - you really need to do better. You have been in government for many years now and you must respond to the needs of those for whom you govern - all Territorians.
I will take this document back to my electorate office and when people contact me, I will tell them about the wait lists. Sadly for me, I am not able to look them in the eye and say: ‘Let me fix it’, because I am not in government. Having said that, I appreciate some of the difficulties and I know that tricks cannot happen overnight, and substantial change cannot happen overnight. However, you have had a significant period of time, and in that time you have had unprecedented amounts of money courtesy of the GST, never the sort of money the former government had; and government really should be doing much more and should have achieved much more.
My final point is, again, the statement and, as far as I can read, the tabled documents did not reveal how many public housing houses in the Territory are unoccupied. I would like them, in particular, for Alice Springs. I have recently written to the department. There is one house in my electorate in particular, in Van Senden Avenue, which I understand has been vacant for nearly two years. I am getting some more information on that, but perhaps the minister - I know he will have much to get through in reply - could assist with that. How many are unoccupied? We really need that data. Presumably government has it, but we would like to see it because if you have a number of buildings that do not have anyone in them for whatever reasons, you need to address those reasons. I understand, in relation to this particular house, it is a maintenance issue. I know it is hard to get a plumber or a sparky, and I speak from personal experience, but it cannot be possibly be that hard to get the appropriately qualified tradespeople to come in and do the work.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, they are the comments I wanted to make in relation to the statement. I know perhaps I am coming from a different angle but I thought it was important, especially given the references to social housing; really, all of us have a responsibility to do what we can to ensure our fellow Territorians have decent housing, because all the people in this room do.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the statement. As I mentioned before in this House, I was born in Alice Springs and grew up in the Territory, often in public housing. I went to numerous schools up and down the track, public and private. I really enjoyed the member for Stuart’s contribution earlier about growing up in public housing as that is the personal experience I have had as well. It is one reason why I do believe it is so important to salt and pepper public housing through future developments, through every community. That is a really important responsibility for government to make sure we do.
That is also a reason I welcome the new policy we have of making sure in every release of Crown land we include a portion of housing for social housing and affordable housing. That is a really important decision to make, to ensure we are incorporating social housing and affordable housing, all those mixes, into every development we turn off. That was a critical decision by this government because it will mean ongoing new stock for Territory Housing.
As we discussed at some length over the course of these sittings, the Territory population has increased markedly in recent years. We have grown at double the forecast rate, and our population is increasing. That has created extra demand for housing, there is no doubt about that. There is a lot of stress out there: many people suffering from mortgage stress, balancing the budget, the incomes to bills, even trying to find a place they can afford in the area they want to live. So there is a need for social housing, and there is a need for affordable housing.
In many respects the market now has a need for a social housing component, a need for a defined, affordable housing component; and the general property market in its own right. There was a time when public housing was essentially workers’ housing and, in many respects, that is what the member for Stuart was talking about earlier. It was much more prevalent and many more people lived in it, and the income caps were much broader. It has now come into a more refined focus as social housing. The Wirrina units which we knocked down were first built for workers, and so we have to find ways to address the affordable housing problem in the Territory at the moment, and we have announced we will be creating an affordable housing rental company in the Territory.
There are a number of different affordable housing rental models around the country, so it is not a new idea, but it is a need which emerged in other areas to ensure, often in the inner city, that housing which meets the needs of people on low to middle incomes is put into the market so they have premises they can afford and close to where they work.
I have seen different models in Brisbane and Sydney. They let their properties to people at a percentage of the market rate. The ones I saw set their market rate at 75%, and I understand under the tax laws you can set it at 80% below. Sometimes they went below that, depending on the property, but essentially their business plan was 74.9%. They had income caps for singles and for couples, and they ensured the rent they were collecting did not put stress on the tenant in terms of their total income. They were charging a higher rent than Territory Housing would charge, and that ensures more funding into the system for repairs and maintenance, and they are looking forward to further developments. I know that they were often approached; private developers would come to the affordable housing company and say: ‘We are looking at building on this block and we would like to have you involved from the start - 15%, 30%, 40% development you get, we have the rest.’ Obviously, for the private developer they were guaranteeing presales, but those mixed tender partnerships were happening actively and often separate from government. Once the affordable housing company was established they formed business relationships in the private sector company to meet those goals.
They recognised there was the need to provide housing in the inner city, and the ones I saw were in Sydney and Brisbane, and they were doing it at an affordable rate. It was quality stock they provided and it was very impressive. They worked hard to find savings in the construction, but they did not do it at the cost of quality. They were very impressive looking developments and they looked like any other private construction. You would not see them and say: ‘That is clearly social housing or affordable housing.’ You would look at it and think it was an ordinary unit.
There are several ways they went about that and I am sure there are many ways you can do these things, but the ones I saw these were the efforts they made to reduce costs. They often built units which were slightly smaller than the private market. I looked at units available on the private market and often there was wasted space and often the square metres were not used. So, when they built the units they were slightly smaller than those on the ordinary market, but everything fitted: the dining table, the couch, the outdoor furniture, the fridges, the beds. The tenants took great pride in their units and were very happy to let us look through, and you could see that everything fitted. They had everything they needed, but in a smaller space than might normally be built. They were quality units, cleverly designed, smart and simple layouts, and they built them for less. And that was one reason how they built them for less - the size of the floor plan and also lower ceilings, which I did not really notice, but the Chief Minister might, he is taller than me - they had ceiling fans and I felt very comfortable in the units with a lower ceiling. I take the advice of the experts - they built it with a lower ceiling, and it was cheaper.
They also had innovative approaches to car parking. I am not sure if Darwin City Council would be happy to get on board with this, but they built their units on public transport routes and they had a good look at their client base; not all of them own cars, so rather than have clearly assigned car parks per unit, they had general car parking available at the unit complex for tenants and guests, and they found they did not actually fill all the car parking spaces; people basically park where they can when they come into the complex. The one I looked at had about 45 units and about 17 car parking bays or something like that. So they found …
Mr BOHLIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I do not want to interrupt the member for Fannie Bay, but I draw your attention to the state of the House again; and it is their statement.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells. A quorum is present.
Mr GUNNER: They made different decisions about car parking space in the complexes, depending on where they were located and what public transport routes they were on; however, they found by reducing the number of car parks they saved a considerable amount of money, and also had more space for units.
They also constructed the units so air-conditioning is unnecessary. The member for Johnston spoke about this in his contribution, and I know many people in the Territory like air-conditioning; I, for one, can live without it and often do not use it at all during the Wet Season. I have a house with good air flow, and often do not need to use the air-conditioner. But some people do. The houses I saw in Brisbane did not have air-conditioning but they were very well constructed and the wind fairly raced through. You actually had some trouble keeping the doors open. They were very well designed and I am sure it has much to do with location; some locations do not get breezes. But they build them without air-conditioning, and that is one effort they made to turn out cheaper units.
As I have discussed before in this House, the first project for the affordable housing rental company we are creating will be the public housing redevelopment on Parap Road. I drove in this morning past Wirrina on the corner of Parap Road and Gregory Street and that two-storey unit complex has gone; there are a couple of mounds of rubbish which the demolition company, R.U.B. Pty Ltd, appear to be taking away at the moment. The demolition is ahead of schedule; I thought it would be happening in a month or two, but we found new homes for the tenants faster than expected.
It is always an anxious period of time when you are moving to a new home, or you are not quite sure where you are moving to and a number of tenants came to see me and my electorate officer looking for assistance and reassurance. We were very happy to work with them through that time. They all found homes in the areas they wanted, so it was a good outcome. We still get a few people drop into the office, which is excellent, and some of them still drop into Parap Fine Foods and keep in touch with Rene and Paul and the staff. Those who wanted to stay in the local community, everyone I have spoken to, have stayed in and around the area.
I hosted a number of meetings in the Wirrina complex. I went there a number of times with Clare Martin, the former member for Fannie Bay, who set up a barbecue and cooked up a few sausages and had a casual chat with the tenants about their issues and ideas, just staying in touch. I took a leaf from the member for Nightcliff’s book and started taking pizzas instead. I found that was much easier than lugging a barbecue around, and very popular, I might add, with the tenants. The Minister for Housing came a few times as well, which the tenants much appreciated, and they discussed general concerns they had about the complex and, obviously, around the time of change, finding a new home in a new location, and what was happening on-site.
Talking to the tenants, visiting the place and seeing it over a period of time, there is no doubt in my mind the model of high density public housing does not work. I have lived in that local community for a long time and I do not believe that model works. The building was also past its use-by date and was built many years ago now. We were talking to the people demolishing it, and there was some debate about which year it was built. I thought the late 1950s, but the bloke who was knocking it down said he thought it was built in the early 1960s – anyway, it was past its use-by date.
I was down there once on a beautiful Dry Season day and the area in the middle of the horse shoe design, which was common ground, was stifling and I was drenched in sweat. It was very badly designed with no breeze or ventilation through that common area. I was able to encourage a few people to come down for a pizza, but I do not believe anyone, on a voluntary basis, would spend time in that common area. It was a very poorly designed complex, it was past its use-by date, so we knocked it down, and we are moving into a new era of Territory Housing.
We are ahead of schedule on our promise from the last election, and we are moving on from a failed housing model. There is no doubt in my mind the housing model at Wirrina does not work - and not just at Wirrina - it does not work at Kurringal, Shiers Street and so on. The member for Goyder, the shadow minister for Housing, has made it clear these sittings that the CLP does not support the demolition of Wirrina and they want to rebuild it as it was - 100% public housing. That is their policy, which I call a proven failure as a housing model, and I do not believe it is the right idea. What we are doing right now is the right idea, trying to find a better way for people to live. However, that is the CLP’s plan, their policy, and they are allowed to have it, obviously - I just disagree with it.
They have raised in this House and in the media, quite reasonably in some instances, issues which have emerged from Territory Housing unit complexes - as I said, I do not believe these housing complexes provide a great living environment. They have raised the issues, and that is fair enough. I thought the members for Fong Lim and Port Darwin might have agreed with our decision that these complexes do not work and we need to find a better way. However, the CLP policy position is that those units do work and that housing model is the best way: do not knock down Wirrina; leave Shiers Street as it is; leave Tomaris Court as it is, and so on. I find that perplexing; I do not agree with that position and I find it quite extraordinary. We believe we need to find a better way to house Territory Housing tenants. The housing conditions in these complexes are not good enough.
We believe the better housing model is the mixed tenure model where you combine affordable housing, social housing, and private housing. That is what we are moving forward with on the site of Wirrina. We are about to enter the expressions of interest stage, and I expect a large number of people to be interested and a large range of views put forward. It is a big site and it will include the six town houses which were behind Wirrina and the house on the other side of Drysdale Street behind Wirrina, so it will be a large site. Once it is finished there will probably be more people living on that site than there is now - it will have a higher density, which makes sense to me.
Wirrina is on a main road, Parap Road. It is on a public transport route, it is across the road from shops and is the right place to do that type of development. I believe it will be a very positive development for the local community, for Territory Housing tenants, for the new affordable housing rental company and the people who will move in there - low income earners, middle income earners, and anyone in the private market who decides to invest in that location
After Wirrina there is further development. Three more public housing complexes behind Wirrina along Parap Road, which many people do not realise: there is Somerville Gardens at 10 Parap Road, and the Pitscheneder complex which we are looking at redeveloping and have already flagged for seniors and looking at different options for seniors. We have built many seniors villages in the past around Darwin and they work very well, but it is always good, where you can, to provide people with different choices. We are looking at building units on that site to provide variety in the market and different options for seniors and Territory Housing tenants. Not everyone wants a garden, and that provides a different option and, I believe, a very welcome option. I am confident Territory Housing, given what they have done in the past, will be able to deliver a quality product at Pitscheneder.
The Kurringal Seniors’ Village is just down the road and is a fantastic little community. I try to get down there monthly for a community barbecue; everyone brings a plate, throws a few dollars in, and you get some quality food. I do not organise that; I enjoy local community barbecues, but I cannot take credit for that. It is a really good Friday night, and I look forward to that when that is coming up and I am free to get down there. They have developed an Open Garden scheme in the last couple of years, and I remember last June shovelling nine or 10 trailer loads of top soil at the weekend. They take great pride in their gardens, and the Open Garden scheme over the Saturday and Sunday was fantastic. I went again this year and they are talking about taking next year off to give the gardens a bit of a break, to give themselves a bit of a break, and then opening up the Open Garden scheme again in 2011. I encourage all members to go out there; it is a fantastic community.
Accommodation for seniors is a priority for many reasons: with the growing seniors’ population we need to provide more seniors’ public housing to free up three or four-bedroom Territory Housing homes for families. I sincerely believe we can do that, and the Pitscheneder complex is part of the Parap Road redevelopment.
The other project going on in my electorate at the moment is the Southern Cross Care Retirement Village. With 85 aged care beds and 85 homes between the flexi-care apartments and the independent live-in townhouses, it will be an excellent development, and Stage 1 will start soon. I commend all the players in that project and it has certainly sparked a great deal of interest in the community. A large number of people have come into my office very interested in the project, and many have put their names on the wait list.
What I did not mention is the number of people who called my office and called Southern Cross Care saying they have heard about this retirement village happening at the old Waratah Oval at Fannie Bay, and they want to move back to Darwin to live in Fannie Bay in the retirement village; and they were quite excited. For whatever reason, they are living down south at the moment and are looking at their retirement options and, instead of people in Darwin moving down south to retire, we have people down south looking to retire to Darwin to live in Fannie Bay. That is fantastic, and is a reflection of the quality of Fannie Bay, Parap and Stuart Park as great places to live. People in the south are now looking to retire and move north, which is fantastic.
We have a positive plan in my electorate to address many of the housing needs we have in the Territory - social housing, affordable housing, and seniors’ housing.
Madam Speaker, I commend the statement to the House.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Madam Speaker, I welcome the statement because it gives us an opportunity to talk about public housing and Territory Housing, not just in Alice Springs, but Tennant Creek, Katherine and Darwin. It is something this parliament should talk on a regular basis.
About 10 or 15 years ago, ABS had data which showed an increase in the number of people from the bush moving into towns like Alice Springs, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Darwin. The government said they really did not pay any attention to the increase of populations in Darwin, Alice Springs and Katherine and, I guess, that is why we have this lack of housing for people.
If you go around Alice Springs you will see the homeless in the creeks, in the Todd River, up in the hills around Alice Springs, as you have here in Darwin in the long grass and in buildings in the city. It is really sad when in a young country, a rich country like Australia, we have ourselves in a situation where we have people with mental illness, people in poverty, people who are struggling, living on our streets. For a rich country, for a Territory which is new and small, we should never have put ourselves into this situation where our people are struggling.
One of the questions I would like the minister to answer is: in Alice Springs you had what was called Aboriginal Housing based out of Territory Housing, and early this year Aboriginal Housing closed. One of the things that Aboriginal Housing did was collect money from Indigenous people who were living in Territory Housing and put it into a bank account so that these people could use their own money for the maintenance of their houses. So if a drunken relative came one night and smashed a window or bumped into the gate, they would use their money out of Aboriginal Housing to fix the houses, rather than going to Territory Housing. It would be very interesting to hear from the minister why Aboriginal Housing was closed down. At this time, when we have a huge increase in the number of Indigenous people in towns like Alice Springs, we need a social policy within Territory Housing. I do not believe they have the capacity, at the moment, to understand how people live in Territory Housing.
Some of my earlier dreams in Territory Housing were in Gnoilya Street and Standley Crescent and it has really given us some opportunities, but we have moved on from there. I believe why we get ourselves stuck is because there is really no plan within Territory Housing to have a look, case-by-case, where those people live when they come to apply for housing. I know there are people who live in homelands 15 km, 20 km, or 30 km out of Alice Springs, who have a home out there built by the federal government because they are classified as homelands and also hold Territory Housing houses in Alice Springs. This clogs up the system for people who really need housing in Alice Springs for someone who has a house on a homeland 15 km or 20 km away, to then be given another house in Alice Springs. That is something we really need to look at; we really need to scrutinise people when they apply for houses.
One of the things I want to get to as well is antisocial behaviour; I know the member for Araluen spoke about that. I live in the member for Braitling’s area, and you heard about this last year and the year before - Saltwell Street and Lindavale Drive is just hectic - because Territory Housing has lumped every Aboriginal person who applies for Territory Housing in Alice Springs out to Larapinta. It has really degraded that area. We need social housing, we need private housing, and we need the two to get on. At the moment Larapinta is the hot spot because of the inability of Territory Housing to spread people out equally across Alice Springs. There is a whole influx of my people living in one area causing all types of grief to their neighbours, to shop owners and to people simply walking their dogs or walking with their children in the parks. I believe we have to get away from lumping people in one area and have a plan within the department which understands the town, understands the social problems we have in the town, and spreads all the people equally across the town so we are living as good neighbours, like the member for Araluen said, looking after each other and making sure we support each other. That is certainly not currently happening in Alice Springs.
Another issue I wanted to talk about is seniors’ accommodation. As the Minister for Central Australia said, for years Loraine Braham spoke in here about a seniors’ village in Alice Springs, and we are still waiting for our seniors’ village in Alice Springs. As I said in my statement on Monday, you have a lady with dementia sitting down in the creek; you have an amputee crawling around underneath the bridge in the river in the heart of Alice Springs - I certainly hope he is still there when parliament meets in November in Alice Springs so the government can see him crawling round in the creek because he cannot use his wheelchair and he depends on drunken relatives to get him up to hard ground so he can sit there and wait for them.
It is very unfair that people, no matter what their colour, who have mental illness, amputations and dementia struggle and suffer in a very rich country like Australia, and specifically in the Northern Territory. It should be a huge concern to us, not as politicians, but as human beings. These people are someone’s uncle, someone’s auntie, someone’s dad or grandparents; and I have seen children with these people, as well.
I will finish up by encouraging the government to really have a look at a social inclusion plan in Territory Housing and, hopefully, engaging Aboriginal Housing to be part of Territory Housing so it is taking the initiative and the direction to work with Indigenous people who live in Territory Housing in Alice Springs. They were doing a very good job; they were talking to people about antisocial behaviour, keeping their yards clean, keeping their houses clean, and making sure those people were putting money aside to keep up their own maintenance.
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Madam Speaker, quite frankly, I have had a gutful of this nonsense. We come here today, everyone knows about all the problems in this joint, and these guys have the hide, the audacity, the absolute gall to come in here with a statement about public housing and saying how committed they are.
First line of the minister’s speech is: ‘The government is committed to housing Territorians.’ Well, what a load of absolute nonsense! The government is doing everything they can not to house Territorians. They have sat for two years now on $672m for probably some of the most disadvantaged Australians in this country. Have they got their act together and built a house or two? Not one single one, and they have the audacity to come in here and tell us how committed they are to housing Territorians. Well, it is an absolutely appalling situation where they sit on $672m for two years and cannot build one single house.
I am not going to go on too much about SIHIP; the member for Macdonnell has spoken about it, the member for Braitling and a number of other members have spoken at length about SIHIP. Everyone in the country knows this government’s handling of SIHIP has turned into a complete farce, and it is an absolute national disgrace. It is right up the with the Little Children Are Sacred report, which also highlighted what a disgrace this government is.
The minister said they recognise they have some challenges because people have moved to the Territory in the last 10 years, the population has grown, urban drift has increased, and people are getting older. Goodness me, blind Freddy could have told you the population is ageing. I remember when I was in the superannuation industry in the early 1990s people were talking then about the ageing population; that is more than 20 years ago. Here we are, it is just dawning on this government that people are getting older in the Northern Territory, and they cannot plan for that for some reason or other.
We sat in Question Time today and heard excuse after excuse from the Minister for Health why our waiting lists for elective surgery are getting longer and longer. Every other mendicant Labor state in this country has the same problems. He said we are doing better than Tasmania and the ACT; well, that means we are doing worse than Queensland where they have Doctor Death and Goss with his old mate who is now who is the Prime Minister. They call him Doctor Death too, because of all the hospitals he closed in Queensland, and the nurses and doctors he sacked and put out of work. The health system in Queensland is an absolute disgrace.
We saw a Four Corners program only a week or so ago which shone a spotlight on the system of government in New South Wales. New South Wales is on its knees - absolutely broke - but they have a better health system than we have here. I made a bit of a jibe in Question Time saying I am surprised the minister did not compare us to Zimbabwe or some Middle Eastern countries, and say we have a better health system than there. However, all this is a backdrop to the fact this government, over the last eight or so years, has received a windfall of money, an additional amount of over $1.2bn - $1200m – more than they expected to get. In fact, in the last eight years, revenue into the Northern Territory government has doubled - yet, things get worse.
Mr CONLAN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells.
Mr Conlan: I honestly cannot believe the government cannot form a quorum. This is ridiculous.
Madam SPEAKER: Resume your seat, member for Greatorex!
Ms Lawrie: Have you heard of an empty vessel? That is what …
Madam SPEAKER: Deputy Chief Minister, cease interjecting.
Mr Conlan: You are the Belinda Neal of the Northern Territory parliament.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order! A quorum is present.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It is interesting to hear the member for Karama firing up yet again. My colleague described her as the Belinda Neal of the Northern Territory parliament - an empty vessel that makes the most noise - because the Treasurer has a great many problems organising the finances for the Northern Territory; and it is the work the Treasurer does which has seen the $1.2bn windfall squandered. Whilst revenue has doubled, it seems we are getting less and less for our money. What a failure the member for Karama is. This is the same person who described her own electorate as a war zone ...
Ms Lawrie: No, I did not.
Mr TOLLNER: What a disgusting situation when the Treasurer of the Northern Territory describes her own electorate as a war zone. However, I digress, Madam Speaker.
This week we heard the story of 70 demountables shipped to the Northern Territory as part of the intervention from the Woomera Detention Centre. They were shipped to Alice Springs to provide emergency accommodation for people as part of the intervention and organised by the Commonwealth government. The only thing the Northern Territory government had to do was find a place to locate those demountables. We are going through the worst housing crisis the Territory has ever faced, mainly due to lack of planning, poor planning, and the fact these guys could not organise a chook raffle in a pub – and that is putting it politely. In any case, 70 demountables sitting in Alice Springs for well for three years gathering dust, not located anywhere, just sitting in a park and lo and behold, what happens? The Commonwealth says: ‘If you guys do not need them, we will take them.’ So they have gone there this week to collect those demountables, and guess where they are using them? They are going to use them in detention centres for boat people, because Kevin Rudd relaxed Australia’s immigration laws and practically encouraged illegal immigrants into this country to the point now where they need to take 70 demountables which were for Indigenous people in major disadvantage to house illegal immigrants. What a shameful, shameful situation.
When you look at public housing, what has the Labor government done there? Admittedly, I agree with the Minister for Housing, the previous government did sell off houses; it sold off more houses than it built, but that pales into complete insignificance in comparison with this government. This government has sold off more than 2000 public housing dwellings - what a shameful situation. We now have a situation where the waiting list for public housing has more than 2700 people on it, with a minimum four year wait. This plays out terribly right across the Northern Territory, because we have people living in car parks, living in tents, living rough, the likes of which we have never, ever seen.
We have always had a problem in Darwin and some of the regional areas with itinerants, but the way the itinerant population has grown under this government has to be seen to be believed; there are itinerants everywhere. The car park for my electorate office most nights has cars parked where people are sleeping; their washing is strung between cars, simply due to a lack of proper accommodation in the Northern Territory.
Antisocial behaviour abounds in public housing locations - drunkenness, the most disgusting behaviour you can imagine occurs in some of these places, and what is the government’s response? Well, they knocked down a big block of units in Parap with no thought to where these people were going to go; but it had to go because it was impacting negatively on the member for Fannie Bay. That is the only reason they demolished those units and, the fact is, those people are now turning up in other places.
In my electorate, in the area of Reynolds Court - Madam Speaker, I am sure you would be aware because the other side of that street is in your electorate – there is a wonderful seniors’ retirement village, you could describe it. There are some wonderful people. I heard the Minister for Business talking earlier about the wonderful way people keep their gardens, and this place is an exemplar of that. These people work hard and diligently on their gardens, nothing is out of place, and you could not find a nicer group of seniors anywhere in the Northern Territory; and I am sure you would agree with that statement, Madam Speaker.
A couple of weeks ago, one of those people passed on and the unit became vacant. They shipped a man in there from the Wirrina Flats in Parap. The man is in a wheelchair and has a mental disability. Every night he is drunk and he has a team of hangers-on like you would not believe. All of sudden, that quiet little housing estate has become a nightmare for the residents there. And this is not just occurring there; it is occurring in a range of other places very similar to it.
In my electorate there is a big block of Housing Commission units in Runge Street, and another big block in Shiers Street. These places spew antisocial behaviour throughout the surrounding suburbs, and it is quite disgusting what some people do. I have gone all through the statement the minister has put out, and I have seen nothing in there which says how the government is curtailing, or trying to even stop, the antisocial behaviour in these public housing units.
Mr Bohlin: They have lost the war.
Mr TOLLNER: They have lost the war. My view is if you want to live and carry on like an animal, move out to the scrub where the animals live. Decent, civilised human beings should not have to put up with the disgusting behaviour of a minority of these people. It is just not right. I would like to ask the minister how many tenants he has evicted this month, or in the last six months, or in the last year or last five years. I bet it is not too many. There is not a Housing Commission block of units in the Territory where you do not see trouble and strife wherever you go.
Most of these places have alcohol warning signs all over them saying they are alcohol-restricted areas. I put it to you, minister, you say you go to these places; go there any time during the day and tell me whether people are sitting under trees drinking. I tell you right now, it happens in every single one of these places. What do the authorities do about it? Absolutely nothing. The minister presides over this type of nonsense and seems to think it is all right. The reason we know he thinks it is all right is because the guy has the gall to come into this place and make the dodgy statements he makes. It is an absolute disgrace.
Nowhere in these places are people being evicted - nowhere. I tell you what, if I rent a unit in the private sector, and most real estate businesses have a property management arm, if I rent a unit through one of these and I carry on like the tenants of Housing Commission places do - before you blink, you are booted out. There is no way known a private owner will have these animals housed in their places. The minister does not even acknowledge this sort of behaviour happens; and does not acknowledge people are living in terror.
At the Shiers Street block of units only a few months ago, A Current Affair came up here and described them as the worst Housing Commission units in Australia. What an indictment on the government. I see the minister sitting over there chuckling, and thinking: this is all fine. He knows at the back of his mind it is not really the worst place, because there are plenty of other places in the Territory which are much worse. He knows it, and I know it. I watched A Current Affair and saw the way they portrayed this place, and guess what? It was pretty damned accurate.
Before they did the story that day, I was standing there with a gentleman who lives in that block of units, and the A Current Affair presenter asked me: ‘Do you think there is any point us keeping a film crew here tonight? Do you reckon there might be an incident?’ I said: Look, mate, I don’t know, I suppose there is a 50/50 chance.’ The old bloke who lives in there looks at me and says: ‘Go away, Dave, you are bloody dill. Every night something happens in here. Every single night I can guarantee we will have the police around here, every second night there is an ambulance here, and once a week we will have the fire brigade.’ Sure enough, A Current Affair decides to hang around to get a bit of footage, and what do they see? Whole places getting smashed up, and a bloke hacked up with a machete. Incidentally, the same fellow who only a few months later passed on, the Housing minister had his 14-year-old daughter callously kicked out of that block of units. He can kick out a 14-year-girl, but he cannot kick out people who throw TVs out of units, throw fridges out of units, who smash in doors, who write graffiti all over buildings, who urinate, defecate in the stairwells – no, no, it is all too hard – but he will throw a 14-year-old girl out in the street. It is just appalling, absolutely appalling.
Mr CONLAN: Madam Speaker, I call your attention to the state of the House, once again, please.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells. A quorum is present.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It is good to see some people on the other side are interested in hearing someone else’s problems here in the Northern Territory.
Madam SPEAKER: I ask you to withdraw that comment, bearing in mind you are not supposed to comment on the presence or absence of members.
Mr TOLLNER: I was not, Madam Speaker. I just said I am glad to see there are some members in here who are interested in hearing about the housing problems we are having here in …
Dr BURNS: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker, it is the presence or absence.
Mr CONLAN: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker. The member for Fong Lim made no reference to anyone being present or absent. He simply said it is great to see people are here to listen to him.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Greatorex, resume your seat, please. Member for Fong Lim, you have the call; continue your comments through the Chair, please.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I know you were hanging off every word. As I say, what goes on in these commission units is absolutely appalling, and the most vile behaviour I believe any of us can imagine. I get into these places on a regular basis talking constituents, and it is terrible the lifestyles …
Mr CHANDLER: Madam Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order 77, I move that the member be given an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and member for Brennan, and all those on the other side who supported that call.
The people who live in these places have to put up with horrendous conditions. I heard stories about people whose kids cannot come home in the afternoon from school for fear of what is going to happen to them in these blocks of units. There is a man in that Shiers Street block of units who tells me quite often his daughter will not come back until after dark because she has to hide and sneak her way into the place for fear that in daylight someone will see her and come down and assault her. I have heard of stories of people who sleep with hammers under their pillows, with spear guns, with all types of weapons for fear they will be broken into and bashed.
For us, in this place, that sort of scene is unimaginable, but for these people it is a very real threat and it happens on a regular basis. They have a real fear, and a real reason for the fear they will be broken into and bashed. And what is the government doing about it? Has the government stood up and said: ‘Right, we are going to reform the way these places are managed. We are going to come in here with legislations which make it easier for us to evict problem tenants?’ As I say, if these people want to live like animals they should do it out in the scrub where the animals live. That is where they should be, not in a civilised society. I do not believe we should be showing much heart to a bunch of people who get drunk, smash up public property, urinate and defecate in stairwells, smash other people’s motor cars, throw fridges and televisions out the window, because they do not deserve it - they do not deserve it one bit.
Public housing should be seen as a privilege, not a right. I know there are people out there who are suffering, and who have copped all sorts of problems in life, to whom the privilege of public housing should be extended. However, there are other people in those places from whom that privilege should be withdrawn. To me, that makes perfect sense.
Going back to that Shiers Street block of units, where the minister so callously evicted a 14-year-old girl onto the streets. At 5.15 pm that afternoon, I received a phone call from one of the tenants ...
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member is asserting the minister himself was a party to these proceedings, and any reasonable person would know that is not the case.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Fong Lim, I would like you to continue, but just bear that in mind.
Mr TOLLNER: Put it this way: someone in the minister’s employ …
Dr Burns: Who the minister is responsible for.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr TOLLNER: … who the minister is responsible for and wears the ultimate responsibility, had this kid turned out onto the street at somewhere around 5 pm, because I received the phone call at 5.15 pm saying: ‘Come down to this block of units’ - no reason given. The person just said to me: ‘Come down to these block of units and see what these mongrels have done’. I get there and a 14-year-old girl is sitting there with a whole heap of bags, outside a block of units at around 5.30 pm.
Contrary to what the minister has alleged in this place, the first phone call I made was to Territory Housing. However, it being 5.30 pm, interestingly enough, there was no one about. The next set of phone calls I made was to the minister’s own office, thinking: I can understand a bunch of public servants knocking off before 5.30 pm, that is quite understandable; their hours of work do not extend to 5.30 pm, but as sure as God made little apples, there would be someone around to take a phone call in the minister’s office. But, alas, no, it must have been one of the few days in the year where everyone left the office by 5.30 pm.
I then contacted someone in the Opposition Leader’s office and explained the situation, and they started to work the phones. Around 6.30 pm, we managed to get onto Family and Community Services - a 24-hour, 1800 number. Contrary to what the minister told the parliament, these people were not even aware this girl had been evicted. They knew the girl well, but they were not aware she did not have a place to stay. What happened then? The minister accused me that it was all grandstanding - no concerns for the child - does not come in here and explain why this child was turned out, and how many other similar instances had occurred, and what changes to his internal departmental policy he has made. No, he accused me of grandstanding because I had the audacity to contact the media.
Of course, I admit it, I did call the media. I called the media because nothing seems to happen in this place until the media gets hold of it; then, all of a sudden, the whole joint seems to go into damage control mode - complete and utter damage control mode. I am surprised it took so long, but at 10.30 pm or 11 pm the police turn up to the block of units wondering who kidnapped the kid. This is the minister who said he cannot understand why I contacted the media. He seems to believe I should have contacted the police, as if he suggested some type of crime had occurred. My understanding was it was Territory Housing who kicked the kid out, and they must have had some reason. I do not believe sooling the police onto Territory Housing was the right way to go. In any case, maybe I should have called the police. The fact was, the police turned up at 10.30 at night looking for the kidnapper. What a ridiculous situation. How coordinated is this government and their departments? It is absolutely appalling.
Public housing is a disgrace in the Northern Territory, but it is not only the disgrace this minister has to his name. Territorians suffer regular blackouts. We are coming into the Wet Season now, and it will be interesting to see what circumstances occur in relation to electricity in the Northern Territory in this coming Wet Season. I hope it is much better than it has been in the Dry Season. The minister’s response to all these blackouts is telling people to buy a generator - go and buy a generator. What a silly response! The price of generators has gone up in the Northern Territory because no one can trust the power system.
Not only is he the minister for blackouts, but he is also the minister who is now trying to restrict hard-working public servants having a decent pay increase; and that goes back to the Treasurer we have here, because the Treasurer has squandered the Territory’s money and now realises she cannot afford to pay the public servants a decent pay increase which would bring them into line with the Consumer Price Index. But no, public servants now have to take a pay cut, in real terms, because of this Treasurer’s failure to manage money properly.
Dr Burns: You were going to slash the jobs; that is what your leader wanted to do.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr TOLLNER: Well, that is absolute rubbish. The fact is, this is a shambolic government; there are so many shambolic ministers here to go through in just a 30 minute presentation, but one thing is for certain, the Housing Minister must go, and anyone with decency or common sense would get rid of him. Unfortunately, we have a Chief Minister who is weak, who is only hanging on by a thread, and who is desperate to hold government and knows he has nothing left in the cupboard – nothing - so Territorians have to suffer this fool for as long as his dodgy deal is maintained, and that is a poor indictment of the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I am at my wits end. As I said at the start of this speech, I have had a gutful of this nonsense, of listening to the absolute trash the minister comes in here with. It is sickening, particularly when you take it back to the real lives of real people out there.
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, I would like to talk about two particular couples in my constituency, and I will mention only their suburb as they have asked not to be further identified. I will talk firstly of a young couple with two small children and another one on the way, who visited my office complaining about their neighbours in a Territory Housing tenancy in Driver. The wife was distraught, and she fought back tears through the first half of our meeting. These are very unassuming people, they are not dramatically out there in either way, but this lovely lady, in the later half of her pregnancy, with two kids in tow, could hardly hold back her tears.
Territory Housing is well aware of the complaints from this couple. In response, they have conducted neighbourhood surveys, and are currently in the process of conducting a second neighbourhood survey after our complaints to them.
A member: To be sure, to be sure.
Mr BOHLIN: To be sure, to be sure - a very good comment. They have been involved with the Antisocial Behaviour Officer who conducted mediation sessions - with no real results. Further, Territory Housing officers, on a recent visit told this couple their complaints were not worth complaining about. The department which is supposed to help our people said their complaints are not worth complaining about.
I will read some of the complaints. They are verbally abused when they are in their yard - not the neighbours’ yard, not the offending yard, but in their own yard. They are verbally abused with words like: ‘What the [expletive] are you looking at?’ Another complaint: the neighbours trespass and hide in their yard; they do not stay in their own yard and cause trouble, they will actually climb the fence and go into the victim’s yard. I will call them the victim because they are victims - victims of circumstance, victims of failure to act. Food scraps, rocks and rubbish are thrown into their yard, and they are personally afraid to allow their children to play outside in their own yard. They have caught the young boys next door trying to lure their young daughter next door to ‘something’ them. They actually caught the young boys saying: ‘Come here, come here’, trying to entice the much smaller girls across the fence line. Unbelievable.
The complainants are afraid to leave their house, fearing for their personal safety. They had to get rid of their dog. They had a dog and they feel they need a dog still, but because the Territory Housing tenants next door threw rocks to the point they significantly wounded the animal, in the best interest of their animal, they sent it away for friends to look after. The neighbours pegged a large lump of concrete at their dog and caused substantial injuries.
Most of the windows in the Territory Housing property are smashed, and the yard is a mess with bags of rubbish present. The house has an alcohol prohibition sign on it, but drinking still occurs. Police have been called several times and when they attend, they are also subjected to abuse. Police report they have been asked to attend this premises by most of the other residents of the street. The complainants participated in a Territory Housing facilitated mediation session some time ago and, as a result of this intervention, the Territory Housing tenants left the premises for two weeks, but on their return continued their abuse, drinking and antisocial behaviour. The complainants believe after the mediation an agreement was actually entered into by the offenders, and their way of dealing with it was to go walkabout for two weeks, the time for which the behaviour order was put on them.
Staff of Territory Housing in Palmerston have been there, and I commend them for going there, but the officer there at the moment seems to have ignored the previous efforts to deal with this, and has said: ‘Right, let us wash our hands and give everyone a fresh chance. The evidence has been gathered previously, it is with the police, it is with the neighbours and it is time to just wash our hands and start again. We will even chastise the victims, and say your complaints are not worth complaining about.’ They mirror the standard of complaint and what is required to deem it to be a complaint. I am seriously concerned about the lack of leadership, and that this type of behaviour can happen.
How can we control and maintain good order when the agency in charge of the facilities will not do anything, or will do everything in their power to repeat the process until someone, and it is normally the victim, gets so frustrated that they leave. But the people who are wrong, the offenders, stay in the house - they get their way - their abuse and intimidation has worked, and the victims have to suffer.
The Minister for Housing is aware of that particular residence. If the minister would like to approach me afterwards, or on Monday, I will give him the correct details of that address. I will make sure there is no confusion whatsoever as to where this problem is. I will even go as far as to state to this House that someone within the government’s employment, the Chief Minister’s employment, lives in that same street and is appalled by the behaviour of that family, and is appalled by the response from Territory Housing, and is shocked at their insistence to go down another mediation line when it has already been conducted. When will you get tough and say: ‘Enough is enough?’
Mr Mills: Hear, hear!
Mr BOHLIN: I will move to my second couple and say they live in the suburb of Gray. This couple formally complained to Territory Housing and did not receive an acknowledgment of their complaint which later complicated the formal advice the minister received in regards to the number of complaints made, and the duration of the problem. So, could there be a problem with the way in which complaints are handled, managed and recorded? I would like to suggest there is a massive problem between the initial phases of complaints being made, and the next stage where a Complaints Conciliation Officer is appointed. There seems to be a void, as if concrete door panels between the two offices prevent vital information being shared and, in this instant, I believe this was the case.
In the first case I have talked about, it is obvious either the Case Officer from Territory Housing has totally ignored all the evidence gathered over the last year or two; or is so self-important of their own position they think they are much better than anyone who has previously tried to deal with it. I am not sure; it is a surmise, that is all.
So, this couple in Gray have lodged a complaint and never received an acknowledgment of their complaint. When they complained further to try to get some action, the minister, it would appear from this information, was unable to get the information because the complaint was not recorded properly in the first place; so the escalation of the problem was not appropriately recorded by his department. This couple have participated in two Territory Housing neighbourhood surveys and mediations. But it took successful, independent, court action and an apprehended violence order, which resulted in the Territory Housing tenant, the offender in this circumstance, signing a conditional undertaking to keep the peace.
The couple took this independent court action at significant financial cost, after verbal and off-the-record advice from Territory Housing officers who said their hands were tied. They gave this advice to the couple: ‘Our hands are tied. You should take court action.’ Territory Housing is the agency in control or, probably, out of control. They have control to deal with the problem tenants, and they said: ‘Our hands are tied. You are better off seeking private, legal advice.’ Well, they were successful, and they got a court order. So a magistrate has found that this tenant is a problem, this person is a problem, but nothing changed in Territory Housing.
An interesting point will come later about that order; so do not forget that violence order was taken out on their behalf, at their cost, from April 2007 until they were forced to sell their home. Now this couple are personal homeowners, being directly affected by a bad Territory Housing tenant; they had to sell their house due to the actions of the adjoining Territory Housing tenant. It was so bad they had to sell. Some of the things they had to continually endure were loud music; intimidating behaviour at the back fence of their property, including objects thrown and kicking the back fence; and verbal abuse which, on one of many occasions, saw the wife, the victim, transported by ambulance to hospital due to stress and trauma. I have spoken with this couple a number of times, and it has been going on for so long, with no help at all, that this beautiful lady, the victim, has essentially had a nervous breakdown, because they would not do anything.
I spoke to other neighbours around, and they said the same thing. I would love to bring some other information into this House, but I believe I am precluded from discussing some information about this particular case. If the Housing Minister likes, I can tell him about this case afterwards, and he can take it back to his department and say: ‘You are kidding me, aren’t you? Why have you not acted?’
This couple lost the use of their back yard, their veranda, and all peaceful amenities normally afforded a person in their own back yard. This was their own house. On one occasion, guests were invited to a barbecue at this home, and they ended up packing up and leaving due to the antisocial behaviour the Territory Housing tenant hurled at them. They could not stay there; they were there for a beautiful barbecue with their friends, and because of the abuse they were copping, they had to leave.
There have been rats entering the property from derelict car bodies left in the adjoining tenancy, which ended after our intervention when Territory Housing removed these cars, but at no cost to the tenant at fault, so he would not be financially disadvantaged. He left the wrecks there; he put the wrecks there. The department finally had the gumption to do something to get rid of them because there was a potential public health issue, so they moved them on his behalf, but they did not charge him with any costs. They did not even say we will take it out of his payments over the next however many months. So, we, as a Territory, have paid for his failings, the offender’s failings. By the way, the tenant, the offender, has subsequently obtained more car wrecks, and I believe they are still there today. So, on one hand, Territory Housing has got rid of the cars, and then a couple of weeks later the bloke gets another couple of cars. Still nothing; still no direct action.
The victim’s teenage son has been verbally abused while in the yard, and he just will not go there. The wife was verbally abused and physically assaulted by the tenant at the Palmerston Shopping Centre. I am told this resulted in a fine being applied to the offender, the Territory Housing tenant. So the matter was technically dealt with, but it should have been dealt with by way of proper court action, because there was an apprehended violence order which precluded the offender, the Territory Housing tenant, going anywhere near the victim. But he got away with it. Let us say this has been dealt with; he did get a fine, I have been advised. I am also told; again, off the record, that this Territory Housing tenant has been relocated several times, and is well-known to both Territory Housing and to the police over many years.
It is unbelievable this type of behaviour is happening right across the Territory, and no definitive action is taken. The victims and the public are suffering because the department internally will not stand up, or because they do not have the strength of leadership to guide them through the process to stand up against those who are offending against the rest of the Territory community.
The statement talks about what you are going to do. Eight years, I remind people, eight years to change not one thing but, in fact, make matters worse. Let them stew and stagnate so they become festering sores upon society and people have to sell their houses; people have nervous breakdowns; people are in fear, and hide in corners of their own houses because offenders next door come and crash on their veranda and argue with their partners. And it is all due to lack of management. It could have been dealt with much better over the years if there had been appropriate land release. You had the GST revenue, dramatically larger than any budget the CLP ever had and, during that time I am not sure what you have done with that money, but you certainly have not renovated the Territory Housing houses. You have not done maintenance.
One of my colleagues, who may stand up in a few minutes to give me more time, mentioned checking the oil of your car. It is about preventative maintenance. If you do not check the oil in your engine, if you do not check the water in the radiator, if you do not check the tyres and change them occasionally, something will go wrong, something will happen. So, if you do not maintain the houses, if you do not check the condition of the houses and the tenants, and keep an eye on what is going on, something will break. Instead of protecting the government’s investment, through neglect - and it is long-term neglect; eight years you have had control of the ship to do what you needed to do to effect the change you claim you so badly want make.
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, I move that the honourable member be given an extension of 10 minutes to conclude his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr BOHLIN: I thank the House. It is about maintenance, and if you had maintained it properly there would not be these dramatically large bills. If you had checked the tenants, and kept them in order, like any other rental agreement, we would not have this antisocial behaviour. Those people would understand the boundaries and the consequences of stepping outside those boundaries.
Territory Housing should be a privilege; it is a necessity, but it is a privilege. If you abuse that privilege, you need to be set straight. You need to be given the right guidance, and if that is some form of education and training and reform, then give it to the people. They deserve that extra help. To ignore them and let them continue to create this festering sore of discontent amongst society, this anguish upon the victims, is not acceptable.
I skip to some talk from this side this week about high rise apartment, about places like Kurringal having to be knocked down and how horrible some of those places were; they needed maintenance, but they were a solution at the time. Yes, there are different practices but, if you do not maintain, if you do not control the situations within them and execute consequences for bad behaviour, of course they will get out of control; of course, they will be horrible.
The member for Karama said: ‘All those people jammed together is not good’. Maybe the buildings themselves may not have been in the best state of repair after eight years, but look at high rise buildings just over here, there are several apartments with people jammed together. We are building new ones all the time and people get along with each other to a fair degree, because there a consequences. There is someone in charge, and there is a corporate body in charge of what is happening. People know there are consequences, and there is respect for the facility.
There has also been talk this week of the unexpected growth rate – unexpected - never saw it coming. I know over three years ago there was talk in the building trade and the industry began identifying a land shortage then. That is over three years ago. Whilst I was the Officer-in-Charge of Kintore police I kept in touch with many of my contacts and they kept saying: ‘We have a problem’. I asked: ‘What is that?’ ‘There is no land, mate. We have a problem; these guys are not listening.’ I said: ‘I cannot believe that; there is land everywhere.’ I came back to Darwin and, yes, there is no land. Now, all of a sudden, it is the result of an unexpected growth rate over the last three years or more. As I pointed out in a speech yesterday, it is because of a government plan to restrain land release to help boost the economy and become a great investment hub - a deliberate act which has backfired and hurt all the Territory.
I want to point out clearly to people that this week the government has continued to rest their hat on the catch-cry of ‘an unexpected growth rate’. Every excuse they have used, whether it is health, housing or crime, is due to unexpected growth. That is what they have rested their hat on. That is their excuse this week. That is the political spin they have used: ‘We have unexpected growth, so there is a lot of tonsillitis’.
Every time we come in here we have new spin, a new catch-cry for the week. What can we blame the crisis on? This week let the public know, if they have not picked up on it, it is unexpected growth - that is why we have Territory Housing waiting lists beyond four years; that is why we have Territory Housing tenants whose houses are run down and have not been repaired for years; houses that have been vacant for years and not refurbished, and when work is done, they need major work because there has been no control over them for years; there is no land released on time and when land is released and sales occur, they are off-the-plan so there is no physical soil a builder can take and make a dream come true - the unexpected growth did all that. Unplanned and unexpected - no plan for it. As I said, three years ago we could see it.
There has also been discussion about making sure we had the right houses to build with SIHIP, making sure we build the right houses that are strong. The Housing Minister even said: ‘I could buy a tin shed house, put it on a block for X amount of money - done, finished’. If he can do that, why has he not done it? Maybe it would not be the most sustainable house, but as an emergency, it could have helped; it could have eased the situation. I clearly state I am not saying that is the answer, because I probably would not use that method, but there will be other styles of housing that work.
I know one company, and I will not state their name because I do not want to give bias to any particular company, which makes a transportable-style house with a concrete floor so it cannot be burnt - unlike the imitation wood slats discussed on this side of the House, which are a recycled product, and can burn - and cement fibre sheeting for walls with tin cladding on it. I have seen them in an Indigenous community, and after a period of six months the only major damage and neglect to the house was caused by the residents either not cleaning the house and not respecting the fantastic dwelling they were given or, in one case, a person got angry and took a 25 mm piece of square tubing, which was about a metre-and-a-bit long, and started jamming it through the cement fibre sheeting on the walls. He used it like a javelin to cause the damage - he could not do it with his fist, so he got a great chunk of steel.
So, there are buildings out there, and that company is putting buildings into communities in the Northern Territory, and interstate, yet I do not believe they have any SIHIP work. They will be great to talk to - this stuff works - it is proven on communities, and can be adapted to anything. I know they made a childcare centre in the same format. So to say we have to consult, and it has taken two years to fail to deliver even the plan for appropriate housing is just mind blowing.
It is a very passionate topic. If the Housing Minister would like to see me later, I will give him my two example cases so he can follow them up and make sure appropriate action is taken. If he would take any action, I would be very happy, in fact.
I thank the House for the additional time. This is a major problem and needs some major change on this side. It needs to stop doing the spin. All we have heard this week is spin, spin, spin. It is not about unexpected growth; it is about a failure to plan; a failure to even talk to the people who know what is going on, and then take action.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, the title of this statement is: Improving Public Housing, which could mean many things, whether it is a better house or a shorter waiting list.
A member: Or get a better minister.
Mr WOOD: You will have to ask him that. What we need is better outcomes.
A member: Get a better minister.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr WOOD: That is what I would like to talk about today. Over the years I have looked at the waiting lists for public housing and, there is no doubt, the public housing waiting lists have become longer and longer. Part of the agreement I have with the Chief Minister is to set a goal that over the next five years we need to reduce those waiting lists. It is not satisfactory that people have to wait four years for a house.
I have been to a certain caravan park this evening where it is very likely that about 26 people will be asked to leave. Hopefully, with negotiation, that will not happen in the two weeks they thought they were going to have to pack up and go; hopefully, we will be able to stretch it out to the end of the Wet Season. We had a member of the department of Housing talking to residents, who said if they wanted to get into a Housing Commission house, and they were not regarded as priority or emergency, they would have to wait four years.
I believe there is a definite need to have a goal, and a goal to try to reduce waiting lists over the next five years is a reasonable goal, which is achievable. Unless you have a goal like that, we will continue to wander on, and waiting lists and the numbers of people who cannot get into a house will continue to rise.
There are many things which can be done. When I looked at this statement by the minister, one thing which stood out was the number of programs about housing. I sometimes wonder whether half our problems with housing are it is so complicated. There will be some money from the Commonwealth government for this, there will be money from the Commonwealth government for that, and there will be something from the Northern Territory government. There are all these buckets of money, and you wonder why we cannot get these buckets of money into one bucket and use it to build houses ...
Mr Chandler: They have $670m and they could not build one.
Mr WOOD: That is right, but it is for one group. When you look at the other groups, you have the National Partnership Agreement, the Commonwealth government’s stimulus operation; all these buckets of money going around. It is sometimes hard to work out where all the money is going. That is one issue, but there is probably not much the Northern Territory government can do, because we get our housing money from the Commonwealth. It would be good if we could simplify the process, so we do not have all these subcommittees and committees, and everyone doing things, and perhaps that is where some of the money goes in the end.
There is no doubt - and even the minister alluded to that - to put it simply, if you want to reduce public housing waiting lists, we have to do a couple of things: we have to increase the number of public houses but, at the same time, we have to make more land available at an affordable price to get people to buy their own house. We need to attack it from both ends. Unfortunately, yes, the government has got behind in the amount of land which is available, especially affordable land.
We can also look at other options. Even caravan parks are a reasonable option. There are people who like that style of living, and it is one area the government should be looking at. A well-run permanent caravan park is a legitimate lifestyle. It is usually an affordable lifestyle and many people like the lifestyle because they live relatively close to other people, but they do not live on top of them; they enjoy that style of living. Of course, if you do not like living there, you can attach the car to your home and drive away; it gives freedom as well.
I also mentioned the other day about seeing whether we can build more houses for professional people such as nurses and teachers, and whether we could have a public/private partnership, so those people coming up, instead of putting their names down on the waiting list - and I will come to that in a little while - would know they can get into houses which have been set aside for that profession at a reduced rent. The concept is that those houses could be funded partly by the government - they might give the land - but they might be funded through superannuation funds which teachers put their money into, using that money as an investment and getting some return on their investments through a cheaper rent, which would encourage people to stay in the Northern Territory.
The other issue is one I probably did not take much notice of. I realised when I spoke to the minister about this, the waiting list also includes people you would not necessary say fit within the income bracket. I suppose most people would think public housing was generally for people who are on a fairly low income. However, we do not make those distinctions; we just charge a higher rent. It makes me wonder whether we need to review that. Do we have many people on the waiting list who, if we had enough affordable land - and that is the other side of this equation - or affordable housing, should be putting their money into the private sector, not the public sector?
My feeling is that public housing has always been for those people generally on a low income who cannot afford to get into the private market. But if we look at the waiting list, it would be interesting to know how many people on the waiting list are in an income bracket that really should put them into dealing with the private market. That is an area we should be looking at, and the same, even if it is with the people on the emergency housing.
Another area to look at is how many people actually have two houses? I know there are concerns some people have a house out bush, which is supplied, perhaps by the Commonwealth government, and they also have a house in town, and I do not believe that should happen. If you are supplied with a government house, that is the only house you are entitled to, unless you buy your own house - that might be a different matter, I suppose - but if you are supplied with a house, that is it. It would be good to do an audit of people who live in the town, but also have a house, maybe even on an outstation. I thought the idea was that you get one house and that is it. You should not be using the government purse, you might say, for a holiday home, or a place out bush. That is an area which needs to be investigated as well.
The other area is the number of houses that are empty. It is good to hear the government has put out a second tender to repair houses, and I notice there have been quite a few houses come online. But when houses are being refurbished, the quicker we can get that done, the quicker we have people moving back into houses. I will quote from an e-mail I received today, which highlights the fact about empty houses, and it said:
Even today, we have an issue about vacant units. I know it is something that the minister is looking at but, again, there is no point having vacant places when we have such a long waiting list. We need to make sure vacancies are turned around very quickly.
There is another issue, and I remember the previous member for Braitling often talked about public housing in Alice Springs and problems with security. She spoke about it many times. I believe that if you cannot look after your house, you are out. They are the rules. These are taxpayer-funded houses, and they are there for people to live and sleep, but they should be treated as such; public housing which is for their benefit.
There is talk about knocking the units down near The Narrows, near the Winnellie Supermarket. I know there was a fight not so long ago, where one person was hurt climbing a fence. I believe the reason they are looking at knocking them down is partly because of security issues. I wonder whether we ought to, in some cases, where we know problems exist, fence those units off and put in full-time security. If you own a house, like we come into Parliament House, you show your card. If people come along and want to visit you, the security person rings him up and says, ‘you have some visitors, do you want them?’ If you say no, they cannot come through the gate or humbug you, you can tell them away from there that you do not want them in the house. That would give people security. It would also stop many relations turning up in the house that you did not particularly want, who might be under the weather, and you know you have much difficulty moving them from that house.
Mr Elferink: Been tried, did not work.
Mr WOOD: I did not quite catch what the member for Port Darwin said, whether it worked or not, but I believe it is …
Mr Elferink: It was done at Wirrina Flats when Jack Ah Kit was the minister, and someone ended up stealing the gate.
Mr WOOD: My solution is to get a bigger and stronger gate. I still believe it is an option, especially where security is a problem. People want to live in Housing Commission houses. I listened to some of what the member for Drysdale was talking about. Security is really important. People expect to feel safe living in a Housing Commission house.
The member for Drysdale mentioned the Kurringal Flats. Back in the 1970s, they were a very popular, safe place, and many public servants, when they first came to Darwin, stayed in the Kurringal Flats. They were reasonably cheap accommodation and they were probably regarded in those days as luxurious, and they were solid. They went through Cyclone Tracy with hardly getting a scratch on them. Whilst people might say they are not the best today, they fulfilled a purpose in the old days, and gave people a chance to have accommodation when they first came to the Territory.
We might be saying goodbye to them, but they served a very good purpose for many people. My sisters-in-law lived in them for quite a while, but the lack of security started to kill them. I used to visit and there would be drunks on the lawn, people humbugging and all that sort of thing. Unfortunately, that continued to the point where the government decided that type of housing was not suitable. That was sad. But if the security is there, with strict enough rules - if people are not willing to look after their house, please do not come and blame us for not worrying about them if they are homeless. You can give people an opportunity to live in a home, but the home should be treated accordingly. It has to be a two-way street.
The minister talks about seniors, and I believe we need more seniors accommodation in the rural area. There is some seniors accommodation going up in Howard Springs. But Humpty Doo is a classic example where the government could immediately release some land and say to a private developer: ‘Would you like to build seniors accommodation in the rural area?’ Sometimes we forget the rural area, which is also a legitimate place to live, but there are not as many government services. Until recently, there has not been a new house built in Humpty Doo. In fact, the first duplex was advertised in the paper the other day. This is probably the first government house which has been put there for about 15 years, when there is plenty of opportunity for houses to be built in Humpty Doo. The government should look at that. It needs the mix of both private and public, but they could speed it up quickly because the infrastructure at Humpty Doo is all there: water, sewage and electricity. It needs some roads put in and you could get that up and running by mid-next year, if the government desired.
If we want to change the way things are, if we believe our figures were not right, we can go back to the past and say, perhaps you should have some independent assessment of where we were going. If we did not really recognise the growth that was happening in Darwin or the Territory, so be it. The point is: we have to move on. By all means, you can criticise the government for being slack; I have criticised them about their waiting lists for a long time, but we have to make a concerted effort to turn that around.
This will require land - cheaper land - which will provide affordable housing. I know this is going to sound terrible, but we probably need a few Bellamack Gardens - I call it Bellamack Village. You do not want too much of it, because you crowd many people into a small area, but I see it does have the possibility of affordable housing for people, in a pleasant area, with park land that is an option for people living in the suburbs. A few more of those and see how the expandable housing goes, and we should not lose sight that expandable housing may be a good option. I believe we should be trying to talk to builders about not having these huge houses we have today. I know those are the ones they sell, but it would be nice to see a few builders promote smaller houses which can be built on in the private market.
The government needs to make a concerted effort. We are building Johnston. If you want to go ahead with Zucchini and Mitchell, then you have to make the effort to do it now.
A member: Zuccoli.
Mr WOOD: I said Zucchini? Yes, it is Zuccoli. What is a zucchini? What is a Zuccoli, aye?
Members interjecting.
Mr WOOD: The next suburb will be Broccoli. What is wrong with you blokes?
We are doing Johnston now, but I believe we should be continuing straight through in building Zuccoli and Mitchell. Let us not do it little by little; that keeps the price of land exorbitantly high. We need to get those suburbs online quickly. That end of Palmerston is growing very fast and, if we are trying to overcome this waiting list, we need more land and more public housing.
What form the public housing takes is open for debate, whether it is old style public style housing or some new type of public housing. Minister, I am interested to hear more about this affordable housing company. I presume it is part of Land Corp, I might be wrong. I am interested to see what the concept is and what part of it is the government and what is private, is it totally government, or is it another name for public housing in a new format? I do not know. Again, we have to try to change things around. It is no good seeing people struggling for a living.
A lady told me tonight she could not even afford to get assisted rent, she did not earn enough money because of her children, and if she did get assisted rent for a house, she would basically be going down to the Salvation Army or St Vincent de Paul every day for meals. There are people struggling and we need to do something about it.
Madam Speaker, we can talk for ages, but the proof of the pudding will be if we come back next year and the year after and start to see this plateauing, and then start to see it going down. Then we can come back to the government and say: ‘Well done’, but until that happens, we cannot.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, as the member for Blain for 10 years, housing issues have been my main concern or, probably more correct to say, the main concern of the greater number of my constituents, also across Palmerston.
I moved to Palmerston 20 years ago and, at that time, it had plenty of cheap land and some of the earlier suburbs were largely occupied by public housing tenants, and with that came some accompanying challenges. My electorate contains some of those older suburbs, Moulden and Gray, and it is a particular challenge to manage these issues on a day-to-day basis.
Neighbourhood issues can be particularly taxing, and the challenges presented with these issues are of real concern and, if left unattended, can become real problems. The core of this is the need to establish real standards. But, of course, the whole matter has now moved to a place, where I am very concerned about what lies ahead, in terms of poor behaviour in public housing, which has been an ongoing concern. I will go through a log of the sorts of issues we currently have on our books. The Minister for Housing knows the level of correspondence that comes from my office intervening, requesting support and assistance, and advocating on behalf of constituents; it is constant.
On that note, I pay acknowledgement with respect to my electorate officer, Tasma McCall; we have worked together for 10 years. I go through a log of the current issues we have in hand, which result in listening, writing, speaking, writing again, following-up and doing our best to make sure we can oil the wheels, so there can be some speedy process. All of these matters and issues have been going on but, in recent times, with the shortage of housing, it takes on a whole new dimension.
When someone presents their story to you and it is quite clear they are in need of priority housing, and their case is so compelling, you wish you could do something yourself. Then you learn the best case scenario is six to 12 months - there is no refuge, there is no place - between six to 12 months is the best you can hope for. Balance that time of waiting six to 12 months with someone who is facing the most horrendous situation right here, right now, and you are at a loss as to what you can say to that person.
The wait lists in Palmerston are: pensioners - 47 months; one-bedroom, non-pensioner - 46 months; two-bedroom – 38 months; and three-bedroom - 46 months. These are people who are in need. In Darwin and Casuarina: one-bedroom - 45 months; one-bedroom, non-pensioner - 45 months; two-bedroom - 40 months; and three-bedroom - 55 months.
We were talking about this three or four years ago. At the time we were calling upon the government to release more land - it would probably be the same talk. But, with those waiting lists extending outwards, and we get some sense of where the poverty line is, we now find, though, the poverty line has moved to a very different place. There are people who simply cannot afford basic rents. They tell you their story, they know how to do their sums, and they are forced to live in cars or in tents. This is not an exaggeration, minister and members of this government - it is not an exaggeration.
The Minister for Housing receives much heat, and so he should. I am alarmed to hear some of the contributions from the government members, who speak of sausage sizzles and how people are getting on so nicely in certain places, blindly ignoring the underlying social problem which is developing before our eyes.
The Housing Minister is front and centre when it comes to housing matters. But, to unravel this, I place the larger responsibility on the Planning minister, the member for Karama, for her obstinacy when there were calls to release land over three years ago. We went through that, I believe, on Monday. They maintained a strong position, which is a policy position of the government, not to release land, because the release of land posed a great danger of flooding the market. In the failure to do so, to heed those calls, we have now reaped what we have sown. Sadly, as leaders, we have an obligation to respond to this.
I go back, first, to talk about the problems we have in public housing, to give you some of the ideas of the matters ...
Mr BOHLIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Sorry, member for Blain. Madam Speaker, I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells, a quorum is required. Ring the bells, please. A quorum is present.
Mr MILLS: In analysing a problem, a current, growing, and impending social problem, the analysis would have us recognise the core of this problem, the failure - the obstinate and blind failure - to release land, summed up in a defence, arrogantly put by the member for Karama, saying:
You have distorted the market and you have not met the need in the marketplace. Now there are fellow citizens who are reaping the consequences of that foolish position adopted by the government to date.
The sorts of pressures which have been brought upon public housing, these are the sorts of matters, one page of a log of issues which are on hand at the moment through my own electorate office. By the way, minister, none of these are a surprise. They are on foot at the moment, but this is the constant work of the office. Behind each of these are people, fellow citizens.
A senior citizen applied for priority housing in April 2008. The file was lost until July 2008, then it was approved. However, in September 2009, they were still on the priority list waiting for accommodation. A senior citizen waiting for accommodation - no apology or no follow through for the lost file - was about to become homeless due to current private housing being put on the market while she was waiting on the priority list. She asked permission from Territory Housing to live with the family interstate: ‘Can I just seek refuge interstate with my family while I am on the priority list waiting’, even though the file had been lost, and now is found? They said no, it is against the rules. She had to stay, where? A senior citizen, on a priority list, has to wait on someone’s couch, because if she went interstate to find refuge, she would fall off the list, even though the file had been lost.
There is another report of a woman who has been on the priority housing list. She is approved and on that priority list and has been waiting for three years. Reflect on what it means to be qualified to be on a priority housing list. Another case is: neighbours report loud music, and yelling and screaming every evening. Territory Housing staff are unable to catch them in the act, so they cannot do anything. They encouraged neighbours to complete Noise Abatement Orders themselves and deal with the problem. Some neighbours, and this is a constant, are afraid to complain due to the intimidation, and the threats by the problem tenants. These are law abiding citizens, who feel they have no protection and yet, if they take matters into their own hands and go through the system, they are then threatened. As a result, they do not report, they do not complete Territory Housing surveys, so Territory Housing cannot deal with the problems they know are occurring; lawlessness and disorder then increases.
In another circuit, there is constant intimidation by teenage kids at a Territory Housing tenancy towards neighbours. It has been ongoing for years. Neighbours will have to put up with abuse while Territory Housing tries to work with other agencies to deal with the problems. As soon as the incident occurs outside a Territory Housing property, the officers from the agency say: ‘We have no jurisdiction’. The neighbours are then told: ‘It is not our problem, it is a police matter’.
Nine months of reports of abuse by a Territory Housing tenant to her own children; neighbours needing to have windows closed, air-conditioners on to shut out noise; their own children unable to play in their back yard because of the yelling and the foul and abusive language. Tenants are finally moved on, but reports say she is still a Territory Housing tenant. The reports were to deal with the underlying problem. Much leg-work went into that, but rather than fix the problem, the problem was shifted. The tenant moved out of a two-bedroom unit into four-bedroom house because a daughter was in crisis and needed a place to stay. The daughter was allegedly on a wait list for less than a month - this one is on foot - it seems to be that someone has found a way through the system and we are investigating that.
How could it be some are on the waiting list for 45 months, someone else only on the list for a couple of months? There are a number who watch this; we are investigating that. Reports by neighbours of Territory Housing tenants going away for months at a time, and letting family and friends live in a house, causing further disturbances to neighbours. These are ongoing issues that we are investigating.
A tenant in a unit complex has a meter box for other units on their unit wall, and pay meters installed now mean the tenant has to endure visits from pay meter tenants, re-crediting their meter, at any time of the day or night, causing disturbance and trespassing onto their lease. The minister dismissed the tenant, advising the meters will not be relocated. After considerable correspondence between the tenant and minister, the minister has offered to move the tenant. This will not fix the problem for the next tenant.
In a large unit complex where visitors moved into unit with tenant, there were complaints by neighbours about overcrowding, noise, nuisance, etcetera. Territory Housing acted and spoke with the tenant. The visitors then moved to the back of the unit complex, camping in the complex once Territory Housing officers went home for the evening. They have since moved on, but they left a couple of vehicles in the complex, which have been there for months.
A legitimate tenant has his vehicle in the car park waiting to get the registration renewed while he is saving up. He is an aged pensioner. He does not have it there for very long while he is saving up, but he is immediately jumped upon and asked to remove his vehicle. Yet the other vehicles, from the illegal tenants, are left and there is no concern or standard maintained, yet, it applies to the law abiding one. Swift action for the law abiding tenant and a dead hand for those who violate the standards of the community.
These examples are a snapshot of the sort of stuff we deal with on a daily basis through our electorate office. If you want to check up on them, minister, you will find they are issues which are on foot with your office at the moment. These are the types of issues we have been dealing with on a weekly basis for 10 years, but things have changed.
We talk about the housing crisis, but the poverty line has moved to a very different place; a dangerous place. The pressure on public housing will require pressure on maintaining standards. There are people in public housing who do not care about standards and the standards are not being reinforced. There are waiting lists of good people who, through no fault of their own, are in need of a place to stay, because they cannot afford to find a roof or shelter in the open market in Northern Territory. They are waiting and would comply with the standards; they would be good citizens. Yet, you have people in public housing who do not maintain standards and are accommodated again and again.
If you want to bring order to your community, you have to enforce those standards. It would be different if there was no waiting list. But when you have a waiting list, as we have in Palmerston, of 46 months for a three-bedroom house, there is a whole line of people waiting to go in. If any one of those people looked around and saw people abiding by the law and maintaining their properties, fine. But when they find, in some cases - as I have already reported - someone jumps the queue – an interesting case, which we are investigating - people running amok, treating the houses like a dump, and have people come in and make it so unpleasant for others, then you have a real problem. You send a message down the line to those waiting 45 months, forming a view of: ‘to heck with standards, I can do whatever I like’. This has a flow-on effect to the detriment of the tone of our whole community.
We have a serious obligation to maintain those standards. However, there are now so many, who do not qualify to get in, and are required to go to other places. Once it was line-ball: it is going to be heavy to pay the rent but, unfortunately, I have to do it. Now it is impossible to pay the rent. You do the sums. A lady, with three children, explained her story to me. She has waited for three years, and receives $2000, I believe it was, in a pension, but if she paid the basic rent she would have nothing left over.
I put a posting on Facebook the other day to communicate to people about this issue. My grave concern is the working homeless. This is a demonstration of how serious the problem has become. It was sparked by a telephone call, and, in some ways, I am grateful for what occurred when the NT News put my mobile number in the headline of the paper; it produced something quite instructive for me, because I learned so much. Things I had heard a little about all came together in one place. There was a tremendous level of support, but the most troubling element of it was the opportunity taken by so many people to tell me their story. I had well over 75 people; I spent Saturday and Sunday listening to calls, made a number of notes; and it is still going on.
I had a phone call two nights ago from a bloke called Doug. He said: ‘Someone has passed your number on to me and he says you might be able to help. I have tried phoning the government but they fobbed me off.’ He said: ‘Someone has to hear my story: I am a stockman, I have been a shearer, I am 70 years of age, and I have arthritis.’ This is perfectly understandable, if anyone knows the shearing game or working with stock. He is six years younger than my father, his voice is calm, and he is not complaining, but he says: ‘When I turned 70, I thought things would turn out better than they have.’ I ask him: ‘What is the story, Doug?’ He says: ‘I am on the waiting list and while I am waiting, I have nowhere to live.’ He lives on the beach at Nightcliff, and he says: ‘Terry, I would like you to come down if you could, because there are many people here, who arrive at night, sleep in their swags in their cars, and when the sun comes up in the morning, they roll them up and they go to work.’ Then he starts to recount the stories of a number of these people. They are people who cannot afford rent and they do not qualify for public housing.
I have heard these stories from other people, where, if you go early in the morning before the sun is up, you will find people all over the place camping, getting up and going to work. They have jobs and good incomes. This is a colossal problem, with severe implications over the horizon. When we have members on the other side say: ‘Public housing, yes, we have a few issues but, by and large, it is going okay; we are having some lovely sausage sizzles at some of the premises and things seem to be going okay, and yada, yada, yada.’ You have this right in front of you; you do not need to be a sociologist to recognise the implications of this. There are people with tertiary degrees who find they cannot afford it, after making a decision to live here. One fellow told me: ‘I was born in the Territory. I have an honours degree, and I will be earning $76 000 a year …’
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask the member be given an extension, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr MILLS: Thank you, I will not go to the limit, just for the sake of it. This is the most startling aspect of this issue. A gentleman made an appointment with me - he would not mind if I said his name, but I will not say his whole name – and he said: ‘I feel an obligation to tell the story. My name is Lawson. I was born in the Territory and spent my primary years here. Although I have lived most of my life down south, I always wanted to come back to the Territory with my family.’ He has an honours degree in public policy, he is married, and his wife is a qualified teacher with a science degree in research. He has an approved position, paid at $76 500 a year, and he comes up to fulfil the dream. He has $160 000 equity in a house in Adelaide, and $60 000 in the bank. He did the sums, and was almost afraid to tell his wife, who is still in Adelaide. He said: ‘Even with that income, I had to go through the marketplace to see what I could afford.’ The bottom five rental properties at Moulden were all he could look at. He chose one which costs $450 to $500 per week. He says: ‘When I do my sums, that is almost half of my income, and I can only look at the bottom 10 properties.’ They will have a limited amount of money left for the family. His wife will not be able to work in the first instance, because the kids are young.
He sent a message back to Adelaide and said: ‘Wife, are you still prepared to follow me?’ She said: ‘Yes’. He said: ‘I thought it was going to be a relaxed lifestyle’. It is clearly not, and he feels an obligation as a father. In Adelaide, they only pay $300 per week for a four-bedroom home with two bathrooms. For a property which costs $200 a week more, they will have three bedrooms and one bathroom. They thought perhaps there were other options, so he explored caravan parks - they were prepared to live in a caravan park in the hope they would be able to be successful in the ballot at Bellamack. If it is stressful for someone who is prepared to make that level of contribution to the Northern Territory, we have a very serious problem.
I had another phone call from a senior teacher at one of our senior high schools - I will not say her name – and her husband works at a middle school in Darwin. They both earn good money, and have lived in the Territory for 10 years. The husband has spent five years in remote service. They love the Northern Territory. One of them has a very senior position within the school as a moderator. Do you know what a moderator is? It is a person with specific skills, to be able to judge standards. They are quite valued within the profession. She became pregnant – joy - they were very happy; they are a little older and it was something they had been looking forward to. She said to me: ‘I know how to do my sums’. They did their sums and found out what they could not believe on first take: they cannot afford to drop one income and find a place in the market. They have looked at every angle. They do not qualify for public housing. The rent was too high to be within commuting distance of the schools where they work. They want desperately to stay here, but cannot afford a mortgage, because they only have $35 000 or thereabouts. She said: ‘That will not pay the stamp duty.’ The place they want to serve is here, but they cannot. They are considering, reluctantly, to go back to where housing is more affordable.
I put the story of Doug, who phoned me the other day, on Facebook. I phoned him again today and I will have a talk to him. Someone has kindly offered some additional support for him, which is tremendous. But I fear what I will see when I go to visit Doug.
There is another person who used to live in Darwin. She said: ‘I used to live in a tent; I now live in Victoria.’ She described her house there, which is half the price she paid in Darwin.
There is a government employee who said: ‘I am a survivor of being described as the ‘working homeless.’ Remember the saying, that most people are only two pay cheques away from being homeless.
Someone from Palmerston said: ‘The rent I pay for a two-bedroom flat in Bakewell is more than my daughter pays for a three-year-old four-bedroom home in south-east Queensland.’ He has a two-bedroom unit; his daughter pays less for a large house in south-east Queensland. ‘I pay more than half my weeks wage to rent, and that is ‘so-called’ good paying. I have a good paying job with a multinational company. Six months more of this and I will have to go back to rural Queensland and make less money, but will be better off, because it will cost less.’
Another person said: ‘I have been told today, our rent has been raised by $20 per week. This is not a place where people can live within reasonable standards at reasonable cost.’ Another person said: ‘When I took over a lease break, the landlord put it up by $100 per week. When I questioned this, the landlord said: ‘If you do not like it, move on’. Another person said: ‘I just want a fair go at buying a house. What is wrong with that? With another power bill at $500, there is quarter of the savings gone again. Ta, Territory government, thanks for the fair go’.
Another person said: ‘It is good to see that Darwin has made the headlines again this morning: “Darwin has the highest rents in the country: $500 a week for a three-bedroom house”. They forgot to say three-bedroom dog-box with no air-conditioning, but, anyway, it is a roof over your head, after all. When is the Territory government going to pull its head out of the sand and do something for people in this town, who are desperately in need? That is right, we have a wave pool and a new convention centre, maybe we can all live there.’ Someone else said: ‘I suggest they build more housing commission houses. They seem to have sold too many of them. Knocking down other places does not make sense.’
Another person said: ‘People are leaving, or refusing to move here because of the combined lack of, and cost of, housing. Even people who are coming here with well-paid jobs are appalled at the cost and are even struggling with the rent. My husband and I are on good wages, but there is no way in hell we could afford to buy. We are blessed to live in my mother’s house, whilst she is away, at a reduced rate. We could struggle with the current going rents, but those in low-income brackets, without that help, have even more limited choices’.
The stories go on. This occupied two days; people buying into this story. Someone made an astute observation and it is quite obvious that you do not need to be a sociologist to work this out. We talk about INPEX coming to town – it is exciting. However, it will need a whole range of backup employees, all the way to the checkout cashier, all the way through. You are going to need teachers and people working in the service industries. How are they, on their wages, going to afford to find a place?
Getting to the final point, key workers like teachers. The education report came out yesterday, and we all know it is an ageing profession. When I did my survey of the 20-plus schools, with a few more to go this semester, in the northern suburbs in Darwin, I noted a number of the teachers live close by, and they have served in those schools, or in neighbouring schools, for around 20 years or more. Many teachers serve for a very long time, and some of the local members in the northern suburbs know what I am talking about. Consider that it is an ageing profession, and those who bought into the market, 25, 30, or 40 years ago, living in Leanyer, or wherever, decide they are retiring; they are going to leave the profession. They will move into a unit or they may move interstate. The next rank of teachers will not be able to occupy that building. Remember when those people bought those places; I bought mine 20 years ago. If I came here now, as a founding principal of a school, I would not be able to, with my income, get into the marketplace. Fortunately, 20 years ago, when Palmerston started and land was cheap, because there was supply which matched demand, we allowed people in. Coming up here today, 20 years later, I would not be able to get in.
These are only some of the stories, and there are many more to be told which demand a response beyond spin. We need to look carefully at this, because what is presented in the next chapter is of real concern. Unless we look at the fundamental, which is the supply of land - it is a tragedy. I know much of it passes to the Minister for Housing, and so it should, because of those issues I have described. But the bottom line sits with the Territory government’s appalling policy position, and its obstinate refusal to release land. That is what we have today, and there is more to come, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Deputy Speaker, I talk on this very important statement. I do not believe the issue is just about public housing wait times. I believe it is housing, more broadly, and land release.
Public housing can only solve part of the problem of housing. I believe housing follows a lineal spectrum where, at the bottom, you might find temporary or emergency accommodation, which moves up the linear scale to public housing, private housing, home ownership and the like. That follows many different aspects, through the private and home ownership models, through varying rates in the market, from what you might call a medium house to an upper-class house, if people can understand that. The point of this statement is the government saying it is doing things for the waiting list. I do not believe that is the case, but I believe it is important to reflect on some of the telling statistics about the housing situation.
I will quote a couple of things. One is from a document called The Road Home: A National Approach to Reducing Homelessness, and I quote:
If you look at the other states in the National Approach to Reducing Homelessness report, you see that New South Wales has a homelessness rate of six per 10 000 people, Victoria has four, ACT has three, South Australia has five, but the Northern Territory has 75 homeless people per 10 000 people - that is appalling - it is more than 10, nearly 11 times the rate of Tasmania. It is amazing to see that the Northern Territory is far outweighing everywhere else. Just imagine if the census people had all the real data.
These are real issues for the Northern Territory, and require a housing solution, not just a public housing solution. But, alas, I saw on the Northern Territory website, titled: Housing the Territory, Fresh Ideas, Real Results, and I quote from the website:
I thought everyone might get a laugh out of that. I am not sure where this transitional housing is; it is not anywhere in the Northern Territory. This was put out - I have the media release somewhere, and that made me laugh too - I believe it was in March this year, I am not sure. It is quite funny though. Nothing has happened since. Maybe it is referring to the 80-something dongas in Alice Springs which Mal Brough kindly brought up from the closing Woomera Detention Centre. I believe they were funded out of the Aboriginal Benefits Account and brought to Alice Springs as part of the Emergency Response, to send most of them out bush to provide some emergency accommodation. Some of those would have been used in Alice Springs, I believe one location was on Dalgety Road, in my electorate of Braitling, and the other location was at the Tyeweretye Club on the south side of town.
The previous independent member for Braitling, reflecting the views of residents in Alice Springs, had concerns with the location on the north side. The government was facing pressure about where to put them on Dalgety Road. Fortunately, the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority happened to find a sacred site there, so they could not put them exactly where they wanted them to go; they have sat dormant since. We have the worst housing crisis in the Northern Territory, and we have had 80 demountables sitting in Alice Springs gathering dust in a little storage area on Dalgety Road.
I knew some of the dongas were going to be used for the town camp redevelopment, 12 of them, but I assumed they all went out bush. It was not until a month ago I found they were still sitting there gathering dust. I thought this was appalling, and I have been trying to find some housing solutions in Alice Springs, not publicly, but privately. I ran into the people who have control of these dongas, if we can call them that, and I asked: ‘How many are there?’ He told me how many there are. I asked: ‘What needs to happen?’ ‘Well, they have to be a retrofitted so they are more accommodating for people’. I said: ‘Do we just need to find a block of land?’ ‘Yes, that is all we need; a block of land and as long as we have the infrastructure and services there - water, power and sewer’. I mentioned a number of places, and one was the Camel Farm, on the Ross Highway going out of town, which is up for sale. I said: ‘What about that?’ He said: ‘Well, you need to upgrade the sewer slightly so they can take them. It would be great as a worker’s camp for working families, who have to leave town or have to sleep in tents, and cars, or caravans or swags, but the Northern Territory government will not pay to upgrade the infrastructure; it will not put the infrastructure in for these people.’
I will step aside for one minute and say it was quite interesting, in Question Time yesterday, when the member for Daly said: ‘We had nothing to do with those dongas’, because the person who was managing the dongas, said: ‘Adam, it is funny you ring up, we have had the Chief Minister’s Department of Northern Territory government ringing up, asking if it can use them for temporary accommodation.’ Maybe it is another case of the mystery, where the member for Daly says one thing, but the reality is another. The Northern Territory government was definitely involved with those dongas, and is taking 12 of them for the town camps. I am quite sure it has got something to do with them. Then to find out - this is a sting in the tail - that 81 dongas are going over to Christmas Island to house boat people.
We have Kevin Rudd’s scum, bringing boat people over, and we cannot house the First Australians, but we can house the next ones, or the people who want to be the next Australians. We can send dongas to Christmas Island to house the boat people, but cannot house the homeless, Indigenous people in Alice Springs, and we cannot house homeless people in Alice Springs. We could have used those dongas across the Territory, brought some up to the Bechtel site. We could have used them to help solve the housing crisis.
But wait, there is more. In 2007, a letter was sent to the Indigenous Coordination Centre - I am sure the member for Daly will quickly remind me this is the federal government - in Alice Springs, by Karen Eva-Stirk from Riding for the Disabled, which said: ‘The facilities are not that good in Alice Springs. We have a couple of steps, probably about two or three foot high, to access the current building we have a dilapidated old building and wheelchairs cannot fit, and they cannot be moved around this demountable. Is there any chance we can have a demountable?’ This is besides the fact the toilet, which is 200 m away at Blatherskite Park, has a step and wheelchairs cannot go up steps. But that is beside the point, for the toilet.
It sent this letter off to FaHCSIA, which has not responded. They have had a chat to the department of Sport and Recreation, which I am sure is the responsibility of the NT government, and said we need some money for this and we need some money for that to try to help us out.
Mr Hampton: Was it 60 000?
Mr GILES: You know about it? It was looking for money and for Northern Territory government support, to advocate on its behalf, to get a donga, and nothing happened.
Mr Tollner: This is cooperative federalism.
Mr GILES: This is cooperative federalism. A no-blame game, forget about the $20 000, Indigenous disabled kids and the non-Indigenous kids in wheelchairs trying to access Riding for the Disabled services. They went back in 2008 and asked: ‘Sport and Recreation, can you help us please access one of those dongas, to utilise it for disabled kids in Alice Springs so they can be trained and supported as they ride the horses at Riding for the Disabled in Alice Springs?’ Do you know what the Northern Territory government said? ‘It is not our business; it is the federal government.’
The sting in the tail is we are taking potential dongas off disabled kids in Alice Springs to house scum, asylum seekers, in Christmas Island. We cannot house Territorians or support a disabled kid, but we can give accommodation to people traffickers over on Christmas Island. That is exactly what happened.
I have digressed. I spoke before about some Northern Territory government initiatives, I found one, but I happened to find another one. I have a lovely little flyer; it is not in colour, unfortunately, we are the opposition, after all. This one is called:
Sorry, Madam Speaker, it is hard not to chuckle …
Mr Tollner: Who put that out?
Mr GILES: It has to be the member for nothing, the member for Daly:
First home? I digress again. That is quite funny, because I see the widely promoted Buildstart program - I would love to see the figures on how it worked in Alice Springs. I heard one person was successful in getting the $14 000 Buildstart grant, which I believe is a very good program. I said before it is a good program. Unfortunately, if the government does not release any land, it is pretty hard to build a house. I could be wrong; there might be two people in Alice Springs who have accessed the Buildstart program.
But have a look at the Homestart NT program, which is another Territory initiative. I do not have a date for this; this is one of the lovely fliers they put in our letterbox, member for Greatorex, in Alice Springs - coming out to promote the wares of nothing. This tells us:
I searched long and hard, both yesterday and today, to find a house in Alice Springs for under $300 000, and I could not find one. I am not saying there is not one; there may be one out there, but I could not find one in my search on the Internet of all the real estate companies. Great work, Northern Territory government, you are killing it again. Tennant Creek has a limit of $120 000, but you are doing it hard to find a house in Tennant Creek at $120 000.
I digress, Madam Deputy Speaker. We are here to talk about public housing. I spoke before about two elements under the Housing the Territory: Affordable, Quality Housing package, the third element is:
I believe this means it is easier to rent than buy in the Northern Territory, but that is wrong. The fourth element is:
We have not even started talking about wait list times for public housing in the Northern Territory. We know it is five years for a one-bedroom non-pensioner unit in Alice Springs. We know it is more than four years for a three-bedroom house in Casuarina. Heaven help you, if you are looking for a one-bedroom non-pensioner unit in Nhulunbuy because that is 75 months. It is like when you have a child, and you decide your child should go into a good school when he gets older: I have just given birth and I will enrol him now. It is like saying, I have just given birth, we are going to need an extra bedroom soon, I better sign up now because in seven years time I will get a bedroom; I believe it is the same correlation. If you are thinking of having a baby, if you have a twinkle in your eye, sign a housing application form.
While we are talking about house numbers, I would like to know how the government can justify having, at least as it qualifies, 58 public housing dwellings in Alice Springs vacant, as of 21 September, with 22 houses being worked on at a time, and 36 waiting to be worked on. We have 22 being worked on, and 36 sitting there waiting for someone to work on them; these houses could have been empty for 12 months. There are also all the other houses which are sitting around empty, that the department does not even know about.
A number of very interesting matters were brought out through the estimates process. I have a great concern about the management of public housing. I believe you can only get good tenants, if you promote good tenancies. One of the things I believe is, you do not just go in and fix the inside of a house when it is vacant and write a condition report. You also fix the outside and make sure it is in good condition, so you can do a condition report and ensure the tenant maintains a good upkeep of the property externally. That is not how this government operates. It operates like most other Labor governments around the country, where it does the internals and forgets the externals, and the place always look like scum as you drive down the street. You can always pick which ones are the public housing properties.
Mr TOLLNER: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be given an extension of 10 minutes to complete his remark, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr GILES: Thank you for your indulgence. Madam Deputy Speaker, we have heard complaints about antisocial behaviour in Alice Springs. I refer to figures I was provided during the estimates process, which I believe were until April 2009 of that financial year. The figures show, during the eight or nine months, there had been 1343 complaints about antisocial behaviour in public housing tenancies, which is a fair number of complaints about antisocial behaviour. I said to the Housing Minister: ‘How many of those complaints have been investigated? You have 1343 complaints, how many have you investigated?’ Eighty-six, you have investigated 86 complaints out of 1343 complaints. I have to say, that is where you start to fail.
I went on to ask: how many tenants have been kicked out for damage and blacklisted from going back to Territory Housing properties because of damage to property? We all know there is a plethora of bad public housing tenants who do not look after the property, who smash it up, cause antisocial behaviour, and damage taxpayers’ investments. This happens across all of our suburbs, we all know households that do this. I thought there would be hundreds of people who get kicked out for damaging Territory Housing properties. We know 86 complaints out of 1343 are being investigated, so I thought, how many? I was told nine people have been kicked out of Territory Housing for damaging a property.
Then I said: we have 1343 complaints, you have decided to investigate 86, how many people have been kicked out for antisocial behaviour? Such as parties all night, attacking your kids, belting your dog, burning things down, drunkenness, verbal abuse over the fence, all those things we put up with in our electorates. The member for Macdonnell made a very good point about my electorate in Larapinta, where the housing policy seems to be we will put all the Aboriginal people in that pocket in Larapinta. We found that out of 1343 public housing complaints, 31 people were evicted for antisocial behaviour.
Is it no wonder I am constantly onto the Housing department asking them to take action? Wondering what has happened in Heidenreich Court, Ellery Drive, Elliott Street and Head Street - the list is endless in my electorate. Those public servants in Territory Housing, Gail Conner and Gaylene Rye, do a fantastic job; the Territory Housing staff do a fantastic job. It is the policy that is the problem. It is not just Territory Housing policy. It is land release, infrastructure, and first homebuyers. The people who are in public housing properties who cause the problems are the ones that create grief for Territory Housing staff and not much can happen.
Here is another example. In the private sector, a property manager will usually inspect a house four times a year. I asked the Minister for Housing during estimates: ‘How often is a tenancy manager supposed to check Territory Housing properties in urban areas?’ He flicked it to Dr Ritchie, the CEO, who said: ‘The usual rate of inspection is once per year’. I asked: ‘Can I confirm that every Territory Housing property is inspected once per year?’ Dr Ritchie said: ‘In all honesty, to say every one is inspected every year would be incorrect’. You do not even inspect every Territory Housing property every year. You have a $400 000 asset - whatever the price is - and he said we do not even inspect every house, every year.
Many of us on this side would know, because we pay attention, we are not incompetent like Labor, and are aware of many visitors coming to stay at these houses. Most jurisdictions in the country have a rule that visitors can only stay for two weeks, but, in the Northern Territory, visitors are allowed to stay for six weeks. How do you know if people have visitors who have been there for longer than six weeks? They do not. They do not inspect the houses so they do not know who is staying there. I went on to ask about how many people have been in trouble for having too many visitors. None. How many people have been kicked out for having too many visitors? None.
I believe, instead of the department employing 12 dedicated communications staff within their agency, with a departmental advertising budget of $163 000, it would be better off spending that money on employing more Territory Housing staff to implement the policies. It sounds crazy, I know, but maybe they could inspect every house once a year. If they had a proper regime, there would be a chance for the government to build more houses, because it would know they are being inspected.
Then we would not see, from 2002-03 when there were 6119 dwellings, that the dwelling numbers had dropped down to 5251 by 2008-09. We might see a change. But we know why that change happened in those years - the government needed $47m to put money into the waterfront. It had to sell the houses to put money into the waterfront; that is exactly what happened. The government will deny it, because it likes to be seen as the great saviours of the socialist brigade, but it sold out on those people to put money into the waterfront.
While there are these dodgy little processes and bad policy practices by the Northern Territory government we will see the following in public housing complexes: rubbish left lying around; graffiti all over the place; dumped cars, caravans, and trucks - creating problems, making our places look like eyesores - grog sitting everywhere, lawns not mowed; and we have the amazingly successful ‘no alcohol sign’, sitting next to a carton of beer - things are going well.
Digressing for a moment, I spoke to the licensing mob that put these signs up. I said: ‘You put the signs up, when does Territory Housing come round to inspect or kicks these people out?’ ‘Territory Housing cannot enforce those signs; that is the Liquor Commission’. ‘Right, we will get the police to come around’. The police have a look and say: ‘We cannot do anything, that is a Liquor Commission issue. That is Territory Housing property. We cannot move people for drinking behind one of those very strong, sturdy signs which say, “No alcohol. Restricted premises”. We have to get the Liquor Commission out.’ We ring the Liquor Commission. ‘Can you guys come out and get these drunks off the footpath?’ ‘We do not receive enough resources to have staff to come around and get people away.’ I said: ‘What do you put the signs in for?’ We were walking around, scratching our heads, saying: ‘What is going on here? Is this the dumbest government ever? No, it is just the member for Daly.’ But I must apologise, I believe I digressed a little.
I believe housing is a very important issue, which needs sweeping reforms. Land release is the key to solving the public housing crisis, and removing the member for Daly. While we have these appalling approaches, we will continue to see problems such as applications for bond assistance go from 429 two years ago, to 305 last year, to an estimated 209 this year. They are very important figures because bond assistance is what helps people get into the private market. When we see more than 200% reduction from two years ago in applications for bond assistance that clearly signifies the private market has outstripped the capacity for the renters to get into the market, right across the Territory. That is the biggest sign of failure because the private market is not responding to demand through capacity constraints, through land release, and a lack of this Northern Territory government to invest in infrastructure to support the growth in housing.
Members: Hear, hear!
Debate adjourned, pursuant to Standing Order 41A.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, it now being 9 pm, the item of business before the Chair stands adjourned until the next sitting day.
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: I ask you to resume your seats until I conclude what I am saying. Resume your seats, please.
Honourable members, under Standing Order 41A, I propose the Assembly do now adjourn.
The Speaker has approved, under standing orders, an adjournment from the member for Brennan for incorporation. I table that document.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will talk about a serious situation with one of our non-government associations operating in the mental health area.
I have been approached by a group of constituents, and women and families who have serious concerns with the association’s operations, and moreover, the lack of attention by the government to what is obviously a big problem which is not going to go away. These constituents have been involved in the mental health area for many years due to family needs and requirements
The association is Top End Association for Mental Health Incorporated or, as it is commonly called, TEAMhealth. If one works within the non-government community sector in the Northern Territory for a period of time, one is struck by the fear which exists within the system, or so I am told. Funded agencies are afraid to raise issues of concern because their funding may be affected. Clients do not complain because they fear what little they receive will be threatened. Service delivery level public servants do not complain because retribution will come from above. Unfortunately, these fears are based upon recent memory. The result is a system which accepts second, third and fourth best as norm. Change happens at a glacial pace because we are afraid to say this is not good enough.
These issues associated with TEAMhealth are a case in point. The organisation’s staff will tell horror stories about their own and their clients’ treatment. Many will not formalise the complaint because of fear of retribution, or they lack confidence their efforts will see change. Funded organisations tell these people, who are campaigning: ‘You are doing a good job’, but do not want the organisation’s name attached to anything ‘because we are negotiating our funding agreement.’
TEAMhealth was once held in high regard, now it is not. It is not because of the hard work of the carers, who continue to provide the best of care and support, despite the ineptitude of the management of the association.
In mid-2009, a number of staff and ex-staff approached the then Chairman of the board with their stories of bullying, bad management, and harassment in the management of this association. An independent consultant was appointed by the board to carry out an interim investigation and report to the board. After gathering signed statements from staff and ex-staff - 26 signed statements were received - the report, which verified the original allegations, was given to the board.
As I understand the situation, some board members refused to read the report, despite having commissioned it. Following this untenable situation, the then Chairman of the board resigned when it became apparent the other four board members had no intention of doing anything to protect staff, or more importantly, as some would argue, the clients from the excesses of the TEAMhealth management.
A group of members requested a special general meeting of TEAMhealth at which they intended to move a motion of no-confidence in the board. This was stymied by the board, which refused membership to people who thought they were members and had paid their membership fees, in some cases, months earlier than the proposed meeting. Since then, at least 27 membership applications have been refused. The CEO of this association remains in place, and clients continue to miss out.
In 2008-09, TEAMhealth recorded a staff turnover of over 100%. This is nothing short of extraordinary, and should automatically ring alarm bells. The industry average for the community sector in the Northern Territory is about 14.3%.
Since the return to work of the CEO and her deputy on 17 August 2009, who had been overseas on an extended 10-week trip - I am told it was meant to be a business trip. However, I am hard-pressed to know of any business trip in this country which would take 10 weeks. After they returned, at least eight full-time staff have resigned - this is since August, and we are now in October - and at least three are, or have been, on stress leave. This could be an all-time record. If the average of one staff person leaving per week is maintained, there could be staff turnover of over 150% in 12 months.
TEAMhealth is perpetually understaffed; some positions have been vacant for almost two years. In the last two years, TEAMhealth has underspent funding allocations by $2m, or 20%. The organisation has over $3m in cash assets. Tenants of TEAMhealth are charged 60% of their income as rent. It is reported one family of five has been left $250 per fortnight to live on after paying this rent. Up to 25% of the accommodation managed by TEAMhealth for mentally-ill people is empty at any one time. There is a crisis in mental health accommodation in the Northern Territory and, yet, this organisation, which is specifically meant to care for mental health patients, is denying people, who most need accommodation, a secure and safe place to stay. This is something I cannot fathom, let alone accept.
The Board of TEAMhealth has received written complaints over the last three months about the service delivery and management of TEAMhealth from GROW, TEMHCO, Mental Health Carers NT, and the staff of the adult team at the Tamarind Centre. How do I know this? I have seen the letters of complaint.
This association needs to be reviewed through the Associations Act, at the very least, as it is not meeting its obligations under the legislation, nor is it meeting the needs of the staff of the association and, more importantly, the clients, it purports to care for and look after.
Yes, there have been representations to the minister’s office and, the minister’s office has failed to act appropriately, given the seriousness of the situation. The minister had referred the matter to the department, and I quote the minister from a newspaper article on 12 September 2009:
Nice words, but what do they mean? Of course, the clients have priority, but so do the staff who care for the clients. If they are working in an environment of bullying, harassment, and nastiness, what hope is there for the people who most need the care?
I suspect this issue has been put into the too-hard basket, and the department is actively working to make this issue go away by ignoring it or, at worst, trying to cover it up. I get the distinct impression the biggest problem created, is the fact the whole sordid and sorry mess was made public, and has smacked the minister in the face. Will the minister do something? Get involved, find out why there are empty houses, find out why it has not spent its money. Why does TEAMhealth have $3m in cash? Why could that money not be put to better use? And why is it denying membership to people who really care and want to get involved in looking after people with mental illnesses?
Through you, Madam Deputy Speaker, I urge the minister to get involved, or at the very least, tell the department to get involved, and stop hiding behind screens while people in need are left wanting, and, possibly, suffering further harm due to the lack of care and medical attention or appropriate housing.
It is a disgrace that a once good organisation has got to this stage, and I urge the government to act immediately, find out why there is rot and decay in this association, rectify it, and ensure that the people who most need proper and professional care are receiving it.
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Madam Deputy Speaker, I draw your attention to this wonderful piece I found tucked out behind your chair, underneath all the old Hansards.
I thought it was a terrible shame something so lovely is hidden away and not in the eyes of the public view. I will describe it; it is an hourglass. I will spin it around. I think it goes for a minute or so. Obviously, we have clocks these days, but, I am guessing, in the days of the old parliament, it actually used hourglasses.
I will read the inscription: ‘Presented to the Legislative Council of the Northern Territory by the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia 12 April 1960’. There is much history surrounding this hourglass, presented to the old Legislative Council in the Northern Territory. I notice we have these despatch boxes, which are replicas of the original despatch boxes in federal parliament, which go back a long way.
I thought it would be appropriate for this to be on display in the House. I request that maybe the Clerk’s Office or even the Speaker might look into this request. I have seen in other parliaments around Australia, in the Parliament of Victoria and the Parliament of South Australia, they have these hourglasses on display. I am not sure whether they do use them or not …
Ms Lawrie: Quick, fast-track to the punchline, as entertaining as you are.
Mr CONLAN: Believe it or not, member for Karama, I am deadly serious. It could sit right there in front of the Parliamentary Records on the desk. I believe it is a wonderful piece, which could be on display for all Territorians and, indeed, visitors to this Chamber.
Ms Carney: Bring it to the Alice Springs sittings.
Mr CONLAN: That could even be a very good idea, bring it to the Alice Springs sittings. It is a little frail, but I do not think it would be used.
Nevertheless, in all seriousness, I urge yourself, Madam Deputy Speaker, perhaps the Speaker of the House, and the Clerk’s Office to consider placing it on the Table. It represents a vast history, and demonstrates the history of government, albeit, limited government we had back in 1960 …
Ms Lawrie: The appointed Legislative Council.
Mr CONLAN: when it was presented to the Northern Territory Legislative Council, beg your pardon?
Ms Lawrie: They were appointed.
Mr CONLAN: Whatever.
Ms Lawrie: Do you want a history on ...
Mr CONLAN: Whatever. You would think someone whose family are very involved …
Ms Lawrie: Do you want a history of the Remonstrance?
Mr CONLAN: Beg your pardon?
Ms Lawrie: Do you want to know about the Remonstrance? Go upstairs and read that.
Mr CONLAN: Which one?
Ms Lawrie: No, the one that we have. The Remonstrance signed …
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr CONLAN: Madam Deputy Speaker, I do feel that - we have gone through, I will spin it around again. It is not a time-wasting exercise. I saw it stuck away there, it is not being used, it is out of anyone’s view; no one can see it. It is a lovely antique, and is part of the history of the Northern Territory Parliament. I have seen them in previous parliaments around Australia; in South Australia and Victoria, which have it sitting there. It is simply a request, which maybe the Clerk’s Office might take up, or bring up with the Speaker, instead of having it hidden away, so no one can see it. It could be on display for all Territorians and visitors to this House to view.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Greatorex, I am sure Madam Speaker will give that due consideration.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Madam Deputy Speaker, I express my disappointment in the member for Barkly, and I refer to his attitude towards plagiarism.
I am referring to the Parliamentary Record for this parliament, on 21 October 2008, where the member for Barkly says, and I quote:
He continues further on:
I have discovered, along with my colleagues - in fact, I should probably give credit to the member for Araluen who discovered this, the act of hypocrisy in this parliament. Oh my goodness me. I can give the references from the Internet so I am not accused, once again, of plagiarism. One of the online dictionaries I read tonight defined a hypocrite as: ‘a person who pretends to be what he is not’. Actually, that could go for many of the people on the Labor side of this House, because they pretend to be ministers, and I can assure you, they most definitely are not. Another, the Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines a hypocrite as: ‘a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion’; or ‘a person who acts in contradiction of his or her stated beliefs or feelings’. Dictionary.com describes a hypocrite as: ‘a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions or statements belie his or her public statements’.
The member for Barkly, on 21 October 2008, came out and made a big issue about plagiarism in this House committed by me and also the member for Sanderson. I know the member for Sanderson is going to have a few words on this also, so I will not go too much into what I know he is going to talk about. Lo and behold, on 20 August 2009, the member for Barkly stood in this House and, against all the lovely words, the nice flowery words he used in his speech, he derided the members of the opposition in relation to plagiarism. I quote a couple of other things he said, from the Parliamentary Record on that night:
Let me tell you something, Madam Deputy Speaker. Here we are, a year on, and I cannot believe how insincere and disingenuous the member for Barkly is. He stood here in this House and committed the very same thing which he describes in his own words. When we look at the comparison between what the member for Barkly said on 20 August 2009, when he plagiarised another speech that came out of the Assembly in Western Australia, in relation to the bill he was presenting, the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Amendment bill, they are almost word for word.
It is bad enough the member for Barkly dared to come into this House on 20 August 2009 and plagiarised from another person’s speech without giving that person any credit for the speech, never mind the fact he stood here a year ago berating us for the very same act. That is bad enough in itself. But this morning, when this was put to him, it came up in debate again, the member for Barkly defended himself.
I will point out now the difference between the integrity of the member for Barkly, and the integrity of the members for Katherine and Sanderson, because, after his speech, on 21 October 2008, I came back into this House the following night, on 22 October 2008, and I said, and I quote from the Parliamentary Record:
I respected he found out we had plagiarised, that is fine. But I was man enough to get up in the House the following day and admit my mistakes. Not only did I admit the mistakes, the member for Barkly pointed out, but then I continued on, because I found that I had cut another speech, which may have been considered plagiarism by the member for Barkly, when I spoke in another adjournment about breast cancer.
I have admitted my mistakes, seen the wrongdoing, I suppose, as alleged by the member for Barkly, and moved on. I believe that is a far better position to be in, rather than the member for Barkly coming out here, accusing us of one thing in one breath, and then turning around, with 12 months’ worth of parliamentary experience under his belt, and doing exactly the same thing. And then to try to give some lame excuse for defending himself …
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! Plagiarism is the unauthorised use of someone’s work. What the Minister for Correctional Services did was an agreed national speech.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order, member for Karama. You have the floor, member for Katherine.
Mr WESTRA VAN HOLTHE: This is a case of the member for Karama standing up trying to defend the indefensible. I believe what the member for Barkly did, and his subsequent actions are inexcusable. Those actions go to what sort of man the member for Barkly is; he is a man with low moral courage, he has no integrity, and he will not stand in here, like all the people on that side of the House, and accept wrongdoing. He stands there and continues to defend the indefensible.
The members on his side of the House are continuing down the same path. It is no wonder this crowd cannot get anywhere in the Northern Territory, because even when their wrongdoings are pointed out to them, they are so incredibly arrogant, they simply will not accept they are wrong and move on.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I also speak in relation to matters of plagiarism which have occurred in this House.
I was the target last year of the member for Barkly in relation to being accused of plagiarism, something I stood up and admitted. I said, yes, I am sorry, and I apologised to the House, and I apologise again. However, I was new, and in my enthusiasm to promote the Boy Scouts - we are talking about the Boy Scouts, I contacted the Commissioner of the Northern Territory and said: ‘I would like to promote the Scouts’. I had been to a fantastic dinner, and some events to celebrate the centenary of the Scouts, and there is no more homely group of people helping our community than the Boy Scouts. I stood here, in what might have been my naivety, and accepted responsibility for what I did and I was prepared to take whatever it was the member for Barkly handed out. I did not like it at the time, but I accepted it and I apologised.
I listened to the lessons the former principal was giving us like students. I quote from his adjournment speech on 21 October 2008:
Wow! Whoopee do!
I recall the member for Barkly saying to me: ‘The member for Sanderson used this stuff without acknowledging the source’. I also recall - if I am correct - he said something along the lines of: ‘Fine, if you just acknowledge the work’. But, that was my failing. I did not acknowledge the work. Yes, when you are actually quoting what the Scouts say, they, obviously, have the best words. Things like over the past 100 years the shaping of lives of many individuals. Then I went through and talked about a whole range of fantastic people. Some ALP members in the federal government at this point were former Scouts. Member of this side - and I am assuming the government side of this House - were also former Scouts, and made a great contribution to our community.
He went on to say - and I quote again from the member for Barkly’s adjournment debate speech on 21 October last year:
Here we are, and we have the good people in Western Australia, who have done some very good work. Then, on 20 August 2009, the member for Barclay, the Minister for Correctional Services …
Ms Lawrie: Barkly.
Mr STYLES: Barkly. My humble apologies, member for Karama. The member for Barkly then plagiarised this from Western Australia. I heard him stand up and say: ‘In New South Wales, we follow very closely the wording’. When you copy someone else’s work, that is fairly close. Then I heard him try to justify trying to get out of being accused of plagiarism.
Both the member for Katherine and I accepted responsibility for our actions. I find it remarkable the member for Barkly will not accept responsibility for his plagiarism ...
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker!
Mr STYLES: We have more. He said we should not ...
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Please pause, member for Sanderson. Resume your seat.
Ms LAWRIE: It is important, as Attorney-General, I offer members opposite a briefing on model legislation and the requirements used for common words.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Karama. It is not a point of order. You have the call, member for Sanderson.
Mr STYLES: Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker.
He said – and I do not have a problem if these people want to use the stuff but, like the member for Barkly gave us a lecture, you simply have to acknowledge we have taken this stuff from Western Australia. If he said: ‘I would like to acknowledge the contribution of the people from Western Australia’ – no problem. That is the lecture I got in relation to my use of stuff off websites. I made the error, as the member for Barkly has pointed out, that I did not acknowledge the source. The member for Barkly had not acknowledged the source of his plagiarism on 20 August 2009 in this House.
Then he goes on to say:
It is interesting, because, quoting the achievements of all the people who are scouts can hardly be my own view. It is factual information that we were going through. On the next page of the member for Barkly’s adjournment debate, it says:
And I thought he was getting up us for promoting these sorts of things, he continued:
Here is a minister of the Crown, a former principal of a school, and what does he do? He stands up - and this is about role models, he wants to be a role model, he is a minister of the Crown, a former principal, and he is lecturing other people on being a great role model - and he is plagiarising.
The member for Katherine stood up several minutes ago and gave us a definition of hypocrisy. I find it astounding that one can come into this House, lecture members about their errors, and those members accept it, and then he plagiarises stuff from Western Australia, does not acknowledge it, and expects us to believe he is a great role model and a responsible member of our community to quote:
You do not get much more leading than a member of parliament and, in fact, a minister of the Crown. You do not get much more leading members of the community than that, and the people look at them, and they must lead by example. I hope that is not the example the minister is going to make or continue to do. It would be really nice if the member for Barkly came into this House and said, ‘all right, I made a mistake’. It is exactly what the member for Katherine and I did when we made a mistake. We were brave enough to stand up in front of the people of the Northern Territory, admit our mistake, and cop whatever we were going to cop. Unfortunately, the people on that side do not seem to have the intestinal fortitude to stand up and cop what is fairly given to them, given their own standards.
This is their standards, these are their rules, and this is what he is setting for us to follow. And he wants all the young people who look up to him to follow that, and have confidence in the fact he is a leading member of our community and they are supposed to look up to him. His words, not mine, and I want to stress them again, because I love this stuff:
I suggest that the people on this side of the House are a far better leading example to the community than the member for Barkly. Through leading by example, we teach our kids, students, and everyone in our community that when you are wrong, you should stand up and cop it on the chin for being wrong. I have taught that to my kids. I have taught just short of 40 000 kids in this town in my time as a school-based police officer, and I taught them all they should front up and be prepared to take it on the chin if they are responsible. You know, to be a responsible citizen and do that.
I believe the member for Katherine and I have been responsible; we have copped it on the chin. I now challenge the member for Barkly to come into this House and say, sorry guys, I got it wrong. Accept it and be a leading member of the community, and show us that he actually has the intestinal fortitude to do so.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Deputy Speaker, I launch a defence of the Minister for Correctional Services in relation to this matter and the accusations of plagiarism against him.
I listened very carefully to the excuse he gave today, as well as to the interjections from the Treasurer, the member for Karama. The argument runs like this: a second reading speech may be turned to by a court when seeking to interpret the intent of the bill for the purposes of finding its way through a potential legislative anomaly, which may find its way into a bill. This means if there is an interpretative issue inside a legislative instrument, then the court may turn its mind to the second reading speech only, which means it has to be a very carefully crafted speech, to be able to guide the court in determining what the intent of the government and the minister of the day was. I listened carefully to that particular excuse and I have heard something similar uttered here.
The argument goes like this: we are introducing uniform legislation. Uniform legislation exists in various areas. The government is introducing uniform legislation; therefore, the second reading speeches must be uniform, thus reflecting the intent across the jurisdictions. However, I then raise the question: if the legislation and the intent of the second reading speeches were deliberately designed by the ministerial council to show the same intent, why the minister did not dedicate his entire speech to exactly the same language? Because the language in the rest of the speech - the words which are purportedly his own and have not been tracked down as plagiarism - will now give a different meaning and intent to uniform legislation the government is running a defence on. You cannot be half-pregnant and you cannot have a half-intention demonstrated to a court.
This demonstrates, if you believe the excuse given by the minister and the government, the whole speech should be replicated in each jurisdiction word for word, comma for comma, full stop for full stop, which has not occurred ...
Ms Lawrie: That is not how it works. Each speech also reflects the individual jurisdiction, and you know that.
Mr ELFERINK: Thank you. I pick up on that interjection. That is why we have different jurisdictions: ‘The individual speech reflects the opinions of the individual jurisdiction’. Therefore, it follows, without challenge - any reasonable challenge - the whole speech should reflect the jurisdictional intent of the minister in the particular jurisdiction. To be half-pregnant is not a concept which washes in this place.
However, as I stood up, I said I intended to defend the minister, and the defence run by the members opposite clearly does not hold water. How on earth can I defend the minister when the Treasurer has so fundamentally failed in running a defence of her colleague? I defend the minister in this way: the whole speech is cogent, understandable, and well-written. As we see so often, ministers from the other side of the House come in and deliver cogent, well-written speeches. The problem we have in this House is cogent, well-written speeches delivered by ministers are never written by ministers. They are usually written by bureaucrats or fifth floor staffers. What we have developing in this environment is ministers who think their function is one of being a figurehead.
I remind honourable members of the minister currently under discussion, who, during the estimates process, when he was asked his opinion of something, he replied words to the effect of: ‘Do you want my opinion or my ministerial opinion?’ That demonstrates the level of understanding which actually exists. We can all remember, with great affection, the former member for Millner, Matthew Bonson, being asked a question about government policy. ‘What is your opinion on that, minister?’ He turned to his CEO and looked at him: ‘I will defer that to my CEO’ was the answer.
We know the synchronised swimming team opposite are actually at the shallow end of the talent pool but, to constantly come into this Chamber and consistently hear speeches being read out which are cogent and intelligent, being delivered by people who could not muster an IQ of more than three amongst all of them, is just not credible. What is worse is they do not even have enough critical thinking about their own positions to even challenge, ask, or read the information they are given before they waltz into this place passing laws which affect the people of the Northern Territory.
Is this serious, I ask? A rhetorical question, do not bother to answer it. Yes, is the answer. And how do we know that? Two days ago, we passed a piece of legislation and during that debate it became clear that one of the people who I have the greatest regard for, in terms of their intelligence, on that side of the House, and an element of great cunning, the Attorney-General, was passing legislation without having read the legislative instrument she was bringing into the House.
There is this autonomic belief, entrenched in the hearts and souls of the people opposite, that the people who serve them are infallible. It is like they are running guidance over a bunch of popes, and all of those infallible popes cough up information, which looks good, tastes all right, sounds good, but, at the end of the day, is still capable of being wrong. It is important for a minister, before they walk into this joint, to think critically about what is being served up to them by those people who serve their interests, because the principles of responsible government demand the buck stops somewhere. I believe it was Harry Truman, I could be corrected, who had a sign on his desk, ‘the buck stops here’. Exactly. There is no such thing in the ministerial language, or should be no such thing, especially on obvious things as, ‘I am advised’.
I hear the language so often: ‘I am advised, I am being told’. I can understand that in technical legislation, on technical issues, that if something goes wrong in a power station, that the minister might stand up and say, ‘I am advised’. But to walk into a place like this and glibly spew forth what is being served up by some staffer who was probably too lazy to write an original speech in the first place will invariably mean that outraged members of parliaments will sooner or later be accusing them of plagiarism.
I remember, very fondly, whilst the member for Johnston, who was then the minister for, I believe, primary industries - I could be corrected on this part - was delivering a speech which had been delivered not two years earlier by the former member for Karama. It was as funny as a fit because Tim Baldwin was reading out the speech which was being delivered as a ministerial statement, because the staffer, whoever wrote it, had lifted it straight out of Mick Palmer’s speech two years earlier and dropped it straight into the minister’s speech, and he read it out. They were sitting there reading the same speech as it went along.
A member: Are you telling me they have priors?
Mr ELFERINK: There is a bunch of priors here. Many priors.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the culture has not changed. The culture of: ‘I want to be at home at 5 pm, yeah, whatever, stick it on my desk, I will read it out in parliament tomorrow’ has not changed. I urge the government: please be critical, because if you think your function as the government is to come in and merely vomit up whatever the public servants stick on your desk, then we will end up with legislation that will do ridiculous things like perhaps fine beggars $6500. Stick that in your enamel cup, folks.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Notice No 1 relating to Alice Springs Sitting – Deferral
Notice No 1 relating to Alice Springs Sitting – Deferral
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, we are deferring that item pending changes to some of the details. There will be an amendment to that motion.
MOTION
Council of Territory Cooperation – Appointment of Members
Council of Territory Cooperation – Appointment of Members
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move - That the following members be appointed to serve on the Sessional Committee of the Council of Territory Cooperation: the member for Fannie Bay, Mr Gunner; the member for Arafura, Ms Scrymgour; the member for Katherine, Mr Willem Westra van Holthe; the member for Port Darwin, Mr Elferink; the member for Macdonnell, Ms Anderson; and the member for Nelson, Mr Wood.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I acknowledge the communications we had from the Leader of Government Business in relation to this matter this morning. I want to state on the record that communication between the Leader of Government Business and our side has been substantially improved in recent times, and I am grateful to him for making those efforts. I believe it does much to oil the cogs of this parliament when that communication exists, and I express my gratitude to him for his forthrightness.
Motion agreed to.
EDUCATION AMENDMENT (NON-GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS) BILL
(Serial 61)
(Serial 61)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr HENDERSON (Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The main purpose of the bill to is to amend the Education Act to bring the Northern Territory’s legislative provisions regarding the registration of non-government schools into line with those applying in other jurisdictions. The bill also seeks to repeal and replace existing provisions in relation to the establishment of advisory councils to provide advice to the minister on matters concerning the administration of the Education Act.
The non-government school sector plays a key role in the education of Northern Territory children, and the sector’s role is expanding. In August 2000, there were 32 non-government schools with 8708 children enrolled. Since then, new non-government schools have commenced operations and a number of others have been given approval to increase the range of year levels they can offer. As a result, by 2008, there were 10 063 children enrolled in the Territory’s 36 non-government schools.
The current provisions for the registration of non-government schools are contained in Part VII of the Education Act. These provisions have not been substantially amended since the early 1980s. In that time, all other jurisdictions in Australia have reviewed their legislation and increased the legislative requirements for non-government schools in response to community expectations. The Northern Territory provisions concerning the requirements for registration of non-government schools are now, by comparison, out-of-date and in need of amendment.
Part VII of the Education Act currently provides for the registration of new non-government schools; for variations to be made to existing registrations for non-government schools to be inspected; and for applicants to seek review by the minister if they are dissatisfied with how the department has dealt with a registration application.
In seeking to register a new non-government school, applicants are currently only required to provide details of the school’s location, the method of management, the educational qualifications of teachers, the proposed school’s curriculum, the age range of students to be enrolled, details of buildings and facilities, the financial position of the school at the time of application, and the name of the nominated person for the service of notices.
The current requirements only cover the most basic requirements in relation to the registration of a school. However, it is now apparent the current provisions are no longer adequate. Various deficiencies in the legislation have emerged. For example, the bill now provides for clear power to be established in the act to ensure the school has an appropriate governing body with skilled directors of good character, and will operate with sound governance arrangements. The government is also seeking an improved capacity to ensure the assessment of ongoing financial management and viability, and performance management and accountability of non-government schools. Also, new registration requirements in respect of student health, safety, and wellbeing, and procedures to deal with complaints and disputes are now included in the bill.
The government provides significant financial and other support to the non-government school sector, and I am sure members would agree there is every need to ensure these resources are well used. Even more importantly, as minister, I have a responsibility to the wider community to see that the Northern Territory provides the best possible standard of educational services, whether government or non-government, for young Territorians.
By way of background, I point out the standards of performance, management and achievement required of government schools have steadily increased in recent years. The requirements outlined in the schools’ management procedures and schools’ policy documents have been expanded to address many issues in this bill which is seeking to address the provisions applying to non-government schools. My department has already had extensive discussions with representatives of the non-government school sector about the need to amend Part VII of the act, and they are very supportive of the reforms. In fact, the Non-Government School Ministerial Advisory Council, which compromises representatives from each of the non-government school sectors, has been the driving force behind this review of legislation.
My department has also extensively reviewed the legislation of other jurisdictions governing the registration and operation of non-government schools, and has sought to include provisions which will bring the Territory’s registration provisions into line with best practice standards.
The most important change proposed in the bill is that applicants will be required to address a more up-to-date set of criteria in applying for registration of a new non-government school. Operators of non-government schools will also have to comply with the new registration requirements established by the bill, and the conditions imposed by the CEO following registration.
In addition to the existing registration requirements in Part VII, the bill introduces further, more robust requirements. These include: consideration of the likely impact of the new school upon existing schools, both government and non-government in the catchment area to help assess the likely ongoing viability of a new school; adequate safeguards for the health, safety and wellbeing of students and staff; student discipline must be based on procedural fairness, and corporal punishment is not allowed; and, the school must have adequate provision for meeting the needs of any of its students with a disability; all school staff must be of good character; and schools must have appropriate procedures in place to cope with critical incidents, complaints and resolution of disputes.
The information which must be provided regarding the governing body of the school has also been expanded, and some of these topics are of particular note. For example, the bill will require schools to uphold certain values. In line with other jurisdictions that have recently updated their legislation, the NT will require the philosophy and objects of the governing body of a non-government school and the school’s education programs to be consistent with specified basic values. These basic principles will include consistency with the notions of elected governments, equality of all people before the law, and freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of association. In addition, there should be tolerance of diverse religions, political, social and cultural beliefs and practices to the extent they are consistent with civilised values. Respective governing bodies of non-government schools that cannot demonstrate a capacity to abide by these basic principles will not be eligible for registration. This requirement is a recent development and comes in response to increased concerns about the potential for divisive beliefs to be taught in our schools. The Territory is not the first to introduce such a requirement. The ACT and Victorian governments have introduced similar requirements, and it seems likely that other jurisdictions will follow. Western Australia has imbedded into its curriculum framework a set of core shared values related to respect and concern for the rights of others, and social and civic responsibility.
Possibly the most contentious of the new provisions is the requirement for an applicant to address the potential impact of a proposed new school on existing schools in the catchment area. This requirement is not an issue in areas where there is a growing number of school students. However, in more established areas, such as the northern suburbs of Darwin, we have a static or even falling number of children, and the challenge is how to ensure these children have access to the best education options available.
All not-for-profit schools receive government funding and, as I indicated before, it is in the public interest to ensure this money is used judiciously. Introducing a new school in such circumstances could significantly affect the ability of all schools in the area, including the prospective new school, to provide good educational outcomes and may jeopardise the continuity of education for some students.
In assessing the likely impact of the proposed school, the panel may give consideration to changes to the enrolments of existing schools in the catchment area, adverse changes to their curriculum offering, and their future viability. Consideration of these matters will also help verify the expected ongoing financial viability of a new entrant into the non-government school sector.
The bill provides for applications to be assessed by a registration assessment panel made up of representatives of the department and other government agencies, and also representatives of the non-government school sector. Division 6 of the act establishes government financial assistance may be provided to, or withdrawn from, a non-government school. It also allows for the provision of support in other forms, such as the use of government-owned assets or facilities.
This provision is intended to make best possible use of government resources by allowing non-government schools to use government facilities, or to receive in-kind support from time to time. However, the act specifies that government financial assistance will not be provided to a non-government school which is operated for profit. This has been the policy position of this government for some time and is consistent with the practice in other states. The aim is to prevent the opportunity for government funding, that is, taxpayer dollars, to be used for non-educational purposes, such as distributing any profits to shareholders or owners of non-government schools. This is not to say that a non-government school should operate at a loss. Prudent financial management is a must in non-government schools, as it is in any school business. To make this matter clear, a non-government school is deemed to be not operated for profit only if profits or surpluses made from the operation of the school are used entirely to advance the school’s philosophy and objects as stated by its governing body. I should also point out, there are currently no schools operating for profit in the Territory.
I now turn to additional requirements the bill has for non-government schools once they are registered. The proposed amendments to Part VII will modernise and enhance the requirements and conditions for the operation of non-government schools. In addition to non-government schools complying with the registration requirements, and with conditions imposed by the Chief Executive, the bill also requires more comprehensive reporting in keeping with the registration requirements. One of the reasons for this is the government focuses on the self-improved processes adopted by non-government schools. The process will involve an annual self-audit, a five yearly external assessment, and a capacity for the department to investigate any suspected breaches of registration requirements and conditions.
The bill also strengthens the capacity of the CEO to intervene in situations where a non-government school may not be complying with its registration requirements and conditions. These provisions build on and extend the powers currently available in Part VII. The bill strengthens the capacity of the CEO to suspend and de-register a school where the CEO is concerned there is serious non-compliance with the registration requirements and conditions. I trust these increased powers are never used but, of course, appropriate measures do need to be in place so action can be taken quickly if required.
Another aspect of the bill I want to comment on is the introduction of a register of non-government schools. The register will be open to the public, and will contain key information about each school, including the name and address of the governing body, the religious affiliation, if any, the years of schooling offered, and the specific conditions placed on the school by the Chief Executive Officer. The introduction of the register will increase the public’s knowledge of the various schools which make up the Northern Territory non-government school sector. For the first time, the public will be given the opportunity to make submissions on new applications.
The opportunity has been taken in this bill to enhance the provisions relating to advisory councils which provide advice to the minister on matters concerning the education of young Territorians. The bill proposes the repeal of Part III of the act, and its replacement with a new Part III setting out new provisions for the establishment of advisory councils, the procedures governing their operations, and the provision of support to those councils.
Members who are familiar with education issues will recall the Education Advisory Council. The council made a valued contribution to the general development of education services in the Territory. However, the advisory role played by that council in times past has been filled, in more recent times, by the Northern Territory Board of Studies, the Northern Territory Indigenous Education Council, and the Non-Government School Ministerial Advisory Council. It is timely to make new provisions for the administration of advisory councils, and the bill contains a clause to achieve this result.
Finally, there are some consequential amendments proposed in the bill, together with some minor amendments of the type normally dealt with in statute law revision legislation. These amendments do not affect existing legislative policy.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members, and table the explanatory statement to accompany the bill.
Debate adjourned.
EDUCATION AMENDMENT (YOUTH PARTICIPATION) BILL
(Serial 59)
(Serial 59)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr HENDERSON (Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
Members will note this bill to amend the Education Act is called the Education Amendment (Youth Participation) Bill. The purpose of the bill is to amend the Education Act to require young Territorians to complete Year 10 of secondary education, and thereafter to continue in full-time education, training, employment, or a combination of those until they reach the age of 17-years.
The bill provides for the implementation in the Northern Territory of commitments by the Council of Australian Governments, COAG, and by my government. At its meeting in April 2009, COAG agreed to a series of education and training measures. These measures are designed to maximise young people’s engagement with education and training pathways. The proposals assist young Australians to improve their options for the future and their prospects of meeting the challenge of rising youth unemployment. They are also fundamental to broader long-term reform to increase the retention and attainment of young Australians in education.
A key initiative in this raft of measures is a national youth participation requirement; it makes participation in education, training or employment compulsory for all young Australians until they reach the age of 17 years.
The agreed commencement date for this new initiative across all Australian states and territories is 1 July 2010. A review of the legislation in other jurisdictions indicates that although there is a common purpose as agreed at COAG, each jurisdiction has adopted its own model to raise the compulsory participation age, and many jurisdictions have appropriate legislation in place to give effect to reforms. In the Northern Territory it is necessary to amend the Education Act in order to implement this requirement, and the appropriate amendments are set out in the bill currently before you.
Public discussion about these proposals has tended to refer to raising the school leaving age; however, this terminology is misleading because the reforms will only make it compulsory for a young Territorian to complete Year 10 or its equivalent. After that stage and until the age of 17, a young person will be required to participate, but will have a variety of options. They may choose to: continue their schooling; get other approved educational training; commence full-time work; or participate in a combination of any of these pursuits. After the age of 17 there will be no legislative requirements to continue. The intended effect of the legislative amendments will be to increase the numbers of young Territorians who continue in full-time education, training and/or employment and, consequently, reduce the number of unemployed young people.
Although it is difficult at this stage to determine the actual number of young people in the Northern Territory who will be affected by the reforms, ABS data indicates that in 2008 the size of the disengaged cohort was in the order of 530 15-year-olds, and 690 16-year-olds. The reforms will apply equally to all Territorians including: those in the government and non-government sectors; those with special learning needs; those in what is commonly referred to as home schooling; those who are living in remote areas; and those who live in urban areas.
However, the bill contains a transitional provision giving an exemption for young people who have turned 15 before 1 January 2010, the commencement date of the reforms. It is estimated there are about 250 Territorians who will have turned 15 by that date, but have not yet turned 17-years of age. The reason for exempting this particular cohort is these children and their parents will have made decisions based on the current legislation and should not be subject to amendments which would, in effect, apply to them retrospectively.
Of course, these young people may choose to participate voluntarily in additional education, training or employment, and they are strongly encouraged to do so. These reforms will require all young people, who might otherwise leave school as soon as they turn 15, to remain at school until they complete Year 10. At present, it is estimated that approximately 15% of students leave school in the Northern Territory prior to completing Year 10; some leave to take up a job, but the exact number of those students who will do so in each particular year cannot yet be known.
The act, as amended by this bill, will continue to allow young Territorians to seek employment after they have completed Year 10, whether or not they have turned 17; and continue to allow employers to employ these young people during the youth participation years.
The government is committed to ensuring that during the compulsory participation phase, young people in remote locations and young people with disabilities are able to access suitable education, training or employment opportunities. Approximately 44% of young Territorians live in remote and very remote locations. Remote students with access to a computer and broadband Internet connection are already able to access senior secondary and vocational education subjects and units online. These subjects are certified for the Northern Territory Certification of Education and Training, and residential components are included in courses which require hands-on laboratory and workshop learning and assessments. The government is also working to quickly establish, or improve, the education hubs in each of our A Working Future towns, which will provide senior secondary education, including vocational education pathways.
Government agencies are also addressing the issue of enhancing the participation opportunities for young people with disabilities. It may be that additional education and training programs will be developed to meet the needs of specific groups and communities. The bill provides for new programs to be approved by the Chief Executive Officer and published by notification in the Gazette.
To support these new participation requirements, the Northern Territory is implementing a range of initiatives aimed at:
improving literacy and numeracy outcomes through the Smarter Schools National Partnerships;
improving student attendance;
providing access to more flexible and meaningful pathways for young people, especially in the senior years of schooling; and
establishing a Beyond School Guarantee to encourage young people to complete their schooling so they are assured of a post-school pathway into further education, training or employment.
Whilst the Northern Territory’s youth reform will occur across the Territory, it is in remote locations that the most significant reform will need to occur. It is also in remote locations the Northern Territory and Australian governments are focusing significant investment and effort to reshape remote communities, improve service delivery and infrastructure, and drive major improvements in outcomes for Indigenous people.
Education and training is the most important commitment to this government. The Northern Territory government’s draft Territory 2030 strategy places it at the centre of our development as a community. It is also at the centre of our A Working Future policy. According the Commonwealth Grants Commission data 2006, over 40 000 people, or approximately 20% of the Territory population, resides in remote or very remote townships and communities. Under this initiative, the Territory’s 20 largest remote communities will be transformed, over time, into Territory growth towns which are properly planned and designed; have services, building and facilities like any other country town; and gain benefit from targeted investment in infrastructure.
Territory growth towns will become the economic and service delivery centres for their regions. They have been identified on the basis of a combination of community and regional population, geographic location, existing and planned government services, and potential for development of commercial enterprises. In partnership with other agencies, the Territory’s Department of Education and Training has already commenced developing implementation plans for an initial group of six Territory growth towns. These are Maningrida, Ngukurr, Angurugu/Umbakumba on Groote Eylandt, Gunbalanya/Jabiru, Ntaria and Lajamanu.
A Working Future is closely aligned with the COAG National Indigenous Reform Agreement which aims to improve outcomes for all Indigenous Australians. This agreement recognises that improving outcomes for Indigenous people requires adoption of a multifaceted approach to direct effort across seven key building blocks: Early Childhood, Schooling, Health, Economic Participation, Healthy Homes, Safe Communities, and Governance and Leadership. Whilst progress across the seven areas is critical to delivering sustainable improvements in participation and productivity, the areas which are most linked to youth attainment and transitions are Schooling and Economic Participation.
The Smarter Schools reforms will expand on existing good educational practice and provide the opportunity to trial innovative ways to address the challenges of delivering education in the Northern Territory. Existing school improvement planning processes will be used to ensure the Smarter Schools reforms complement and align with core business and other Territory and national reforms such as those under the Closing the Gap and Youth Attainment and Transitions National Partnerships. These reforms include:
Low Socio-Economic Status Schools Communities National Partnership Agreement which identify schools for targeted effort to address the complex and interconnected challenges facing students in disadvantaged communities, including the Territory growth towns;
The government has also recently launched A Smart Territory – the Education and Training Strategic Plan 2009 - 2012. This plan sets an ambitious program of reform for Territory government schools, and is driven by the objective of successful transition of students from their formal years of schooling to further training, employment and/or higher education.
In addition to what I have outlined here today, there are many other Northern Territory and national reform agendas which are working together to shape the service and support we provide young Territorians. These include:
Productivity Places Program National Partnership Agreement to increase Indigenous people’s access to employment and training services;
Remote Indigenous Public Internet Access National Partnership Agreement to provide Internet access and training in remote Indigenous communities, including Territory growth towns;
Indigenous Economic Participation National Partnership Agreement to set Indigenous employment targets for the public sector, and outline commitments for increasing Indigenous employment through procurement practices;
We need the reforms encompassed in this bill because too many young Territorians are leaving school early and not acquiring the skills, the knowledge, and the attitudes they need to get jobs and to be well prepared for later life. According to the ABS, in 2008, just over 13% of 15 to 19-year-olds in urban areas in the Territory were not participating in full-time education and/or employment. Anecdotal evidence suggests this percentage is significantly higher in remote and very remote locations, which has increasingly important economic and social implications for the future of the Territory.
We know technological advances, changing composition and organisation of the labour force, as well as other structural changes in the Australian and Northern Territory economies, will reshape and significantly reduce employment opportunities for unskilled or low skilled young people. The reasons for poor outcomes and early exit from school are multifaceted, but the characteristics of the population in the Territory give some insight into the serious challenges faced by many young Territorians, especially those young people who live in remote and very remote locations.
Education and training have major roles to play in delivering the Territory’s social and economic development and wellbeing. The Territory government believes very strongly in the importance of all young Territorians having the opportunity to undertake the education and training which will equip them with the skills to enable them to get jobs and a good income, and contribute fully to our economic, cultural and social growth.
Whilst national and international research show a long-standing and stubborn relationship between education outcomes and student background, more recent research demonstrates this is not an inevitable relationship. The research shows education systems which put in place coherent, consistent and comprehensive reform agendas that prioritise supporting schools to undertake whole-school improvement can disrupt this relationship, given time. This evidence also suggests that one of the most significant impediments to achieving this is the beliefs and expectations of teachers, parents, principals and system administrators. To this end, the Territory government is driving a culture of high expectations in Territory schools, and has a range of policies in place directed at increasing participation in education and training through strategies ranging from whole-school improvement planning, to increasing VET in schools, and school-based apprenticeships and traineeship program to establish a Beyond School Guarantee.
The Northern Territory clearly requires a significant and renewed focus on delivering a skilled and capable workforce ready to met future opportunities. Much work has already been done by schools to develop flexible, responsive pathways between school and work or further study. However, more work is needed, and this will be a focus area for many schools in their planning as part of the Smarter Schools National Partnership, and in their work to make youth engagement, attainment and successful transitions key priorities. Our schools will be required to position themselves as key drivers of change by better integrating vocational education and training programs into the senior secondary curriculum by encouraging and supporting partnerships between schools, business and industry; brokered and supported by effective policy change at corporate level.
The Territory government wants all young Territorians to have the opportunity and support to deliver the knowledge and skills they need to participate effectively in society, to be employed in a globalised economy, and to succeed in life, whatever their background or aspirations. The education and training sectors have key roles to play in skilling young people so they are well placed to meet the future needs of industry for a highly skilled workforce.
Fundamental to this are clear, high quality pathways for students between school, vocational education training, and university. To support this aim the Territory government has set the following systemic targets to be achieved by 2012: a 20% increase in NTCET completions; a 20% completion rate for attaining VET in Schools qualifications; a 3% increase in the proportion of non-Indigenous students at or above national minimum standards in all NAPLAN tests; and a 9% increase in the proportion of Indigenous students at or above national minimum standards in all NAPLAN tests. The Territory has also committed to achieving its contribution share of COAG targets under the Youth Attainment and Transitions National Partnership - that is to lift the Year 12 or equivalent attainment rate by 10% by 2015, and to achieve a 27.9% Indigenous attainment rate by 2020.
To drive the changes necessary to reach these ambitious targets the Territory government, through the Department of Education and Training, is implementing a range of initiatives including:
the Youth Participation Requirement: from 1 January 2010, young people must participate in schooling until they complete Year 10, followed by the requirement to participate in full-time education, training or employment until they turn 17.
a Compact with Young Territorians, which provides 15- to 24-year-olds with an entitlement to an education or training place for a government subsidised qualification, subject to admission requirements and course availability;
the new Northern Territory Certificate of Education and Training, which will ensure all students achieve sound levels of literacy and numeracy, are provided with clear, flexible pathways to university, further training or work in which both academic and vocational pathways and outcomes are equally valued;
VET in Schools, expanded access to high quality job aligned programs in all senior secondary schools, delivering real qualifications and getting students work-ready. This initiative will:
confirm the role of schools as deliverers of in-house training, providers of VET to other schools, and purchasers of services from external Registered Training Organisations;
align the focus of new Trade Training Centres to industry and employer need;
increase the number of school-based apprenticeships and traineeships; and
facilitate more students to complete Certificate II and/or Certificate III and get an NTCET;
Centres of Excellence in Maths/Science, Engineering, and Tourism and Hospitality Industries within senior secondary colleges to provide opportunities for students to access innovative programs, industry experience and fast-tracked university entrance;
Virtual Schooling: improved access to the South Australian Certificate of Education, approved academic and VET courses, using digital technologies to facilitate real time, quality learning for senior secondary students who do not have these courses available in their home school;
A Sporting Chance: expanded access to the Clontarf Academy programs across more schools and communities for a wider range of students, including young men in the senior years, as well as exploring options to be trialled with young women;
a Beyond School Guarantee and local Jobs Register ensuring students a pathway to work, university or further training when they fulfil base requirements, including attendance, participation and behaviour;
a Regional Focus: realignment of DET resourcing to provide a regional focus on early years schooling and post-schooling, to ensure the necessary support to drive youth engagement, attainment and successful transitions;
Personal Learning Plans requiring all Year 10 students to develop a personal learning plan;
Work-Ready Programs: improved access to and investment in training, driven by the skill needs of industry and leading to employment;
Outside School Hours Access to School Facilities to assist tertiary education and training; and
Smart Alignment of the effort of DET with other agencies in the Australian government, to achieve stronger outcomes for young people.
This bill is a fundamental platform for putting in place many of the strategies and government programs I have outlined, and it will frame a new future and new opportunities for the Territory’s youth. There are a number of minor amendments included in this bill to take account of changes in the Interpretation Act, particularly recent amendments to sections 38F and 65 of the Interpretation Act concerning subordinate legislation.
The bill also offers an opportunity to update references in the Education Act to the department of Education and to the Secretary of the department as those terms are now somewhat archaic, and the bill proposes they be replaced with current terminology: ‘agency’, instead of the current name of the department concerned, and ‘Chief Executive Officer’ for the officer leading the department. These amendments were of the kind normally attended to in statute law revision legislation; here they are included in the schedule of the bill.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members, and table the explanatory statements accompanying the bill.
Debate adjourned.
MOTION
Alice Springs Sittings
Alice Springs Sittings
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move – That, unless otherwise ordered, the days and times of the meeting and Routine of Business in respect of the 2009 Alice Springs regional sitting of the Assembly be as follows:
1. TIMES OF MEETINGS
- The Assembly meets each day at 9.30 am, and Tuesday 24 November 2009 the Official Opening will commence at 9 am.
2. ROUTINE OF BUSINESS
The Routine of Business shall be:
- TUESDAY 24 NOVEMBER 2009
- (i) Prayers
(ii) Petitions
(iii) Government Business - Notices and Orders of the Day
(iv) At 1.30 pm, Notices
(v) Questions
(vi) Government Business - Notices and Orders of the Day
(vii) Papers
(viii) Ministerial Statements
(ix) Any proposal pursuant to Standing Order 94 - Matter of Public Importance
(x) Adjournment
- Luncheon 12 noon to 1.30 pm
Close at 8.30 pm – Adjourn until 10 pm.
- WEDNESDAY 25 NOVEMBER 2009
- (i) Prayers
(ii) Petitions
(iii) General Business - Notices and Orders of the Day
(iv) At 7 pm, Notices
(v) Questions
(vi) General Business and Orders of the Day
(vii) Adjournment
- Luncheon 12 noon to 1.30 pm
Close at 8.30 pm - Adjournment
- THURSDAY 26 NOVEMBER 2009
- (i) Prayers
(ii) Petitions
(iii) Government Business - Notices and Orders of the Day
(iv) At 1.30 pm, Notices
(v) Questions
(vi) Government Business - Notices and Orders of the Day
(vii) Papers
(viii) Ministerial Statements
(ix) Any proposal pursuant to Standing Order 94 - Matter of Public Importance
(x) Adjournment
Luncheon 12 noon to 1.30 pm
Close at 8.30 pm – Adjourn until 10 pm.
Madam Speaker, as members would be aware, there was a timetable, or details, circulated about the times of meetings and routine of business in Alice Springs prior to today. I did receive a communication from the member for Port Darwin that the opposition would like a number of changes, and we have negotiated those; in some things we have come halfway to what we proposed, and I hope these changes are acceptable to everyone. Although it has been circulated, I will detail the changes to members now so people are aware of them.
Formerly, it was proposed the Assembly would meet at 9 am each day, and that has been changed to 9.30 am. On the first Tuesday there will be an official opening at 9 am with proceedings on the floor of parliament starting at 9.30 am on that day, also. The other change is because there is a knock-on effect due to the change from 10 pm to 9.30 pm, closing on Tuesday 24 November will be 8.30 pm, so now parliament will close and adjournments will run for 1 hours until 10 pm.
On Wednesday we go to exhaustion, either figuratively or literally, on adjournments; basically the close will be 8.30 pm and when all members have adjourned who want to adjourn, proceedings will then close. Also, on Wednesday, notices have been moved from 5 pm in the original schedule to 7 pm and Question Time will follow notices at 7 pm. Similarly, on Thursday close at 8.30 pm and adjourn until 10 pm.
I am very much looking forward to our sittings in Alice Springs. They are always very lively, and the residents of Alice Springs are not backward in coming forward with their criticisms of government and their feelings about the way things are travelling in Alice Springs. It is always robust debate and the citizenry of Alice Springs have made a feature of engaging with the parliamentary process and, as I say, letting their feelings be known and, in some instances, protesting outside the conference centre. I welcome that. It shows engagement by the people of Alice Springs, and government certainly takes on board the messages we receive from them; and I do not believe these sittings will be any different.
I did notice last time that attendance seemed to be slightly down, and I hope attendances will be very strong again this year. I am sure local members in Alice Springs will be endeavouring to get as many people as possible along to the sittings. I hope the amended times go some way to ensuring and facilitating the attendance at the sittings by people in Alice Springs.
Madam Speaker, I commend the motion to the House. I am pleased to say there are changes, but they have been done in collaboration with the opposition and the Independent.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, perish the thought that we should forget the Independent; there are actually two in this House, by the way, and I wonder if the other Independent was consulted in the same way, because that Independent has a seat which actually borders the town boundary of Alice Springs. I am interested to hear in summation whether the Independent with the seat in Central Australia was approached and negotiated with in relation to this issue by the government, or is it just the Independent member for Nelson who has a seat just south of Darwin. However, I acknowledge …
Dr Burns: The principal changes came from the opposition, member for Port Darwin.
Mr ELFERINK: I pick up on that interjection. You have made it a point, not I, to consult the Independent. I am just curious why the member for Nelson was high on your list of priorities, when the other Independent member has a seat in Central Australia. That is up to you to consider.
I acknowledge and thank the Leader of Government Business. In terms of the timetable being circulated, my desk looks not unlike a World War I trench so, perhaps, I missed it, but I am not entirely sure if it was circulated; I will check with the Tabled Papers Office …
Dr Burns: I did give you a copy.
Mr ELFERINK: Yes, I will have a look. In any instance, the Notice Paper today was the first time I have seen this document. I am not blaming anyone; it could well be my own level of organisation on this desk.
Having made that observation, I acknowledge and thank the government for negotiating this prior to us coming into the Chamber. It always makes for a smoother passage of material through this House when these details are nutted out and advice is given from both sides as to their intent. At least if we are going to have an argument, we know there is going to be an argument, and there is no entrapment involved.
It was our initial intent to move it to a normal sitting day starting at 10 am, with the exception of an hour-and-a-half lunch, and finishing at the normal times. By this system, having an hour-and-a-half lunch, we are actually get an extra half-hour of business done during the day. I have to point out it was in the forefront of my mind that finishing at 9 pm would mean government members may not go out on the town to various social functions which, undoubtedly, their $9m spin machine will be trying to arrange for them. I care about the members of government in Alice Springs, and I was hoping by leaving them in the House until 9 pm, they would not be exposed to people in Alice Springs who may want to do horrible things to them.
Madam Speaker, I thank the government for their negotiations, and we support this motion.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I have now heard everything from the member for Port Darwin in his sincere concern for the government facing up to the Alice Springs public. I actually enjoy going to Alice Springs; it is great to catch up with people in the southern part of the Northern Territory because they, obviously, have different points of view about matters pertaining to the Territory, and I always enjoy my time there. In fact, I am one of those who believe we should meet there every year; however, there may be cost implications with that. But, I would like to repeat that I believe we should have the sittings there every year.
I am also pleased both sides of parliament have come together on this very important issue of time. I hope it may extend to other things which happen in parliament from time to time. To be honest with you, even though the government spoke to me, I do not get excited over these things; whether we start at 9 am or 10 am, generally speaking, we will still have the same number of hours for debating matters. Obviously some people think one time is better than the other, and I am glad we have been able to accommodate people by coming halfway - if that is not a level of diplomatic manoeuvring, I will go he.
It is good to see both sides have agreed on what could have been a point of contention on this issue, and will mean, hopefully, smooth running in Alice Springs. I look forward to the debate and to meeting people, and also to going to the Firkin & Hound - pardon me, Madam Speaker, that is the name of the inn - for a good bangers and mash.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I thank members for their support, and I look forward to the sittings in Alice Springs.
Motion agreed to
PRISONERS (INTERSTATE TRANSFER) AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 56)
(Serial 56)
Continued from 20 August 2009.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, the intention of this bill is to broaden the minister’s ability to approve interstate prisoner transfers. There are also minor amendments to remove gender specific language from the principal act.
It is appropriate for me to give something of the background to this bill. The Ministerial Council of Corrective Services Ministers requested the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General to agree to changes to national uniform prisoner transfer legislation to give ministers the ability to consider a wider range of factors when recommending or accepting interstate transfer requests from prisoners.
In 2004, and that is significant - and I will come to why shortly - an intergovernmental agreement set out the agreed terms of the amendments, and stated that while there were no time frames for the introduction of the amendments, jurisdictions were advised to implement them as soon as practicable. A very minor amendment to the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act commenced in 2007 to remove the word ‘and’ from section 3(7)(b)(ii)(B), which makes this bill the first time the changes recommended in the Intergovernmental Agreement of 2004 have come to pass. In other words, this government has again taken a very long time to get to this position; it should have done it several years ago. I will come to why that is of some significance shortly.
Interestingly, the provisions agreed to in the Intergovernmental Agreement have been attributed to a case in which the Territory has a very real involvement. That was the case with the Attorney-General of the ACT vs Daniel Heiss. The case resulted from Mr Heiss’ sentence to imprisonment for life for murder being denied his transfer request by the ACT Attorney-General for reasons outside the specified welfare scope of the legislation. On appeal to the Full Court of the Australian Federal Court, the ACT Attorney-General was directed to reconsider the non-approval of Heiss’ transfer without the irrelevant considerations.
The Intergovernmental Agreement was agreed to in June, I believe, of 2004. If its provisions had been introduced to amend the NT Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act sooner, it may have enabled the then Correctional Services or Justice minister to avoid the very loophole the current Correctional Services minister refers to in the case of Jonathan Peter Bakewell, because his transfer was not effective until 15 April 2005. Had government been more active in this area, the complaint about which the new minister makes much in relation to Bakewell, would not have arisen.
Unfortunately, we have seen it time and time again where the government is just too focused on spin and brochures and not, as it should be, on bringing before this parliament proper legislation. We saw an example of it earlier this week with the Attorney-General and the Justice Penalties amendment.
By way of a brief digression, I have had the opportunity to read the Hansard of that debate, and I note with enormous interest when the fine of $6500 in relation to begging was put to the Attorney-General she said she stood by that penalty, and that the Labor Party stands by its policies. Clearly, there seems to be some disagreement between the Chief Minister and his deputy.
However, coming back to this bill, I would like to make some other comments for the sake of the Hansard. In relation to clause 5, it is fairly straightforward and removes reference to the welfare of the prisoner and a few minor punctuation changes throughout section 5 of the act. Clause 6 changes the gender specific references throughout section 9 of the act; for example, ‘himself’ becomes ‘him or herself’, and about time too.
Clause 7 introduces a new section 9A to expand the factors the minister may have regard to when considering a prisoner’s request for transfer to another jurisdiction. Under the current legislation the minister can only have consideration of the welfare implications of the prisoner’s request to transfer. These have now been broadened to allow the minister to consider, inter alia, the administration of justice, the protection of the community, the prisoner’s welfare and safety and any other matter the minister feels is relevant.
Clause 8 amends section 21 of the bill and allows the minister to apply the expanded provisions introduced in the new section (a) to the consideration of prisoners returning to their original jurisdiction under section 18 of the act.
That is essentially what the bill is about. I made a note here in relation to the delay of government in regard to the Bakewell case; the government has closed the stable door after the horse has bolted. That is quite a poor way to govern, if I could respectfully suggest that to all members but, in particular, through you, Madam Speaker, to the minister for Corrections. I also respectfully suggest you very carefully go through the legislation and the changes to it that you bring to this Chamber. I do not know you well, but I suspect you would be minded to carefully consider the legislation, and I believe events evidenced in the parliament over the last couple of days certainly illustrates the point that, as a minister of the Crown, if you want to come into this Chamber and present legislation, then you make sure you have it right.
Having said that, you are not off the hook entirely, minister. I now turn to what you knew I would - in your second reading speech you plagiarised; you plagiarised quite a deal. I have a copy here. This is part of the first page of the speech, your speech, you gave here on 20 August this year. The green bits are the bits you copied and, on page two, all these green bits - and I see on my colleague’s computer, the member for Greatorex, the green is being picked up very well by the cameras. Is it not great the new cameras are working so well?
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! It is quite gratuitous for the member for Araluen to point to the similarities in language for a bill which is uniform throughout Australia. I would have thought in second reading speeches they need to be uniform. She needs to stop being so cute with people who are watching this broadcast, and who may not appreciate the particular facts.
Madam SPEAKER: Resume your seat, please.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! This is a House of communication, and a House of speaking, and if the member for Araluen wants to speak, so she may well speak! If the minister has a problem he can speak later on.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, resume your seat.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Araluen, I am a bit concerned about Standing Order 62 in relation to actually claiming plagiarism. Perhaps you could be vaguer; unless you want to do it by way of substantive motion. You are actually making a very strong point.
Ms CARNEY: I will come to the hypocrisy, Madam Speaker, because I will shortly be referring to some comments previously made in this House by the member for Barkly in relation to allegations of plagiarism by some of my colleagues.
I guess it is for others to ascertain from looking at this minister’s two-and-a-bit page speech that the green bits were copied from somewhere else. They were copied - plagiarised - without attribution. We all know the definition of plagiarism, and you know it quite well, minister; you took someone else’s comments, and you did not attribute them. Why is this of interest? Two reasons.
One, the opposition does not have the resources of government; we do our best to assess every piece of legislation brought to this Chamber. As a result of the minister being sprung copying someone else’s speech, we are now minded to go through, word by word, every second reading speech brought into this parliament by the government. Regrettably, we do not have those resources because we are focused on positioning as an alternative government to the people of the Northern Territory and, come the next election, whenever that is, to win that next election. If we had endless resources, like government, we probably would have someone - perhaps someone will volunteer - to check all the speeches; but it should not be the case and members of this Assembly should not expect a minister of the Crown to come in here to do a second reading speech copied from someone else’s speech. I believe that is an insult to the parliament, and it certainly says much about the minister doing it.
Second, and more importantly, the member for Barkly, the minister for Corrections, on 21 October last year, in adjournment debate, said:
- It is with great disappointment, that on going through Hansard, I have made an alarming discovery. The act of plagiarism is occurring in the House.
He went on to quote the definition of plagiarism. Then, the member for Barkly, the minister for Corrections, whose second reading speech refers to the bill that we are debating, said and I quote:
- As a former school teacher it was important for me, as an educator and a role model, to impress and teach my students about the importance of doing your own work and expressing your own views, and if someone before you had said it better, then give that person the credit deserved.
The NT News published a story about this, and the minister’s lame defence was quite awful, and the Leader of Government Business touched upon it. The member for Barkly denied this was plagiarism, notwithstanding his own definition, but he denied it was plagiarised and he said all the speeches were given the same legal advice and, basically, we all use the same words. At my charitable best, even if I accept that, then the minister still makes a fool of himself because he said - no one else said - he said on 21 October 2008: ‘If someone before you had said it better, then give that person the credit deserved’. I have gone through the minister’s second reading speech and I cannot find anywhere he acknowledges the second reading speech made by the then Minister for Corrective Services in Western Australia in November 2007. I hope the minister is embarrassed - he should be - and based on his indignation on 21 October 2008, I hope he recognises the extent of his hypocrisy; as do his colleagues. We would like to hope this unfortunate business will not happen again.
Madam Speaker, we support the bill.
Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I commend the Minister for Correctional Services for bringing this bill before the Chamber. I also recognise results from a federal court decision in 2002 which, two years later led to decisions of the Corrective Services Minister’s Conference and the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General in 2004; and I note this Corrections minister, in a very short time under his steerage of this portfolio, has brought this matter before our Chamber. I thank him for being so prompt in recognising the need for this legislation. Obviously, as Attorney-General, I have worked with him to support the carriage of this through the government processes to ensure it occurs, because it makes for a far better functioning system.
The bill provides for the minister to have regard to the broader range of matters that are: the prisoners’ welfare; the administration of justice; the security and good order of prisons; the safe custody of the prisoner; the protection of the community, and any other matter the minister considers relevant; applications for transfer for welfare purposes involving decisions by the minister in the state or territory from which the prisoner wants to transfer, as well as a decision by the minister in the state or territory to which the prisoner wants to transfer.
The changes, as I said, have grown out of the federal court decision in 2002, Corrective Services and SCAG in 2004. The problem is the existing legislation, prior to these changes, only allowed the minister to consider welfare transfers in a relatively narrow and unclarified manner. Therefore, opening up this discretion to consider broader policy objectives such as the general administration of justice, as well as other important matters such as the prisoners’ safety and the safety of the community in general, is very important.
The changes in the bill made in relation to welfare transfers may provide increased opportunities for inmates and their families to develop and foster relationships during the prisoner’s period of incarceration. The bill ensures the minister has the same discretion in considering prisoners’ applications for interstate transfer as the corresponding ministers in all other participating jurisdictions. It is important to have broader regard to matters of the prisoners’ welfare, the administration of justice, the security and good order of prisons, the safe custody of the prisoner, the protection of the community, and any other matter the minister considers relevant.
As Attorney-General, and in the hot seat currently under the Administrative Orders, I am very pleased to see this coming through. I have a very close working relationship with our Correctional Services minister; he is doing an outstanding job. Despite all the theatre of the shadow, the reality of model amendments as agreed by Corrective Services ministers and SCAG, sets down a form of words which are relevant to be used across the jurisdictions when they are introduced in second readings. While the shadow flops around in her theatrics and accusations of plagiarism, second reading speeches are quite different by their nature to normal debate. They need to specify very clearly the requirements as agreed to in the model legislation, in this case an amendment to the transfer of interstate prisoners.
Madam Speaker, I congratulate our Correctional Services minister who, very quickly in his role as Correctional Services minister, brought this matter to us. It is contemporary practice and it is good to see it introduced here in the Territory.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I am very curious about this legislation. I say that because, up until recent times, according to the minister’s second reading, the Northern Territory has consented to nine prisoner applications for transfer to the Territory since July 1995 – and 52 Northern Territory prisoners have been transferred to other jurisdictions under the welfare provisions of the act.
What that says is, up until now, there has been no difficulty with the existing act. What has changed to bring on these so-called new amendments to the bill? Well, it is the case of Mr Bakewell, which has been discussed and debated in this House before. In fact, it was debated here on 8 May 2008 to try to stop Mr Bakewell being released from a South Australian prison. As I said, there has been no problem up until now; and I believe there may have been other prisoners serving long sentences who had been sentenced interstate. Again, there had been no fuss about it.
I should remind the parliament this has actually has come about because the Attorney-General at that time, Peter Toyne, wrote a letter to the Hon Terance Roberts MLC, Minister for Correctional Services, Adelaide, South Australia, and I will quote from my speech on 8 May 2008, where he said this:
- Northern Territory prisoner, Jonathan Bakewell, has applied for transfer to South Australia on welfare grounds, pursuant to the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act.
On 26 May 1989, in the Supreme Court Darwin, prisoner Bakewell was convicted for murder and other offences, and sentenced to life imprisonment. The sentence was deemed to have commenced on 27 February 1988. In November 2003, the Sentencing (Crime of Murder) and Parole Reform Act, was an act that would allow the court to set a non-parole period when sentencing a person for the crime of murder. The legislation also affected existing life sentences.
- Consequently, prisoner Bakewell has been given a non-parole period of 20 years, and he is eligible for consideration by a parole board for release on 27 February 2008.
That was not correct. Prisoner Bakewell was due to have a 25-year non-parole period, but the Attorney-General wrote a letter to the Minister for Correctional Services in South Australia, saying it was a 20-year non-parole period. Obviously the South Australian government accepted that as the sentence and, working on that date, that sentence then initiated re-integration programs. In fact, Mr Bakewell is said to have been a model prisoner, who went to Yatala, Mobilong and the Adelaide Pre-Release Centre, and I believe he has now been released.
I do not think there is anything particularly wrong with our existing law. What our existing law is being brought in to do is to cover up, and I do not use that in a corrupt sense, but to mask the fact that there was a mistake made by the Attorney-General at that time to the South Australian government. I believe if the prisoner Bakewell had been sentenced to 25 years, and the South Australian government had been informed of that, this would, possibly, never have come to this House, and there would not be changes to the rules. I reiterate: there cannot have been too much wrong with this legislation because it does not just apply to murderers, it applies to everyone. It could be Joe Blow, a bank robber, who is in for 10 years, and would rather be close to his mother who is very old; or there might be other reasons a transfer is wanted. It is not just for murderers.
The change is simply because a murderer was given an incorrect sentence because the Attorney-General wrote the incorrect sentence in a letter to the South Australian minister.
I reiterate that from July 1995, 52 Northern Territory prisoners have been transferred to other jurisdictions under the welfare provisions of the act. I have not heard anyone complain about that, but I have heard a complaint about Bakewell. What I am saying is, there was nothing wrong with the existing rules; there simply was a mistake made which created a furore in the press. I remember the Attorney-General getting up and, I believe, she made statements like: ‘This will never happen again.’ This is a reaction to a headline in the newspaper which was caused by the government itself making a mistake. I ask: does this make a good law? Or is this a ‘my laws are tougher than your laws’? Because there does not appear to be anything wrong with the existing law.
I ask the minister: now there are additional requirements for a minister to take into account, is it going to be harder for a person in gaol for a lesser offence to go through all these steps to get a transfer? Transfers are not uncommon throughout Australia; it is not as though it is something new to prisoners throughout Australia. Many of the prisoners in our gaols in the Territory are from interstate. If you look at the figures I believe it is somewhere around 8% to 10% of prisoners come from interstate so it is obvious a number of those prisoners will ask for a transfer.
I do not necessarily say the legislation is bad, what annoys me is I believe it is more a reaction than something brought to this parliament because there is a genuine need.
During the debate on Thursday, 8 May, I made this statement in the committee stage:
- My other two questions are: which jurisdiction says whether a prisoner can, for instance, work outside a prison; and which jurisdiction determines which prison he will be accommodated in.
As I mentioned before there is Yatala, Mobilong and the Adelaide Pre-Release Centre. When a prisoner is transferred, his sentence stays exactly the same. If it was a 25-year non-parole period, the South Australian Department for Correctional Services must abide by that ruling; but the manner in which the prisoner is managed within the South Australian correctional facilities and the decisions about parole are all done under the jurisdiction of the South Australian government. The Attorney-General at that time, the member for Sanderson, said: Yes, member for Nelson, that is correct.’ As I say, it is still under the umbrella of the Northern Territory Sentencing Act.
What has come out of that is that the High Court did not agree. In the unanimous decision the High Court considered that by operation of prisoner transfer legislation applicable in the Northern Territory and South Australia at the time Mr Bakewell was transferred to South Australia, three outcomes resulted: the life sentence imposed on him in the Northern Territory ceased to have effect in the Territory; a life sentence was deemed to have been imposed on him by the Supreme Court of South Australia; and the 20-year non-parole period fixed under Northern Territory legislation, was deemed to have been fixed by the Supreme Court of South Australia.
That put the Northern Territory in a bind. I understand that, but considering this was the only case which came to court, I believe, was caused simply because the Attorney-General wrote the incorrect parole period in his letter, and I am concerned we have rushed this legislation through. Sorry?
Mr Elferink: It is likely they would have referred to a Warrant of Imprisonment, not to a letter of a minister.
Mr WOOD: Well, this is what appears to have happened, and I raised …
Mr Elferink: I would be very surprised.
Mr WOOD: I raised that at the particular time.
It does also raise some questions. I am not opposed to the system of 20 and 25-year sentences, but there is a whole range of questions which still need to be debated in that area. In fact, if what I read here is right, it says the life sentence imposed on Mr Bakewell in the Northern Territory ceased to have effect in the Territory. I ask the minister if that was the case, and the prisoner came back to the Northern Territory and committed an offence, would he immediately be put back in prison? My understanding is once he has left the Territory, the life sentence does not apply anymore. I was always of the understanding life is life. Whether you are in prison or out of prison was not the argument. The way I read it there does concern me. Once you have left the Territory, does it mean your life sentence still applies if you come back to the Territory? That is one issue I noticed when reading that.
There are some other matters I have concerns about. The minister quoted all the parole boards and, obviously, the parole boards are all very different; in fact, I think we probably have the strictest parole board of any state. We have 10 members of the parole board, and it has to be unanimous. Whilst it has to be unanimous in most states, except the ACT, generally speaking they are much smaller parole boards. The question which has been asked of me is: we have a Victims of Crime representative on the Parole Board - and so we should - but in this case where we are applying a whole range of considerations the minister may have regard to, is there a prisoner representative to argue his case?
First, the parole board requires a unanimous decision; and, second, the minister now has to take into regard six particular matters, and I do not know whether there is a representative to argue the prisoner’s case. I am not necessarily talking about murderers; I am just talking in general, because this act applies right across the board to any prisoner wanting a transfer. I do not know whether the government has considered this, or whether it actually happens at the moment.
Another area I have spoken about a number of times is the numbers of prisoners still in our prisons for murder, but not officially classified under this act. I believe it is beholden on this government, especially in light of the recent court case regarding parole for Daniel Heiss and his partner. It is not about whether they should be released or not, but if we are to look at releasing prisoners, there has to be a reintegration program set in place. Reintegration programs take a number of years, so there needs to be some clear indication for prisoners found guilty of murder before the Labor Party changed the laws, that they are classified. Some people say they know what their offence was and they know how that would be classified but, as we have seen, there has been some debate over whether a person should be in for 20 years or longer.
It is not about whether I believe someone should be in for 20 or 25 years, it is about the process. If a prisoner is going to eventually be released, we need good reintegration programs so they fit back into society, and that takes time to set up. To get the time, we need a date by which the prisoner is able to apply for parole so we can work back from there with a reintegration program. It is something I believe needs changing; Mr Rex Wild has said the same in times gone by and other people have said the same. The area of our system relating to the classification of people who have been sentenced to prison for murder needs reviewing so there is more certainty in the sentencing of those prisoners.
I will support the bill. I do not see anything particularly wrong in it, and if it is in line with other states, I can see benefits in that. I am concerned about the clause at the bottom under ‘Matters the Minister may have regard to’, which says: ‘any other matter the Minister considers relevant.’ That is very broad and could mean anything. If a decision is to be made about whether a prisoner can be transferred or not, that particular section, if used, should be clearly stated so we know the reasons why a prisoner was either transferred or not transferred. That is a very broad clause like we have in the Planning Act: ‘any other matters that are relevant’ - I do not know where that particular clause finishes.
Madam Speaker, I will be interested to see whether our existing laws were so bad they needed to be amended; is it purely because of the Bakewell case which, I believe, only occurred due to an error or a mistaken belief 20 years was the sentencing date. I will also be interested in what the minister has to say in relation to parole board prisoner representation, and prisoner classification in relation to knowing exactly when they can be considered for parole.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I support the bill. The bill is about amending a range of matters within the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act, regarding how a decision is made in transferring a prisoner from one part of the country to another; to or from another state or territory.
We are looking at amendments which have emerged as part of nationally agreed changes, and go to matters the minister takes into consideration when assessing a request from a prisoner to be transferred to or from another state or territory. To be clear, that is when a prisoner asks if they can move from the prison cell in the Territory to another state or territory in Australia, or when a prisoner in another state or territory of Australia wants to move here.
We need to stay tough on crime and make our communities safer, but we also need to consider the welfare of prisoners. While we want to ensure the time fits the crime, as it were, we cannot ignore what happens to our prisoners while they are in our corrections system. I know times are changing within our corrections system, and the Henderson government knows we have to do more to break the cycle of reoffending. We are determined to provide a much stronger rehabilitation basis for the prison. We want proper training and education facilities built into the prison.
We know we have to build a new prison. I know the minister for Corrections and the Independent member for Nelson are working closely on locations and options with the shared aim of having a better system - one that can offer the right services in the right place, so an offender can leave prison with skills and reasonable job prospects. I believe that is not just about the welfare of the prisoner, it is about the welfare of society, and this is something we have a duty of care for, as the government. If they have these skills, they have a much greater chance of contributing to the community and obeying the law.
Prisons in the Northern Territory have come a long way, and I look forward to seeing what the next era of Corrections will involve. We have come a long way from the old Fannie Bay Gaol. It is a beautiful part of the world, but I am sure prisoners these days are glad they are not in a prison with a long drop. I know there are members of the community who find it hard to reconcile the importance of prisoners’ welfare; they have committed a crime and they are doing time. We have a responsibility though, a very human responsibility, as a government, to have a duty of care for the welfare of people who are incarcerated.
The impact of being in prison can, as it should in many ways, live with someone forever. I remember a story historian, Mickey Dewar, related about a former prisoner at Fannie Bay Gaol, Butcher Knight, and a peer of hers - I believe he was a peer - Robert Levictus, who was interested in the history of Butcher Knight. They were driving past Fannie Bay Gaol in the 1980s when it was closed down and had become a museum, around the Ross Smith Avenue bend into East Point Road, and Robert suggested to Butcher they drop in and do an interview on-site. Butcher’s reply was to the point - and you can imagine the language used - under no circumstances was he going to set foot back in that gaol. Robert said: ‘But the gates are open, it is a museum, you can walk in and out. Come in’. ‘Open now’, said Butcher Knight as if he was expecting a trap, or there was a warder waiting around the corner to nab him. Prisons can have a very permanent effect on someone.
With this bill, we are looking at an expansion of things a minister can consider when making a decision about a prisoner’s transfer, and what a minister has to take into consideration when making those decisions: the welfare of the prisoner involved. Sometimes it is quite simple; sometimes it is obvious what the issues of welfare are. After the bombing raids on Darwin in February 1942, Judge Wells was quite certain what was in the interests or welfare of the prisoners, and freed all the prisoners at old Fannie Bay Gaol in a general amnesty. That may not be something you want to consider, minister.
I imagine the prisoners were worried about their welfare during Cyclone Tracy in 1974 at the old Fannie Bay Gaol. The prisoners in the cells, I understand, survived in pretty good nick. There was some damage to the watchtowers and the gaol wall, and a few roofs were lost, but the prisoners and cells were okay. I doubt they were writing out requests for transfers in their cells though, they were probably thinking there were safer places to be.
The bill also amends those areas within the act where gender specific language has been used. I understand those amendments are only minor and take into account amendments made to the Interpretation Act. Just as these amendments we are looking at today are part of nationally agreed changes, the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act, when it was introduced in 1983, was introduced as part of a national cooperative legislative scheme. Things have changed somewhat since 1983, and I agree it is time we looked at the terms of the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act. As the minister explained, the current act provides for the minister to consider welfare transfers only within a relatively narrow and unqualified spectrum. As a result, the bill we have before us proposes to increase the amount of discretion the minister has, and allows the minister to include, as part of his consideration of transfer, broader policy objectives.
So, broader policy objectives can now, if the bill is successfully passed today, be part of the decision-making. The minister provided a couple examples: the general administration of justice, prisoner safety, and the safety of the community in general - that all seems very reasonable to me.
I am sure members of the wider community will expect there to be a considered process when a minister makes a decision about the welfare of the prisoners and the transfer of prisoners for welfare reasons. The minister does not make his decision on a whim, there is a considered process, and I appreciate the efforts by the minister in his introductory remarks to go through the practical workings behind the operation of legislation. I appreciate the minister taking his time to outline the process that once a prisoner makes a request, a Correctional Services Welfare Officer prepares a comprehensive report with relevant information on the prisoner and whether the request has merit. That recommendation can include documents which support the request from the prisoner, and you can imagine that would often be letters from the family. I was not surprised to hear the minister say one of the main reasons people seek to move is to be close to family.
That is why we are here today: to close a loophole in the current legislation which allows the minister to take into account other issues and matters when determining whether an application for interstate transfers should be approved. The minister’s discretion is now not limited only to the welfare of the prisoner when viewing an application for interstate transfer - under the current act the only relevant consideration is the welfare of the prisoner - it is broader than that under this bill. The minister can now also consider such things as the welfare of the prisoner; the administration of justice in the Northern Territory, or any other state or territory; the security and good order of any prison in the Northern Territory, or any other state or territory; safe custody of a prisoner; the protection of the community in the Northern Territory, or any other state or territory; and, any other matter the minister considers relevant.
Knowing the minister and the considered way he approaches issues, I am sure he has no problems abiding by that and making very considered decisions about the transfer of prisoners. I believe I have summed up what the minister said in the second reading speech about those issues which he is considering, which he now has to take into consideration, and this is in line with all the other states and territories; other jurisdictions have made these same legislative changes.
Madam Speaker, this bill will ensure the minister the same discretion when considering prisoners’ applications for interstate transfer as every other minister in other states and territories, and is one reason why this legislation, in many respects, is mirrored around the country, and would inform some of the reasons behind the minister’s second reading speech and the comments he made. This is very much a national approach to the bill to ensure we are operating on an equivalent basis with all other states and territories when making these decisions.
I commend the bill to the House.
Mr McCARTHY (Correctional Services): Madam Speaker, I thank members for their contribution to the debate. As the Minister for Correctional Services, and as a minister in the Henderson government, it is always valuable to learn from colleagues on both sides of the House.
The purpose of this bill is to amend the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act to broaden the range of factors the minister may have regard to when considering a request from a prisoner to be transferred to or from another state or territory. The legislation is part of a national scheme to permit prisoners to be transferred between participating jurisdictions. The changes incorporated in this bill have been agreed to at a national level by the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General and the Correctional Services Ministers Conference.
The NT is the last jurisdiction to introduce these amendments. They ensure I have the same discretion in considering prisoners’ applications for interstate transfer as the corresponding ministers in all other participating jurisdictions, and I believe it is very important to harmonise our national legislation.
The key feature of this bill is it provides a non-exhaustive list of factors the minister may consider when a prisoner makes a request to be transferred to or from another state or territory. These factors are:
the welfare of the prisoner,
The bill amends the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Act as part of a national cooperative legislation scheme. The amendments to the principal act have been agreed to by the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General and the Correctional Services Ministers Conference. The NT is the final jurisdiction to introduce the agreed amendments.
I hope that answers some of the questions raised today. We are joining our national counterparts which will make it better for all correctional services jurisdictions, and for ministers to make these very important decisions. The key difference between the current law, and the law after the enactment of this bill, is the bill provides a much wider range of factors for the minister to take into account when considering a prisoner’s application for interstate transfer. The current law provides where the application is not for trial purposes, the only relevant consideration is the welfare of the prisoner. The new, wider criteria allow the minister to consider broader policy objectives, and to ensure the NT minister can consider the same factors as the ministers in all other participating jurisdictions.
Regarding the questions that have arisen, I would like to refer to each of the members’ contributions individually. I will take up the issue of plagiarism to start with.
My second reading speech is, in many ways, almost identical to those made in New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australian parliaments where identical legislation was introduced. The first jurisdiction to introduce the legislation was New South Wales, then Victoria, Western Australia, and now NT speeches have followed the New South Wales speech very closely.
Ms Carney: Then why did you not say so?
Mr McCARTHY: There are a number of reasons for this, member for Araluen. The legislation is identical; the explanation of the content of the legislation using words from the legislation can therefore be expected in each of the second reading speeches.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr McCARTHY: When detailing the new factors to be considered by the minister, of course the wording is the same in each speech, because the new factors are the same in each amending act. The NT News of 27 August 2009, page 4, contains an excerpt from each of these four second reading speeches. Each second reading speech states the scheme, as it was, allowed for transfer for two purposes: to stand trial, or for welfare purposes. This is exactly what the scheme did provide for, and there is really no other way to say it than to use those words.
Given the legislation is part of a national scheme of identical legislation, and given second reading speeches are tools which can aid in statutory interpretation, it would be foolish to use different language to explain, in particular, the details of the clauses. It could lead to a situation where there was a legal argument that since the explanation of the legislation in one second reading speech was so different from the near identical wording in other speeches, the legislation should be interpreted differently than one in the other jurisdictions.
Mr Styles: Do you believe that?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, cease interjecting.
Mr Elferink: Does that stop you from acknowledging it?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, cease interjecting.
Mr McCARTHY: I thought I would bring it back to a grassroots level to try to put a personal explanation on it as well.
Ms Carney: You should give a personal explanation.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr McCARTHY: As the member for Araluen quotes, the ripping off of words from a website is plagiarism; and as the member for Araluen also quotes I am a school teacher, and I do deal with that, so I brought along an example to try to demonstrate what I am talking about.
From a website I downloaded a traditional song; it is a good one called Botany Bay. I go to the last verse of that song, and I would just like to share it with you:
- Now all my young Dookies and Duchesses
Take warning from what I’ve to say
Mind all is your own as you toucheses
Or you’ll find us in Botany Bay
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr McCARTHY: I am no writer, I do a lot of writing, and if I were to incorporate those lyrics and claim them as my own then I would be plagiarising. However, as I have outlined, when dealing with the intricacies of legislation, as the member for Araluen would be well aware, it makes it very apparent you have no licence to work with words. You have to stick exactly to the script, and we have all agreed, in terms of the national jurisdictions, that this legislation is important and we will get it right.
I can see over there that the member for Araluen is very convinced by my argument and …
Ms Carney: Rubbish!
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member for Barkly has wrongly suggested I am so stupid that I would be convinced by his flimsy argument - that is not the case.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Araluen, resume your seat. This is a bill for an act; this is a very serious debate. Resume your seat. Cease interjecting, honourable members. Minister, you have the call.
Mr McCARTHY: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I feel it is a good day when I learn something and, member for Araluen, I always learn something from you, in more ways than one, which I do not have time to go into in this summing-up; but I do thank you for that.
I would like to explain the legislation in terms of the considerations the minister has in this legislation. Under the current legislation, there have only been nine prisoners transferred into the NT since 1995, as the member for Nelson cited. Even if there is a slight increase under the amended provisions, there will still be a negligible effect on the NT prisoner population. It is noted, in the same time period, 52 prisoners were transferred out of the NT.
If NT prisoners are transferred to other jurisdictions, do they serve their sentences under the same terms and conditions as they would in the NT? If a prisoner is transferred to another jurisdiction, their sentence, including non-parole period, is not affected. Also, their security classification at the time of transfer goes with them. However, at the end of a prisoner’s non-parole period, if he or she makes application to the parole board of the receiving jurisdiction, the decision to release on parole, and on what terms and conditions, is a matter for the parole board of the receiving jurisdiction. The amendments have no effect on this part of the operation of the act.
I have been advised, member for Nelson, and I asked a similar question about life, and to put it colloquially - life means life - and it is deemed to be the sentence imposed, and a life sentenced prisoner when released, is released on licence. So it does not matter to which jurisdiction you go, it still remains that classification.
______________________
Visitors
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, do you mind if we just pause and acknowledge these students?
Mr McCARTHY: Certainly, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Year 8 Palmerston Christian School students, accompanied by Mrs Anna Abbott and Mr Tim White. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
_____________________
Mr McCARTHY: I would also like to put on the record today that in the second reading speech introducing the legislation and commenting on the divergence of how parole boards operate, any suggestion in my second reading speech that this bill will have any effect on how parole boards in other jurisdictions deal with prisoners who have been transferred from the NT, is wrong. The purpose of this bill is to widen the scope of the discretion of the minister in making decisions about the transfer or receipt of prisoners who are still in custody.
In response to the member for Nelson’s valuable comments, I would like to comment on the administration of justice. The administration of justice would include matters such as whether the prisoner has lodged an appeal and, if so, whether the appeal process is finalised; whether there are any outstanding matters regarding the prisoner that have not yet been dealt with in the NT courts; that the prisoner has long enough time left to serve to make the transfer worthwhile; that the transfer is not going to advantage or disadvantage the prisoner; that issues regarding victims would be dealt with similarly in the receiving jurisdiction.
In relation to my time in the portfolio, member for Nelson, and your valuable comment about advocacy for prisoners, there are a number of advocacy areas for prisoners who are proposing a transfer. It starts with the Northern Territory Correctional Services staff and the associated support staff; there is also the official prison visitor program which also can advocate for prisoners. There is good channel of communication available now for a prisoner to make their application for transfer, which comes back to the minister.
The additional factors considerably broaden the range of factors a minister may consider. In essence, the interests of the community, rather than only the welfare interests of the prisoner, may be formally considered, and I find this a desirable change in the legislation. Once again, this legislation is harmonising Northern Territory legislation on a national scale, and it refers to both transferring out of the Northern Territory and also prisoners who apply to transfer into the Northern Territory.
I believe I have addressed the member for Araluen’s concerns; they were very straightforward. The comparison of legal-speak is something I would like to talk to the member for Araluen more about; I am sure I can learn much from her.
Member for Nelson, I thank you for your support and your understanding. This is not trying to make things harder; this is broadening the aspects for decision-making by the minister. I hope the question of life in relation to life sentencing in the Northern Territory, is answered. However, we have some very qualified people, member for Nelson, and members on the other side, who can brief on any of these questions in much more detail, and I would be really comfortable sitting in on that because, in this area, there is so much to learn.
The last point I make is to the member for Fannie Bay. Thank you very much; I very much enjoyed that supportive speech. There was a great deal of history, and I love Territory history, even Correctional Services history. In your electorate, you have that fine museum, the old Fannie Bay Gaol. What you brought to the debate today was very important; it was subtle, but it was powerful, and it related to that colourful gentleman, Butcher Knight. The member for Fannie Bay’s main point was that Butcher Knight did not want to return to the Correctional Services facility - he did not want to go back to gaol.
Madam Speaker, that is what this government is on about. We are trying to reduce this cycle of reoffending. We want Butcher Knight’s story to get out there. We do not want people coming back to our prison system, and we are working tirelessly to deliver that.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr McCARTHY (Correctional Services)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Public Housing
Public Housing
Mr KNIGHT (Housing): Madam Speaker, this government is committed to housing Territorians. In particular, we have a strong commitment to housing those who otherwise cannot afford to put a roof over their heads. That is why, in the time we have been in office, we have been working hard to build more public housing in the bush, having boosted repairs and maintenance programs and focused on obtaining more funding directed at Housing from our own sources and from the federal government.
Members should be in no doubt about the size of the issues faced by this government. Our population has been growing at a rapid rate since 2004, and urban drift has increased significantly over the last 10 years. Our population is ageing and, today, more than ever before, people living in Territory Housing dwellings are remaining in them rather than transferring through government housing to privately purchased accommodation.
Today public housing is very much about social housing, something which changed when the government of the day correctly placed access limits based on income and assets. It is a combination of factors like these which has led to demand for public housing increasing significantly over the last 10 years. The Territory is experiencing high levels of economic and population growth, and there is a demand for more housing right across the board.
In relation to public housing, it should be acknowledged that the 2009 report on government services, produced by the Productivity Commission, found the Howard government reduced real expenditure on public housing between 1998 and 2008 by 24.1%. This has placed a real strain on all public housing systems right across the country. Every jurisdiction is now trying very hard to catch up after 10 years of lost opportunities.
Madam Speaker, I table the public housing wait list.
Housing assistance in the Territory is provided for those on low to middle-incomes, families, and individuals with special needs. Other jurisdictions only provide housing to priority clients alone.
A major influence on demand for public housing in the Northern Territory is our population makeup. Around 30% of our population is Indigenous; over 40% of public housing tenants are Indigenous, as is about half of the waiting list. This is a clear indication of the level of economic and other disadvantage Indigenous Territorians experience. Combining these facts with the Territory’s growing population of just over 2% per annum, much of it within the Indigenous population, it is clear that demand for public housing is unlikely to diminish until the socioeconomic status of Indigenous people improves. We know there is significant gap between public and private markets, so we need to improve housing and rental affordability to ensure people can transition out of public housing into their own homes.
Our population is ageing rapidly, with the number of people in the Territory aged 65 and over expected to treble in the next 30 years. More people are also choosing to stay in the Northern Territory after retirement, and while this is good for the Territory, it has already represented an increase of 60% in applications from seniors over the past two years, and will bring considerable challenges to our public housing into the future. Nonetheless, this also represents an opportunity to find new and innovative ways to look at housing for our senior residents. I am confident, over time, there will be housing options for all seniors which is appropriate and safe. We have already delivered new seniors’ villages at Leanyer and Fannie Bay, and work will start on the construction of Bellamack seniors’ village early in the new year, which will provide an additional 44 units of seniors accommodation.
Recently, public housing wait times have received particular attention in the media. There has been the suggestion this is primarily due to housing stock being sold off. This notion is, quite frankly, simplistic, and in recent years, simply wrong.
Madam Speaker, I table the Sale of Public Housing from the year 1995 to 2008-09. I should also advise I have been using an incorrect figure for the CLP sell-off of public housing. I had been using the figure of 1300 properties sold off between 2000-01 and 2005-06 - the figure is actually 2036. So, the CLP sold off 2036 properties in their last six years in office. It is fairly disgraceful.
It is true, over time, the Northern Territory public housing stock has decreased through the sale of stock. This government has dramatically slowed the sale of public housing the previous government had embarked upon - a massive sell-off. In fact, that tap has been turned off in this current financial year, with less than a handful actually sold. It must be remembered the vast majority of stock which has been sold off, some 67% from 2001 onwards, have allowed former Territory public housing tenants, people on low to middle incomes, the opportunity to own their own home. Many would simply not be able, otherwise, to have the opportunity to own their own home.
There is no argument that wait lists have increased over the past three years - they have - but it is also true that 63%, almost two-thirds, of new allocations in the last financial year were to applicants who had been on the wait list for two years or less.
It is not possible to categorically compare public housing wait times across other jurisdictions as each state has its own method of calculation, and most jurisdictions do not publish wait list times; any information that is published is inconsistent. However, based on the limited national data available, our wait list times compare very reasonably, with 15% of new households waiting less than a year, compared with the national figure of 14%. This means that members of the community on public housing wait lists in other jurisdictions are waiting a comparable amount of time for allocations as those in the Northern Territory. Wait lists for public housing are increasing around the country. At the last Housing ministers conference, I was informed the Victorian and Western Australian housing wait lists grew more than the entire wait list of the Northern Territory just in the last 12 months.
Providing new and refurbished public housing to address wait lists in the Northern Territory is a priority for this government. It is difficult to compare wait lists across jurisdictions due to the vast differences in eligibility criteria. However, in light of the recent debate, I table a jurisdictional comparison of wait lists across Australia from the 2007-08 Commonwealth State Housing Agreement. I acknowledge this provides little comfort for those on our public housing wait list; however, I can assure you we are working very hard to alleviate this situation. Reducing public housing wait times is an enormous challenge due to a range of interconnecting issues on both the supply and demand sides.
On the supply side, it is not just about making more land available or building more public housing. There are complex issues in relation to some of our existing tenancies. For example, this is where family circumstances have changed and people are living in dwellings above their entitlement. This is not an easy matter to resolve as many of our seniors continue to live in public housing despite no longer being eligible to do so based on income, assets, or household size. This situation is the result of past policy decisions, and we are looking at those issues very closely. We know that our highest demand is for one-bedroom properties and that makes up approximately 60% of our wait lists. This group is largely made up of seniors, and that is why we are planning more seniors’ villages to appropriately house this group in the later years of their lives.
Also on the supply side, there are a significant number of old dwellings in our public housing stock, and before these can be allocated, they need to be upgraded to standard. We are fast-tracking this work to ensure repairs and maintenance are carried out in the shortest time frame.
The additional funding stimulus through the Nation Building and Jobs Plan agreement with the Commonwealth is delivering for Territorians in need of housing. To date, more than $2.6m has been spent in updating and repairing 289 public housing dwellings. This has had the combined positive effect of improving housing amenity for residents of these homes, and retaining and creating jobs in the Territory’s building sector.
I acknowledge there are properties which have been vacant for an extended period because of the extensive repairs and maintenance required to bring them back to a habitable standard. This is not acceptable, and my department is focused on improving vacate turnaround times. We are succeeding in this challenge, and I had great pleasure in meeting with one of the families over the weekend who had moved into an upgraded house in Malak. This house was one of 84 recently renovated, and it was great to hand it over to that Territory family.
New public housing construction is under way and will significantly increase over the coming months. However, demand for supported accommodation is increasing at an unprecedented rate. Our population growth is presently the third highest in the country, and the Northern Territory has been characterised by high population growth for several years, including seven-quarters of growth in the last two and one-quarter years. This trend is set to continue for some time due to high birth rates, positive interstate migration, and the Territory continuing to attract business investment.
Our strong economic growth has lead to strong demand and limited affordable housing in the private housing market. While this is good news for homeowners and investors, it places strain on the private rental market. As housing stock in general becomes tighter, the low to middle income members of our community, who might otherwise access the private market, must look to the government to provide public housing as their last chance of obtaining accommodation. This, again, is putting pressure on our wait lists.
Recent rises in the private market have increased significantly and led to an increasing gap between private and public markets. Not unexpectedly, there has been a significant increase in applications for public housing over the past three years; in fact, demand has risen by almost 50% over this period of time. This represents 3522 applications as at 30 June this year. With this comes further complication. There are basic eligibility criteria for public housing applicants, and this is primarily based on numbers of household members and income. However, applicants who are in need of greater assistance - the homeless, those who are experiencing family violence, those with medical or other social issues or disabilities - are appropriately housed ahead of general applicants. This is, as it should be, a humane and egalitarian society.
Over the last three years the number of priority housing applications has almost doubled; a more rapid rate of increase than of the waiting list as a whole. There are unique factors in the Northern Territory which compound this particular issue, but in most jurisdictions there is a large sector of non-government organisations whose primary focus is the provision of accommodation services and community housing options, particularly for members of the community with complex and crisis needs.
Community housing options also include provision of medium- and long-term accommodation and housing at low cost rents. For example, Tasmania has around 50 of these non-government organisations; in Western Australia, there are around 230; and in Victoria there are 31 organisations and agencies providing these services. In the Northern Territory there are non-government organisations which do provide accommodation support options to service a range of community needs, and they do a great job; I have seen them working. As yet, non-government organisations in the Northern Territory have limited ability to extend their services to the provision of medium- to long-term housing and accommodation support.
This means many clients who would, in other jurisdictions, be housed by these non-government organisations are, in fact, public housing clients and therefore on public housing wait lists. It should also be noted these organisations in other jurisdictions have their own housing and accommodation assets and do not need to draw on public housing stock. For example, the 230 organisations in Western Australia manage approximately 5400 dwellings, which is equivalent to the entire Territory housing stock; in Victoria the number is 8347 dwellings, and in Tasmania it is around 1000 properties. We do not have that luxury in the Northern Territory. Non-government organisations now, and in the past, necessarily rely on the provision of stock from the public housing asset base. At present, this represents around 370 dwellings, including housing provided to government agencies such as the Department of Health and Families for short-term and crisis accommodation.
This government wants to encourage and foster non-government organisations to increase their presence in the social and community housing sector in the Northern Territory. This will mean a greater diversity of stock and housing options for those Territorians who need it, and we are committed to growing our non-government sector to provide greater housing options for Territorians. The national partnership agreement and the stimulus package, with the Territory government, are delivering dwellings for non-government organisations to deliver and manage. I have had positive discussions with a range of non-government agencies, and I am confident, with this government’s continued support, we can build on the gap between the private and public housing markets.
We are also establishing the affordable housing company which will provide affordable rental properties. Similar companies already operate around Australia, and I have met with several of them. The sooner the company is established, the sooner we will have affordable housing on the market for those in need. Looking ahead, there will be increased pressure on public housing, and we are embracing the issues with a range of policies, programs and innovative ideas to ensure all Territorians, now and in the future, have access to a safe, secure housing and accommodation options that best meet their needs.
It is clear the answers do not lie in quick fixes, which is why back in March I was pleased to join the Chief Minister in announcing the most comprehensive overhaul of our housing system in the Northern Territory. As I said then, and I say now, this government is committed to ensuring there is more affordable housing available to buy and rent, and the Housing the Territory strategy is a package of reforms which will get the balance right with more land, more places to buy, new places to rent, and new public housing stock.
A record $390m is being invested in housing programs this year; this excludes the strategic investment in public housing to meet the requirements of those most in need. For example, as I have said, our ageing population will mean more seniors’ accommodation will be required, so we are increasing the supply of seniors’ housing through the planned construction of seniors’ villages at Bellamack and Larapinta. At Bellamack, this will consist of 44 one- and two-bedroom units, and details for Larapinta will be released when they are finalised very soon. I have already mentioned the Homeless National Partnership Agreement and this will deliver an additional 32 homes for families on our public housing wait lists.
Addressing the past practices of building vast public housing estates, which ultimately create urban ghettos and impacts on our public housing wait lists as these estates are redeveloped and their residents rehoused - which is a short-term flow-on effect - will result in the redevelopment of a far more appropriate mix of community, public and private dwellings, which will ensure safer and sustainable housing outcomes for the communities involved.
The public housing asset base will also be improved by the Parap Gateway redevelopment, which is the first major redevelopment of public housing, and is a long-term investment in the future of Parap. When completed, Parap Gateway will be a mixture of blocks of public, private and affordable units with investment by the Affordable Housing Rental Company. The affordable housing rental company will be a semi-commercial operation operating at arm’s length from government and providing rental housing for low to moderate income households at an affordable level and will increase the range of available housing options for Territorians. A tender was recently awarded; work has gone ahead at a rapid rate and is, I believe, just about complete. Redeveloping the old Wirrina site will get the balance right between the private and public housing, and also means less antisocial behaviour, better conditions for renters, and makes Parap a much safer and better place to live and visit.
This government is also committed to the National Rental Affordability Scheme, or NRAS. The Northern Territory has not done well in this area with only two applicants in the last two rounds, both of which were ineligible. Our private sector can do better, and I am sure they will; we must do what we can to ensure they have access to this initiative. The NRAS scheme will deliver new rental stock at 20% below the market rate; and I am looking forward to organisations coming forward to receive the assistance they need to submit a successful application. For this reason I have asked the department to appoint a dedicated officer whose sole purpose will be to identify potential applicants and assist organisations in the development of their submissions to NRAS. I look forward to advising the House of the successful applicants as they are awarded in the future.
Construction of 22 new public housing dwellings is also being funded through the Commonwealth government’s Operations Stimulus, a $505m package to the Northern Territory designed to boost economic activity and support jobs for Territorians in these dark economic times; and contains almost $60m for public and community housing. Construction of four new homes has commenced in Darwin, Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, and the first dwellings are anticipated to be complete as soon as next month.
As I said, transition out of public housing must be a focal point to address the public housing wait lists. One successful approach is for the government to assess homebuyers through shared equity arrangements. Since 2004, 1208 households have been assisted in purchasing their own homes, and last year 101 households were assisted through $25.8m in loans and shared equity purchases. This year, Homestart NT was introduced on 1 June and has already attracted a great deal of attention from buyers in the low to middle sections of our household market. So far this financial year, 44 households have been assisted to purchase their own home, and a further 27 households are awaiting settlement. This is a great endorsement of our policy, but there are many more in our community who need ongoing support. We know some members of our community are better supported in their accommodation needs through non-government organisations, and we are investing in programs to improve their availability. This will also help reduce the demand for public housing.
For example, a component of Operation Stimulus aims to address homelessness across the Northern Territory. Three applications for projects under this program have been approved by the Department of Local Government and Housing which will allow the Salvation Army, the Catholic Diocese, and St Vincent de Paul to assist with providing options for the homeless. This assistance comprises two major projects for the Salvation Army, and one each for the Catholic Diocese and St Vincent de Paul on Dick Ward Drive in Coconut Grove.
The first of the Salvation Army projects will be constructed in Stuart Park at a cost of $1.6m, and will provide crisis accommodation for women suffering domestic violence. The second Salvation Army project will be the construction of crisis accommodation for homeless men at Goyder Road in Alice Springs, at a cost of $1.4m. Collaboration projects under Operation Stimulus between the Catholic Diocese and St Vincent de Paul will be constructed on Dick Ward Drive in Coconut Grove at a cost of $5.2m, and will provide 20 units for homeless.
In Alice Springs we will deliver a number of projects under Operation Stimulus, including 35 units for renal patients, four apartments for public housing, and 24 units for transitional accommodation. The Salvation Army will also be constructing eight units on Goyder Road for homeless men, which will significantly increase accommodation options in Alice Springs.
Public housing wait lists will also be eased by programs delivered under the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness. Under this agreement, the Northern Territory will invest over $2.5m this year on capital expenditure under the new A Place to Call Home program, along with funding for new homeless services across the regions. Over the life of the program, 32 new homes will be built or purchased and made available to people experiencing homelessness, along with a range of support services to help them break the cycle of homelessness.
Other initiatives under the National Partnership Agreement currently being facilitated by the Northern Territory government include: street-to-home initiatives for chronically homeless people, support for private and public tenants to sustain their tenancies through tenancy support, advocacy, case management, financial counselling and referral services. Assistance is also is being provided for people leaving child protection services, correctional and health facilities to access and maintain stable, affordable accommodation.
Recently, I announced $1m for expressions of interest from the non-government sector to provide transitional accommodation options before Christmas. I have been pleased with the level of interest and enthusiasm shown by the sector which has been working very hard to come up with innovative ways to have transitional housing in place quickly with support services available on-site instantly, I look forward to the outcome of the EOI.
The Northern Territory government is committed to tackling homelessness and social housing issues, and additional funding will continue to be rolled out to assist community-based agencies to provide accommodation services for those with special needs who require ongoing support. This funding will provide community groups with capital funding so they can purchase, upgrade, or renovate accommodation for people in need, and will assist those organisations to provide supported or unsupported accommodation services to expand their existing services.
Two weeks, I ago travelled to Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs to hear firsthand the ideas of non-government organisations in those regions for accommodation options for people in need. I was impressed with their dedication and ideas and, in future, I would like these groups to continue to meet on a regular basis and provide feedback directly to me so we can consider what assistance can be provided. We have a bigger group here in Darwin, and it will serve to inform them of regional needs.
If we are to improve access to affordable housing, the gap between the public and private housing market must be bridged. Improving affordability will reduce the demand for public housing. We are addressing this by fast-tracking land release and ensuring affordable options are available with all new land released.
This government has set aside 15% of new land releases for affordable housing and public housing in Bellamack and Palmerston East. This means approximately 550 new houses and blocks for affordable public housing will be entering the marketplace - that is 550 options for low to middle income earners to enter the housing market. Another example of this government supporting low to middle income earners to purchase their own homes is the recent sale of units at Emery Avenue. This initiative will ultimately allow 16 families who might otherwise be on the public housing wait list, to enter the housing market. I was pleased to advise the House all the units there have been sold, and final settlements will take place at the end of this month. That was a great option put forward for those low to middle income families.
Working on reducing the public housing wait list is a significant challenge, and I will report to this House every October on the wait lists. We know we cannot fix our waiting lists overnight, and we know in the last three years they have grown rapidly. We are on the right track, and with significant support from the federal government, we are undertaking a massive social housing construction program to deliver hundreds of new public housing dwellings.
It must be recognised it is not just about spending money. A wide-ranging review of public housing across the Northern Territory, including the type of housing and the role of non-government organisations, will need to be undertaken. This will inform future policy, and further announcements regarding this will be made later in the year.
We need to do everything we can to get our wait lists down to ensure Territorians who need public housing assistance get it as quickly as possible. It will take some time to resolve the issues, and this government is working hard to find solutions. We are committed to delivering new social housing stock, increasing housing affordability, addressing the gap between the private and public markets and rental markets, and increasing the non-government housing sector.
The Housing the Territory strategy sets this government’s policy for the future, and I look forward to announcing further initiatives to ensure all Territorians, no matter where they live, have access to appropriate, affordable and safe housing.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, this feels like dj vu talking about public housing, in particular the public housing waiting list. I am sure it was only yesterday we spoke about this and highlighted the problems we have here in the Territory. They do not appear to be getting any better; in fact, they seem to be getting worse. I will say again - this government has failed to plan or to develop a public infrastructure investment program for the continued growth of the Territory. This failure has resulted in pain and suffering for many Territorians, and makes the Territory an unfavourable place to stay, invest and bring up a family. It has placed additional financial burdens on industry as they struggle to find accommodation for employees they recruit from interstate. This has resulted in many situations of employers resorting to fly-in fly-out situations which, as we know, does not always bring the best or the majority of benefits to the Territory.
There is considerable strain on the housing sector which services people with special needs. There is a limited amount of this type of housing, yet there is an enormous growth requirement in this area which forces these people into situations which would be unacceptable in any other part of this country.
Under this Labor government we now have the lowest level of home ownership. People cannot afford to buy a home or unit of any shape or size and, if they do, will be struggling to keep up their mortgage payments if interest rates continue to rise. We have the highest rental levels in the country. The average cost of a house to rent is $560 per week - and that is an average! We have the highest level of homelessness in the country. We also have a new type of person here - the working homeless - people who have a full-time job but cannot get affordable accommodation, so they are forced to live in their cars or their vans.
We have almost the highest cost of housing in the country, higher than the cost of housing in Sydney, which used to be one of the more expensive places to live in Australia. Now it is Darwin. We have the highest waiting list for public housing in the country - up to 55 months in Darwin and Casuarina for three-bedroom dwellings. Families have no chance of moving from public housing to private housing and, this in itself will place extra burdens on the public housing system. What normally happens, as I said before, is people use rental public housing accommodation as a stepping stone to get into the private market. However, given the high cost of getting into the private market, more people are staying longer in the public housing system; yet we know we have greater demand on our public housing system. And that is just for starters.
This government has been in government for nine years and the minister says today they have been working hard to build more public housing in the bush. Well, that is a bit of a joke as they have not built one house in two years under SIHIP, and yet they say: ‘We are working hard.’ I do not think so. Minister, you have not delivered one single new house in the bush under SIHIP, but $45m has been spent, so far, on this program.
Yes, our population has been growing rapidly since 2004, and this government has been ignoring that for the last nine years, which is why we are in the current crisis situation. I draw members’ attention to one of the graphs I have here which details our population growth. Does this government not do population growth projections? Surely they would somewhere in their departments. They would have known in 2004 what was ahead, they would have known what population growth would have been expected after ConocoPhillips completed the LNG plant. And, of course, we all know about our ageing population; experts have been saying for nearly 10 years this country has an ageing population, yet the minister, only today, says we have an ageing population.
Let me tell you some other facts which may have escaped the minister’s attention: we also have an ageing workforce; we have ageing infrastructure; we have roads coming to the end of their economic life; we have a power station which has serious issues with maintenance of turbines; we have hospital waiting lists growing exponentially; law and order is out of control, and we are losing skilled workers due to the lack of affordable accommodation in Darwin and elsewhere.
The minister says there is a need to improve housing and rental affordability - high on rhetoric and low on detail. Only recently it was announced the Territory had the lowest take-up of the federal government’s first homeowners’ boost. Out of approximately 150 000 recipients of the first homeowners’ boost since October 2008, just 1147 were in the Northern Territory. To put that figure in perspective, the Australian Capital Territory had 2400 first homeowners accessing this grant scheme in the same period. So, despite the Australian Capital Territory having a population just 50% higher than the Northern Territory, it had 100% more homeowners taking up the grants. With 1% of the national population, the Territory should have been receiving 1% of the grant, which would have seen around 1530 successful applications. The minister said, when this became public, he did not know why we had not been successful. I am not even sure if he knew about the applications. The minister should have known how many applications had gone in to try to access these grants, and he should have been in Canberra helping these people, helping the consortiums, to be successful. Now he says: ‘I will have to work harder to help us get these grants.’ Well, it is a little too late.
I have no issue with the provision of accommodation for seniors. In fact, it is a good thing and we should clearly have more of it with our ageing population. We will need much more of this style of accommodation in the near future. The key item with seniors’ accommodation is it needs to be very close to the services, given the nature of the residents and their age. So, where is the planning for seniors in the rural area? What planning has been made for the ageing population in the rural area, which you know is a big group of people? Why does the government not let the unit complex near the Humpty Doo Shopping Centre expand, despite applications? Perhaps the minister does not know about this housing requirement in the rural area; which I find surprising, given he has a rural electorate. Public housing stocks have decreased and this government has failed to keep pace with the demolition of blocks. Over the last nine years of Labor we have seen very little new housing stock come onto the market.
The waiting lists are almost the worst in Australia – which is unacceptable - but to be expected from this Labor government which purports to care for the socially disadvantaged, but not reflected in their policies or their outcomes.
I have an 81-year-old woman in my electorate who lost her husband last year. She has been approved to receive public housing, a one-bedroom unit. She is an approved priority one tenant and has been told it is a 12 month minimum waiting period before she can get into her unit in an urban area. This woman is not particularly frail, but she is old and she is alone. I say this is not good enough.
Then there is the case of an 18-year-old woman who requires special housing due to her mental health issues. Her carers have been told that she cannot get anything under 12 months, despite being a priority person, as well. So she is forced to live in respite care while she waits and waits for public housing.
The minister compares us to other jurisdictions, and I ask for what purpose? It is like comparing apples with oranges. How can you compare the Territory with its population demographics, geography, high Indigenous population, and high turnover in population with states such as Western Australia or New South Wales which are far bigger and far more established? To my way of thinking, it does not relate. We need to look inwards at our self, at our own issues, and not compare ourselves to our neighbours. Even when the minister compares the Northern Territory with other jurisdictions, he uses raw data rather than adjusted data which give a more accurate picture.
One of the problems with this government, as I previously mentioned, is their inability to plan, and they have planned to fail. The classic example is they have unilaterally forced public housing into single dwelling suburbs taking away community purpose land, and this has been seen across Palmerston and the northern suburbs. That is unacceptable and goes to the core of what this government has been caught out trying to do - play catch-up slowly - along the way, mucking up zonings across town. Why is it okay for the government to change zoning at the drop of a hat but, when a resident seeks to do something similar, they are told they cannot do it even though it is the same size block?
I turn my attention now to the vacancies in some public housing which, by the minister’s admission, are for extended periods of time because of ‘extensive repairs and maintenance that is required to bring them back to a habitable standing’. My question is: what type of tenant has been in that public housing and not been checked so it has to have extensive repairs to make it habitable? Why is the damage so extensive and to such a level that it has to be off the market for a long period of time? Surely, there is a contract to repair and maintain these houses, and surely in that contract there are KPIs to know whether the contractor is keeping up; and there would be reviews of this contract. So why are there extended periods, when there should not be? This is not acceptable, and the minister, and the government, needs to do much more work in this area, so we get a speedier turnaround.
I have written to the minister about properties in Nightcliff which have been vacant for two years. Surely, it does not take two years to make a three-bedroom house habitable. There are houses in Essington Avenue which have been vacant up to three months. When you drive past these houses, it does not seem there is anything particularly wrong with them - they are fenced, locked up, they are clean and tidy; yet, they are empty. I cannot understand why this is so when we have a housing crisis and public housing waiting lists of up to 55 months.
I also want to ask the minister about establishing the affordable housing company which will provide affordable rental properties. This is not a bad idea; however, the tenders closed on 30 July and, it is my understanding the tenders have to be reviewed and go through the Procurement Review Board. I would not expect this company to be set up within six months, which takes us well into the Dry Season next year. Then, who knows? The way this government dilly-dallies around, it could be much longer than that. I am not sure this company will be established as quickly as it should be. I urge the minister to keep a very careful eye on it so it is established sooner rather than later.
There is much in here about affordable rental companies and building seniors’ villages at Bellamack and Larapinta. My understanding is not much has been done at Larapinta, but I will leave that to my colleague from Alice Springs to talk about.
The minister talked about the homelessness national partnership agreement. That is all very well, but how will this agreement – and this NT government - bring down our high level of homelessness? It is written about in our papers daily and we see photographs of people living on excavated ridges in the Darwin area, and it is just not acceptable. We know we have people living on our beaches in their vans and cars, and living rough on the Esplanade. Whilst we have a high homeless rate, I hazard a guess it is actually much higher than the statistics and data tell us.
Some weeks ago, the Country Liberals suggested transitionary housing accommodation on the old ConocoPhillips construction site. It had the support of non-government organisations which could manage this, and we had the support of families who would be happy and willing to live in this style of accommodation, albeit temporary. Then we found, after we made the announcement and it was well received by the community, the minister summoned the non-government organisation to ask them for ideas to help with this crisis situation. Rather than say: ‘This is the idea which I believe should go forward’, the minister has given them $1m to come up with ideas. That tells me the minister does not really have any idea how to tackle the current crisis we have with public accommodation and accommodation generally.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I might leave it at this stage because, really, the rest of the statement is not worth commenting on. It is very light and it has many typos in it; but I will not go there. The minister also did not read it correctly; he said something was excluded when it should have been included. I feel for the people who are living rough. The member for Nelson said in one of his adjournments that the Bloodwood Caravan Park is closing down and around 30 tenants will be turfed out onto the street. These are low income people. They will probably have to go into public housing, but we know they will not be able to because there is no public housing available for couples, families, individuals or anyone. They are just going to have to do it tough, and that is a very sad and tragic situation. The statement is high on rhetoric, but low on substance, and that is a tragedy.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Deputy Speaker, I believe one of the good things about the housing debate we are having is that we are actually having a housing debate. I know that might sound curious, but for a long time when we talked about the homeless, the opposition would call those people itinerants. It was like there was a forgotten cohort of Territorians, and the whole issue around their housing needs was actually a blame and divide issue. I am really pleased to hear that we are debating housing needs, and including in that debate the issue of homelessness.
Homelessness comes about for many reasons, and in many forms. We know there is a great deal of homelessness around our urban centres as Territorians come in and out of those urban centres to access services. This is why we need a range of housing models to deal with those particular needs, whether it is transitional housing or short-term accommodation. What we have seen is an evolution in housing policy from 2001 onwards with the Labor government, which inherited a housing policy of bricks and mortar only, to a housing policy which now looks at how we handle the needs of people through public and social housing, and how that fits with the supported accommodation models within the housing remit.
I know the policy evolution has been significant in how we handle clients within our housing stock. Obviously, we are talking about public housing, in this instance, because that is what this statement is about. I will pick up on the broader issues of public, private and affordable housing. In the context of public housing, there are a range of clients and they all need to meet the income criteria. They are the lower socioeconomic members of our community, and they range in needs. Many of our housing clients have highly complex needs, and many of them require the supported accommodation model. An example of the supported accommodation model was talked about in Question Time today regarding Team Health and what they are doing with mental health clients.
Similarly, we have a range of programs in place with funding organisations to assist Territorians coming from remote communities to urban centres with the living issues they find in an urban environment which is quite a different structure to the communities from which they come. Also dealing with Responsible Behaviour Agreements, putting security in place in the large complexes where, traditionally, there have been problems with behaviours of some residents. I say some, because there are many people living in those large complexes who are trying to quietly get on with their lives and do not want to be disturbed by the element and poor behaviour, to say the least, of their worst neighbours.
It is, sincerely, good to be raising public housing, and I am delighted the agreement the member for Nelson struck with the Chief Minister will report on public housing waiting lists because we will be able to track whether we are making progress and, if we are not making progress scrutinise why not, and continue this critically important housing debate.
The housing debate rages equally in terms of bush needs and urban needs. We know we have a significant deficit in bush housing, and SIHIP is specifically about housing to deal with those needs. We know five years alone is not going to get the Territory to the point of meeting the deficit of housing needs in the bush. That is why we are working so hard and collaboratively with the Commonwealth government on SIHIP to get further funding agreements beyond five years, which have been discussed, into at least a decade long program and beyond for housing in the bush. I have always said we need to do both, and if you only take one aspect, it just will not work. We need to fix and create good, healthy, living environments across all our communities, and central to that is appropriate shelter. Equally, we need to address the shelter needs in our urban centres.
Where have we come in housing stress existing across the housing market, public as well as private? We have come through very strong population and economic growth, which has placed enormous pressure on housing in those strong growth and urban centres. We recognise we have a deficit of housing in the bush. There was already housing pressure out there and that is also putting pressure on a range of government services to support this client base.
Australian Bureau of Statistics population forecasts have been round 1%. The member for Goyder asks: ‘How can you get your forecast so wrong?’ Well, the Australian Bureau of Statistics got their forecast so wrong; equally, Treasury got their forecast wrong. The Australia Bureau of Statistics is an authority the opposition, on one hand likes to quote; on the other hand, is very dismissive of what their forecasts are. Try to have your cake and eat it too - quite a hypocritical approach. Forecasts are forecasts. Governments rely on forecasts. We rely on the experts and statisticians who provide those forecasts, and we plan according to those forecasts. However, we have seen growth far outstripping those forecasts. Yes, we are now playing catch-up in housing stock because population growth forecasts have been outstripped by reality.
The reality of population growth has meant the Territory is providing services for an extra 26 000 people more than was forecast. Clearly, we are planning for this growth. We have the Housing the Territory strategy which brings together all the elements to address housing across the spectrum - private and public housing and rental stock - bringing in rental assistance schemes for low to middle income earners, and also ensuring we have recognition of the supported accommodation needs in the Housing the Territory strategy for high needs and disadvantaged people in our community. Housing is not one thing: it is all these elements working together, with the core of government land release ensuring housing stock has land to build on.
The opposition would like to believe we have being sitting back and doing nothing. That is absolute nonsense; it flies in the face of fact and reality. We are the first government in the history of the Territory to mandate 15% of lots in new Crown land releases are provided for social and affordable housing. Put simply, land that the government has control over, Crown land, land not in private hands, we are mandating for affordable and social housing. You might ask the question: why do that? Because it creates a seamless stream of ongoing new stock for people in the public housing area, for social housing, and also, importantly, a stream of stock coming onto the affordable housing market for people who need assistance into the housing market and home ownership.
That has been a seismic policy shift, not yet quite grasped by the opposition. When they see what that does in Bellamack, Johnston, Zuccoli, and Mitchell, they may start to understand the concept. What I have been delighted with is, in negotiations with Palmerston CDU, with Professor Barney Glover and his board, they have accepted the government mandating 15%, and they have picked it up and included it in their Palmerston CDU land turn-off, which is about 500 lots. So mandating 15% of lots in new Crown land release for social and affordable housing is a seismic shift in housing policy in the Territory - and it took a Labor government to do it.
We are establishing the first affordable housing rental company at Wirrina in Parap which will provide a better mix of public, private and community dwellings. Getting a mix right is critical in terms of housing policy. Research shows the need for percentages of public housing to be spread through the community - the term is salt and peppered. Having enclaves of only public housing creates social problems the Territory has seen in the urban centres for too long. It is not exclusive to the Territory. Enclaves of social and public housing anywhere - Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide, Hobart – create social problems because they condense the most disadvantaged members of society, and that breeds the problems we live with daily, here and elsewhere. It is an outdated, outmoded and poor approach to housing which we have inherited. The previous government that did it was not alone. Practically every government everywhere did that. So I am not saying in a political sense it is their fault and we are dealing with it now; every government, everywhere built concentrations of public housing.
There was a shift in research and understanding through the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s about what occurs in these enclaves. The United Kingdom has led this research, they have been phenomenal at it, and jurisdictions in Australia have picked it up. In the Territory we are going to get into that better space, too. We will not create enclaves. We will spread the public housing mix, salt and pepper it through our communities, our suburbs, so we do not have hot box areas where there are the horrible social outcomes we have seen, and are still experiencing.
Wirrina is our first example in a density environment - public, private and community dwellings together. Decanting Wirrina was the first step, and we have done that. It is now bulldozed, as you heard the member for Fannie Bay say, and that project is actually ahead of time. We understand the importance of getting the Wirrina project right, because it is quite iconic and holds out hope to the enclaves of public housing that exist. I know, because I have one in Malak, in my electorate, where the density is far too high; Shiers Street has been raised in debates in this parliament, and we know where they exist in our suburbs. As the government progresses and correlates the resources, post-Wirrina, which is the next one to be redeveloped in this way? We have said this is the start of a change of policy so, not only are we creating new public housing stock which will be spread through the community rather than concentrated in enclaves, we will go back and deal with the enclaves which currently exist in a systematic way which provides for a range of stocks and a range of mix. So, contrary to the member for Goyder’s aspersions that we are getting rid of public housing tenants in Parap because we do not believe it fits the social mix - that is wrong. Wirrina actually includes public housing.
To do any of this in public housing, the government must work with the non-government sector. They are very good at providing client and management services to public housing tenants, and it is the intention and aim of this government to work with the non-government sector. So, for the member for Goyder to say the Minister for Housing calls in the non-government sector and asks them for ideas - that is what we should be doing. If we want real outcomes in supported accommodation and crisis accommodation, if we are not engaging the sector which actually delivers crisis accommodation, then we are ignoring their expertise and their capacity. I have seen the result of the minister’s engagement with the crisis accommodation providers - Anglicare, the Red Cross, the Salvation Army. These are all experienced crisis accommodation providers, all very good non-government and not-for-profit organisations. They have ideas, and it is a wise way to invest $1m in that sector to deal with crisis accommodation, where we have a need. I congratulate our Minister for Housing for that initiative.
Whilst we have a seamless stream of new stock coming online through the policy shift to mandate 15% for affordable and social housing in government land turn-off, whilst we are dealing with existing enclaves - Wirrina is an example of that – and the non-government sector regarding crisis accommodation, we also need to build transitional housing, seniors’ housing, and the short-term accommodation housing. There are real resources going into all these areas - a mix of Territory and Commonwealth government resources.
An example of that: Budget 2009-10 delivered a record $390m for housing, a 92% increase on the previous year. If you believe the spin of the CLP that we are not doing anything and we are ignoring housing stress, the reality is we are making a $390m investment in housing to tackle the stress - a 92% increase in housing funding. We are building the new suburbs at Palmerston East; Bellamack is selling off-the-plan, 3700 new lots to potentially house up to 15 000 people or more. Bellamack, Johnston, Zuccoli and Mitchell, as I said, have 15% mandated for public and affordable housing, which is critical. That will provide for something like 550 new homes over the next five years in the public and affordable sectors. That is significant new stock coming into the area of need.
Bellamack already has lots reserved for public and affordable housing. Territory Housing will manage the establishment of housing on those lots, working with Urban Pacific and Brierty on affordable housing packages which will meet the Homestart NT price points. We are working with the Rudd government; we could not make this significant investment in bush or urban housing without the Rudd government; there is no doubt about it.
It is no secret the Howard government reduced its real expenditure on public housing between 1998 and 2008 by 24.1% – a 24.1% cut in housing funding under the Howard government. That is what the states and territories all had to struggle with. We were not on our own - we all had to struggle with that. It is an absolute disgrace. It was a decade of lost opportunity and all states and territories are now playing catch-up.
Operation Stimulus from the Rudd government gives us that catch-up; an almost $60m package for public and community housing. Under this stimulus spending 22 new public housing dwellings will be built, and 289 dwellings upgraded, which are in too poor condition to be in stock, coming back into stock, and 22 brand new ones. Congratulations. More than 80 of those renovations have been completed and, as you heard from the Minister for Housing, he was with a family in Malak moving into their new home. The opposition likes to close their eyes and ears and pretend this is not happening, but we have real families moving into real homes which have been refurbished under the stimulus package and this government’s emphasis on housing.
Construction of four new homes has commenced in Darwin, Alice Springs, and Tennant Creek, with the first dwellings anticipated for completion as soon as next month. The package is also providing targeted funding to address homelessness, working with the Salvation Army, the Catholic Diocese and St Vincent de Paul. In partnership with the Commonwealth, the Territory will deliver a $15.81m package, A Place to Call Home, building 32 new homes and including services to reduce homelessness and rough sleeping - thank God we are calling it homelessness now. I have been welcoming the change in language for years, it is important and I hope you stick to it. I hope you continue to refer to people as homeless rather than itinerants, because it is important.
Mr Giles: We will change our language if you change your policy.
Ms LAWRIE: We are improving and evolving our policies.
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms LAWRIE: The affordable housing rental company is innovative, it is new, and the Minister for Housing is working hard on bringing it into the Territory.
As I have said, our seniors are critically important - they are a specialist group. We have seen the success of the seniors’ villages, started by the CLP - I tip my hat to that - and continued under Labor, and we will continue to construct seniors’ villages. We are constructing a 44-bed seniors’ village at Bellamack which will be built on the same model we delivered in Fannie Bay, Leanyer and Coconut Grove - because it works. Works are under way on a proposed new seniors’ accommodation at Larapinta in Alice Springs.
Homestart NT has been a fantastic package and, as I said, it has evolved.
Mr KNIGHT: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move an extension of time for the Deputy Chief Minister, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LAWRIE: I thank members for the extra time; I will try not to take up all of it.
Homestart NT is about tackling affordability and ensuring that Territorians get assistance into the housing market, because we know there is strength in the growth of housing prices, so we need to continually evolve this loans program to ensure it keeps pace with market requirements and demands.
How are we structuring these low deposit home loans and shared equity schemes to help low to middle income earners come into home ownership? The income thresholds and the purchase price points are being amended. Currently, we have structured it to make it affordable for low to middle income earners to access about 40% of the housing market, and for people to use only 30% of their income for loan servicing. That meets the affordable test, and means this formula is an affordable measure for housing. Commencing on 1 June this year, 44 families have benefited and purchased homes under Homestart NT - a total of over $13m in loans.
We have continued Homestart from previous reforms which we had under the HomeNorth scheme. We looked at how the HomeNorth scheme helped; I do not have the figures with me, but I recall at one stage we were tracking at well over 1000 home loans. HomeNorth was very popular. We looked at improving the Homestart NT scheme because we saw many singles benefiting from HomeNorth, and we wanted to gear Homestart to help more families into this scheme. This is for people who may not necessarily be first homebuyers, but people who currently do not own their own home. We know people face difficulty when there is a family break-up, for example, they go into renting after the family home break up, and they are not first homebuyers, and they really struggle to get back into the marketplace. Homestart NT is a scheme which recognises relationship breakdown occurs in our community, and helps people get back on their feet and into home ownership.
Homestart NT is also available to current public housing tenants. This is a really beautiful part of the policy, and I have seen it happening in my electorate where I have high density public housing. I have long-term public housing tenants, people who have been in their homes for 20-odd years; it is their home, they are public housing tenants, but it is their home. Over that time they have gone from struggle street when the kids were little, to the kids growing up through the school system, and they are starting to make a better path for their family income. However, they are still low income, they are still the battlers, and the big banks will not touch them. They have used the government’s HomeNorth, and then Homestart NT schemes to buy into public housing stock, to buy their own home. Yes, it is stock coming off the stock list, but they have lived in it for 20 years, they have raised their kids in that home; many of them are raising their grandkids in those homes. They will not necessarily be able to come straight in; they need 100% equity, which is why this shared equity is so critical to these housing tenants.
Here is an example of how innovative this scheme is: a Territorian who recently accessed Homestart NT is Debbie Barnett. She is a small business woman and I know her business and how hard she works - she is a fantastic woman. She is quoted as saying: ‘The Territory government’s Homestart NT scheme provided us with what we needed to make the transition from renting to home owner. I would definitely recommend it to anyone looking to buy their own home’. These are words from a hard-working, small business woman, and a Territorian.
There is no simple, silver bullet solution to housing. As you heard in my speech, there are many things which need to happen across the spectrum, across the range of housing required, and underpinning that, of course, is government land release. We have fast-tracked land release, but I recognise Bellamack took too long. Bellamack was what I call a controlled area; we put in a whole range of conditions there and went through a two-phase expression of interest process to get that control in place. What we saw, and why we went with Bellamack, was land banking occurring. We had a development without controls in place on the number of blocks people could buy. Time lines were required and there was land banking; that is what we saw occurring in Palmerston. The Buildstart NT scheme helped address land banking by giving incentives to people sitting on their land to actually go in and construct.
Mr Mills: Oh, come on.
Ms LAWRIE: New stock is new stock - and I hear the Leader of the Opposition say: ‘Oh, come on’, but he does not get it. Talk to the builders and listen to the builders; they say: ‘Thank God for Buildstart, because it has brought on new construction.’ I have seen land which had been land banked, and I have figures upwards of 500 lots land banked across the Darwin/Palmerston area - 500 lots sitting there empty - nothing built on it.
Buildstart has bought 300 - tick. We need to continue, that is why we have a roll-out of land released, new suburbs, that is why we are working with the Commonwealth government and the DHA to get the large division of Muirhead under way. There will be a great opportunity there.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! In this new age of technology I just received an e-mail from one of the Treasurer’s fans. The fan would like you to be closer to the microphone so they can actually hear what you are saying. They are having trouble hearing you.
Ms LAWRIE: Madam Speaker, I appreciate the interjection from the member for Port Darwin. Often they tell me I am talking too loudly or shouting; so there you go.
Mr Elferink: I am just passing on a message.
Ms LAWRIE: I will do my best.
So, ensuring we have a range of products across the marketplace to deal with housing needs is critically important. Buildstart has been a product; Homestart NT is a product; new suburbs are a product; new public housing stock and affordable housing to seamlessly flow through that is a product; an affordable home rental scheme is a product. Ensuring we work with the non-government sector is critically important for crisis accommodation. All these things are happening together under this government’s Housing the Territory strategy.
We have built from a very low base. There was no mandated policy for affordable and public housing …
Members interjecting.
Ms LAWRIE: … government Crown release, there was none; we had to put that in place. We had to come off a deficit of the CLP selling off 2000 public housing stock. Everyone around at the time remembers the advertisements in the paper; public housing stocks being flogged off by the CLP when they were scrabbling for cash. Well, we are wearing the consequences of that. You lose 2000 out of your stock, and you wear the consequences of that forever.
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms LAWRIE: Contrary to the CLP who flogged it off, what we did with our public housing stock was to sell it to the person living in it to assist them into home ownership through the HomeNorth scheme and the Homestart scheme. The only other stock we sold in that time was inhabitable stock. We changed the policies we inherited. Now we are turning off land to ensure we are able to meet our growth. As I said, our population growth has far outstripped the forecasts: 26 000 extra people here putting stress on our housing market. As I have said to people, and you have to understand …
Mr Conlan: Three years ago the market was talking about lack of land.
Ms LAWRIE: … living in the Territory to get this - I know we have many newbies, Johnny-come-latelys on the other side - defence movements have a critical impact on housing markets in Darwin and Palmerston with significant numbers of people coming in and out. For example, with people re-deployed from Timor, no one stops and says: ‘What is the housing market like? Is it already tight? Can we re-deploy to Darwin, or shall we do it to Perth or Adelaide?’ or wherever. They redeploy here, and we get an enormous flood of troops. Defence is critical to our economy and they play a great role in our economy.
I am a sister of defence personnel. I have lived on base and I understand defence. I love defence and I will stand up for defence any day. But the reality of managing stock is the need to take defence into the picture, and in the past, governments have not worked with defence to ensure we understand their housing needs as well as understanding the broader public housing needs and the private housing needs. They have to be in the picture which is why I have been in discussions with DHA to ensure we understand their stock needs and flow needs through the years. They have to be in the picture so we can avoid the influx stress.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Deputy Speaker, if this document is not the biggest excuse for bad planning, then I do not know what is. I am absolutely amazed. It is true the Housing Minister has taken a caning this week, in both this House and, of course, the media. You would have expected the Chief Minister to have come out and saved him. Instead, he feeds him to the wolves by getting him to try to explain to Territorians that he is a successful minister and all he does glistens with gold. Well, it certainly does not glisten with gold. In fact, it is a wonder we can keep the lights on in this place with his management. The Chief Minister, yesterday, said that he supported the minister - the word was ‘yes’ - so I can only assume that is full support for everything the minister has done. Therefore, the Chief Minister trades at the same level as the Minister for Housing.
Today we listen to more gloss and more excuses. All the way through this document there are excuses for why we are where we are. That is all it is - excuses. And we are supposed to believe you are going in this new direction and you are going to solve all the problems, and we are to trust you.
You had had a couple of ministers walk out of this government recently because they did not trust this government to deliver and actually put money where it should be going; they did not trust the Cabinet. We know one has come back, but here we have another ex-minister, who is now an Independent, who walked out due to the lack of trust. What frightens me in this place is what happened to that ex-minister, what happened to the Independent member - she was targeted personally for walking out, rather than the reasons why she walked out. Why was the media not interested in investigating the reasons why? The reason someone would walk away from a party they grew up with and loved. Basically, most people are rusted-on Labor voters in society, and then you have the wonderful conservative side. But you have people born into this religion, if you like, the Labor Party, yet you have someone so fed up with mistrust and bad management they are prepared to walk out on that institution. I say that is a failed government. Yet the media here concentrated on trying to undermine - with the help of the government, of course - the minister, without even a look at the reasons why she walked out.
I have a number of issues with this document and I wondered how to best address this today. I thought maybe the best thing is to relay some of the issues which have come into my office in recent times. They are all to do with public housing and other issues this minister has been in charge of. I have had complaints about the small Bellamack blocks - bad planning - overturned because you are now doing something different. I have had residents coming in who need the THA bond assistance due to the long waiting time for THA homes, but they are only allowed to look at homes for $300 a week; they cannot get a place in Palmerston for $300. What is really sad is when they went back and asked: ‘Are we able to put our own money in, additional money above $300 a week?’, they were told: ‘No, you are not allowed to use more that $300 a week’ - no flexibility in your department even though it is your own policies which caused rents to skyrocket.
I had a lovely young lady come in with a small family, including a child with disabilities. Territory Housing finally agreed, after I wrote to the minister and the minister was good enough to allow this young lady to go on the waiting list. However, that waiting list is getting longer and longer, and this family is forced to live in caravan accommodation and travel great distances each day, which is not fair on their family. In fact, they lived in a tent for a while because they were told it would not take long to get into a Territory Housing home. That family, now they are on the list, make contact now and again with Territory Housing. Recently, I was advised they had a break-in at the caravan and feel threatened living there, so they contacted Territory Housing to see where they are on the list, only to be told: ‘If you keep ringing you might slip down the list a little more’.
Is this the kind of caring government we have, where they do not want people to ring up and check? They just want people to go back to their trees, and the complaints and issues will go away? Sadly, they do not go away; they go back to their caravans, their cars, or sleeping on couches at friends’ and families’ houses because they cannot get a damn home - whether it is Territory Housing or private rental.
Yesterday, a lady contacted me for a letter of support because THA want a letter of support or any evidence she can provide to help her get on the priority list. It is a bit sad the day has arrived where people need to go to their local members for support just to get on to a priority list. You would expect the evidence or whatever they can provide to Territory Housing would be enough for a decision to be made one way or another. But, no, they have to get further support now, just to get on to the damn list. That support has been given, and I trust THA will be able to assist.
There are other issues where people have returned keys to THA homes, which they have left in good condition, I must add, only to receive bills at a later stage and they are not allowed back on the waiting list until those bills are paid. Surely, if inspections are done at the time and they are signed off and everyone is happy with the property, there should be no additional bills after that.
Another issue: I had a family come in who were sick and tired of complaining to the neighbours next door - this was a THA home - where they had dog issues, and there had been a number of complaints these dogs were getting out. I know THA is not responsible for people’s dogs - you are housing people, not housing dogs. However, in this case, the house was bordered by a chicken wire fence, and the chicken wire was not up to what is considered standard - the standard was provided to this family by a THA employee. What has happened since is the people have moved out and the house has remained vacant. A couple of THA people came around and said the fence would be fixed because it was not to standard. Now, months down the track, there is no one in the home, and still the fencing has not been done. On the latest call to THA, the same person who had given them the advice it was not up to standard said: ‘Oh yes, it is up to standard, so it will not be replaced’.
We have a lovely, elderly lady in a THA unit in Bakewell - I am sure the minister is aware of this lady - she is complaining about water flowing off the roofs and down into her yard. The way it is constructed is that she is in the lowest unit and there is a retaining wall at the back of the property out to the roadside. The problem is, there are three units there, all with downpipes running onto the ground and into her property, which fills up every year like a great lake and can sit there for a long time. The water can actually get under her back door on days of big rains and storms. There is no drainage, no decent planning, and it needs to be addressed. I will be writing to the minister about that.
There are young mothers staying in spare rooms, sleeping on people’s couches. In the holiday period, at Christmas time, we all have family and friends around, but we all look forward to the day they actually leave. We all know what it is like to have additional people in our home; it is lovely for a short while, but when it is ongoing it becomes very difficult and people’s stress levels rise. That is happening all over the Darwin and Palmerston area at the moment and, I believe, in Alice Springs and Katherine, where people cannot get into the housing market.
There are a number of other issues we could talk about: people with issues of getting into THA, and many other issues to do with what this government has said they would do, and have not done.
I have one here, and this one is going to come back: 87 Hutchison Terrace. A number of people in that area are very concerned about that lot at 87 Hutchison Terrace with DCA processes in place at the moment, and the zoning of that lot likely to be changed from Community Services to a THA development - which will be a block of units. We have new suburbs being developed like Bellamack and Johnston, years late, but it is great they are finally being done. Why in the world could this block of units not be put in one of these new suburbs? The problem is, when you use land zoned for Community Use, and there are already investors who have invested in properties around those blocks, you are left with misleading people, because they start to distrust planning level, they start to question government’s motives; and we all know it is another sign of absolutely bad planning by this government.
We all know cities are designed, as I said the other day, with schools, with parks, with gardens, with areas for hospitals, and a number of other uses, and we have zoning for Community Use. So when people are buying in an area they expect that block, some time in the future, will become Community Use; but to then find out it is now going to be a Territory Housing block, you can understand why people are frustrated. First I need to say, we need more units and I commend the minister for more development, but I question why you need to use a block that is zoned Community Use.
We have spoken about people sleeping in cars, sleeping at friends and families houses because the cost of rents are going up; people coming to the end of their leases and finding dramatic increases in rents, and they are forced to either pay up or, if they cannot afford it, get out.
Another issue I have sent a letter to the Minister for Planning and Lands about is in regard to a rather large Indigenous camp which has grown up next to the health clinic at Palmerston, adjacent to Roystonea Avenue; in fact, they are camped right behind a sign that says: ‘Crown Land No Camping’. The police are there on a daily basis due to antisocial behaviour and a number of other issues. Why are they there? Is this another group of people who do not have housing under this government? Some of these people have caused antisocial behaviour, not only in that area, but in the back areas of Gunn and other places, where they have been found jumping yards, looking for alcohol and other things in people’s back yards. The bottom line is that this is growing because people do not have places to live.
Let us look at the actual statement. The minister says he has a strong commitment to housing those who otherwise cannot afford to put a roof over their head. A commitment is one thing; delivering is certainly another. Everything we have heard here today does not demonstrate you are even keeping up with the demand you are suggesting we will have. Further, the statement says you are going to work hard to build more public housing in the bush and boost repairs. Well, I can give you photos, I can give you evidence of Territory Housing properties left vacant for months and months at a time. I do not know where you have boosted repairs. You talk about 81 or 84 homes you have brought online, and I notice the statement uses the excuse that it has taken so long to get people back into these homes because of the condition of the homes, and that it presents an enormous challenge because of the condition of the homes.
My question is: how did they get that way? Did they get so bad because of bad management? Did they get so bad because you are not keeping an eye on the ball and you are driving from the back of the bus instead of being up the front and leading the charge? This statement is full of excuses - growing at a rapid rate since 2004. Well, that is something you knew and something you could have planned for.
The statement says something that has changed is the government of the day has correctly placed access limits based on income and assets. They are saying it is right they did this; but the thing is they have used that as an excuse in one of the factors; that should actually have reduced the level of people. If you check people’s incomes and what they have, and you take a whole group of people away from accessing Territory Housing, that should have freed up housing and dropped waiting lists but, because of the way things have gone, they have increased.
It reports under the Howard government, between 1998 and 2008, a 24.1% drop in public housing spending. After eight years most people are sick of the blame game. You have had $1.3bn extra in GST - you could have done something with that. Most people expect you could do something with that - $1.3bn, $1300m additional revenue above what you expected, but you are blaming the Howard government for dropping 24.1% in public housing across the country. You have been in charge for eight years and look at the mess we are in.
Your statistics here say 5560 public housing dwellings is 5.4% of the population – I have done a few calculations and that would suggest you would need at least 112 new properties each year just to keep up with the 2% increase. That is just in public housing, and we know how many homes you have built recently.
When you look at these continued excuses – and that is what this document is, do not think it is not – there are excuses all the way, but there is no practical evidence you have done anything to actually fix it. It says here: our population is ageing rapidly with a number of people aged 65 and over. The population is ageing rapidly. There are 365 days in a year. You would have aged by 365 days last year and you will next year. People do not age any quicker. I am being facetious here, but I am just trying to point out you can plan for these things. If you have statistics that tell you that the population is ageing rapidly, then you plan for that.
It says here: ‘I am confident that over time there will be housing options.’ Confidence - that is just another plea that we trust this minister being able to deliver when he does not have a good track record. And it says here: ‘This government has dramatically slowed the sale of public housing which the previous government had embarked on.’ If you had all the statistics to say we were going in the right direction, if we were increasing the numbers of our population, why did you not stop it? You did not; you sold off 2000 homes. I will read that again: ‘This government has dramatically slowed the sale of public housing which the previous government had embarked upon.’ You blame something which happened more than eight or nine years ago; you had statistics to say the place was growing, but you still sold off 2000 homes. This is not rocket science.
There is something in here that I do agree with. The minister says there is no argument that times have increased over the past three years, and that is the only thing I agree with. Down here further is a statement, and if this is not a true reflection of this minister’s …
Mr BOHLIN: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be granted an extension of time, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Leave granted.
Mr CHANDLER: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and member for Drysdale. I will not keep going too much longer.
But if this next statement is not a true reflection of the competence of this minister: ‘At the last Housing Ministers’ Conference I was informed that the Victorian and Western Australian housing wait lists grew more than the entire wait list of the Northern Territory in the past year alone’. What are the sizes of Victoria and Western Australia in population, minister? That is absolutely ridiculous given the size of those two states, and the numbers you are talking about reflecting the size of the Northern Territory is just an absolutely ridiculous statement to make. And over the page: ‘Reducing public housing wait times is an enormous challenge due to a range of interconnecting issues on both the supply and the demand side.’ I read that again: ‘Reducing public housing wait times is an enormous challenge due to a range of interconnecting issues on both the supply and the demand side.’ That is rocket science, is it not? There are two things there - demand and supply - absolute rocket science.
There is a statement in here which says: ‘I acknowledge that there are properties that have been vacant for an extended period because of extensive repairs and maintenance that is required to bring them back to a habitable standard.’ Again, my question is: why? How did they get that way? How do these homes get to the stage where they require massive investment if they are maintained every year? We put oil in our car every three months, or every six months.
Mr Bohlin: There is a sticker on the window that says if we do not, we get into trouble.
Mr CHANDLER: That is true. We maintain things, and obviously you have not maintained the stock. You have not had to build any; all you had to do when you took over government was maintain what was there.
Dr Burns: Well, it had not been maintained for many years.
Mr CHANDLER: No. No. You just had to maintain what was there - you did not have to build anything - just maintain it. But, no, you keep selling them off, you sold off 2000 of them, and you are left with properties you need to have a strong investment with.
It says here: ‘Our strong economic growth has lead to a strong demand and limited affordable housing in the private housing market.’ Why? Because of a lack of planning, and you have not released any land. Rocket science! Over the page: ‘Rent rises in the private market have increased significantly and led to an increased gap between the private and public markets. Not unexpectedly, there has being a significant increase in applications for public housing over the past three years; in fact the demand has risen by over 50%.’ Not unexpectedly! Your own policies have left you in this position. You are a moron, minister.
I still cannot believe the Chief Minister only yesterday said he supported his minister and basically gave him a gold stamp for everything he has done in his time as a minister in this place. Yet, he is not here today, and he is pulling out after he had an absolute caning in the media this week, an absolute caning from this side of the House, and the Chief Minister puts him up like a lamb to the slaughter, because what was this document going to do? It is just giving us more fodder to throw at you and give you more evidence of what is going on; what is really happening out there - because you do not have a clue! You are not there. You do not know some of the things that are going on there and, if you do, you are a miserable person.
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! The member for Brennan should be addressing his remarks through you.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, member for Brennan, if you could address your remarks through the Chair. Thank you.
Mr CHANDLER: Madam Deputy Speaker, I apologise, I was getting slightly excited.
I will finish by saying: this document and the decision by the Chief Minister to put the minister out to be finished off, has to be full of the biggest excuses I have ever seen to try to explain, in a rational manor, how we got to this position. It is full of excuses when, in fact, they could have come here with an absolute plan. They have not done that; they have failed.
Dr BURNS (Business): Madam Deputy Speaker, this is an important statement and timely this House is debating it. It is important the opposition, apart from its criticism, puts on the table its strategies to address this issue.
The Treasurer outlined some of the measures taken by this government, with the assistance of the federal government, to address this issue. There is no doubt we acknowledge, as a government, we were tardy in land release. We have come forward and said: ‘Yes, that is correct’. However, we also said we have embarked on a very ambitious process of land release, particularly in Palmerston East. As the Treasurer said, there are 3000 new lots to house up to 15 000 people, just in Palmerston East.
There was a whole range of other issues the Treasurer outlined, and my colleague, the Minister for Housing, also outlined. Before I start to speak specifically on this issue before the House I have to say, since I became local member in 2001, I have doorknocked a lot. In fact, I have been around the former electorate of Johnston, before the redistribution, about six times - five-and-a-half to six times; and I have almost completed Millner in the year since the election.
Millner, from memory, is about 1700 or 1800 people. There are quite a number of people and quite a number of dwellings in Millner, with many Housing Commission houses. Let me say from the outset, the majority of people living in Housing Commission properties, some of whom raised families there for many years, are very productive and engaged members of our community, and have made a big contribution to our community.
Many people living in Housing Commission homes have beautiful gardens and many have received prizes for their gardens. Their houses are beautifully kept and, even with very small and meagre means, they take pride in their very neat and tidy houses which have a lovely feel when you walk in. So, many people who have lived in Housing Commission houses for a long time are a credit to the community.
In response to what the member for Brennan said about houses run down to the level they are uninhabitable and need to be sold off, when I doorknocked prior to the 2001 election, one of the strongest themes from Housing Commission tenants was the lack of maintenance - some of them have been tenants for 20 years – houses had not been painted inside, and there was a whole range of things. I clearly remember when Jack Ah Kit was the Housing minister he embarked on a very large-scale program of refurbishing those houses and fitting them out with security screens and security doors. I remember doorknocking and people remarking to me how fantastic it was to have a lick of paint and security screens on their house.
I believe I have been a good advocate over time for Housing Commission tenants, particularly now I have a housing complex, Litchfield Court, which has very particular and long-standing challenges, in my electorate. Before me, Matthew Bonson had that complex in his electorate, and Phil Mitchell before him, and they both engaged very strongly with the deep-seated issues and clients with very complex needs there. There is no doubt, Housing is a difficult area. I have had some very difficult tenants who have had to be moved on because they were a hazard to themselves and they were a hazard to their next door neighbours, and made their neighbours’ lives a misery.
One of the consistent issues which comes to me as a local member, and I am not scared to stand up in this Chamber and say it, is the ever lengthening public housing waiting lists which are cause for great concern, and it is fit for this House to be debating this issue. Unfortunately, we have reached a stage now where the emergency waiting list is as long as the general waiting list, which is of great concern. We have people with very acute needs coming to see us, and we know they are on the list and they are going to have to wait for some time.
The measures outlined by my colleague, the Minister for Housing, and the Treasurer, I believe, address those issues. In short, I am saying we, as a government, acknowledge there is a problem, and it is a growing problem with housing waiting lists. We also acknowledge we could have been, or should have been, quicker with our land release. However, we have a comprehensive set of plans to address a range of issues in relation to housing and I believe those strategies and policies will bear fruit in calendar year 2010, particularly land release, as the Treasurer has outlined, and it is important to lay that on the table.
We have heard from the shadow Housing spokesperson, the member for Goyder, and I am interested to hear what the member for Braitling has to say because, during the sittings this week he seemed to take the mantle of the shadow from the member for Goyder. It was quite pointed, looking at it from this side, that the member for Goyder was given a token question to start with, then the running, if you like, on housing issues was done by the member for Braitling. So whether there is a reshuffle in the offing on the other side, we will have to wait and see. They are talking about reshuffles on this side but, given the e-mail the member for Goyder sent out around Estimates time about her colleagues and her lack of performance, as indicated by the faith shown in the member for Braitling during the last week or so to try to prosecute the case for housing, points to the fact the opposition believes their shadow is not really performing; but I digress.
A member: I was wondering when you were going to get that in your topic.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: Well, it is a debate about housing and I believe I stuck to that area, as well.
As the Treasurer outlined in Budget 2009-10 we delivered a record $390m for housing, a 92% increase on the previous year and, as I have said, there is recognition we need to do a great deal more; but I believe that percentage increase says it all. Calendar year 2010 will see the fruits of the investment and the efforts government is making in a range of areas.
The Treasurer alluded to the fact there was a real expenditure cut of 24.1% in public housing by the Howard government between 1998 and 2008, and Operation Stimulus, overall, provides a $60m package for public and community housing. The Commonwealth and the Territory are looking to deliver a nearly $16m package, A Place to Call Home, which will build 32 new homes by 2013 for approximately 2000 people, and this is also a very important element.
The Treasurer also alluded to the fact that in the new suburbs of Bellamack, Johnston, Zuccoli, and Mitchell there will be a 15% provision of land for public and affordable housing - that is 15% of 3700 new lots. There will be a flow of public housing stock available in Bellamack, Johnston, Zuccoli, and Mitchell, as they are constructed and, as the Treasurer rightly pointed out, this is a rolling program and as those suburbs are turned off and those lots are turned off, 15% will be for public housing.
The minister also pointed out the reliance on public housing in the Territory: 8.3% of all Territory dwellings are public housing, which is double the rate in the rest of Australia. There is a greater reliance on public housing in the Territory for a range of reasons. It is very important the government expends and provides public housing. We have the message on this and we are moving to rectify the situation.
The Minister for Housing also talked about the Bellamack Seniors’ Village which should start construction early next year to provide an additional 44 units for seniors’ accommodation. That is very important, and I know the seniors’ accommodation in Leanyer and Fannie Bay has been very welcome. I know people who live in those complexes and they enjoy the life they have there and the fellowship with other seniors.
In terms of homelessness, Operation Stimulus also addresses some of those issues. The assistance provided by the federal government comprises two projects with the Salvation Army and two in the Catholic Diocese. The Salvation Army project in Stuart Park will be crisis accommodation for women suffering domestic violence at a cost of $1.6m; and the Salvation Army is also looking to construct a facility in Alice Springs, at a cost of $1.4m, to provide crisis accommodation for homeless men. The St Vincent de Paul project on Dick Ward Drive will provide 20 units for homeless men, at a cost of nearly $5.3m. I have had a great deal to do with St Vincent de Paul over the years, particularly Ozanam House, and they have done a fantastic job for homeless people for a very long time, and will continue to do that. It is great to see them getting involved with the Salvation Army in these particular projects.
In Alice Springs there will be a number of other projects funded by Operation Stimulus which will include 35 units for renal patients, some apartments for public housing, and 24 units for transitional accommodation. So, there are advances, there are developments happening in both Darwin and Alice Springs in relation to homelessness, in particular.
I believe it is important to realise that homelessness and problems in public housing, as I have noticed in the Litchfield Court complex, is that some of the people who live there, not many, but some, have complex needs in terms of alcohol and drug issues and also mental health issues, and it is important we try to support those who have mental health issues to stop them becoming homeless people.
The Papaya Subacute Residential Facility, which is in my colleague, the member for Arnhem’s portfolio area was opened, and I was part of that opening last year. It is a stepping stone for people coming out of the mental facility at Royal Darwin Hospital, before they re-enter the community, where they get support in a homely and welcoming environment. Residents have their own rooms and share communal bathroom, kitchen, dining and recreation spaces. The staff supports clients not only with mental health issues, but also with basic life skills training. That is a wonderful support for people who are experiencing problems in that area. I commend the work my colleague, the member for Arnhem, is doing, and the support her department and her officers give to people in this situation. Since opening 12 months ago, Papaya has assisted 46 clients and has received very positive feedback from clients in the broader mental health sector.
There is also Kurrajong apartments, in Coconut Grove which is a block of former Territory Housing units now managed by Team Health; and we heard something about Team Health during Question Time today. Those residents live independently and they can access appropriate supports, if they require them, through the Team Health Recovery Assistance Program. This service provides excellent accommodation for people living with mental illness.
They are some of the supports going on in those particular areas but, more can be done, and I believe it is important always to keep that in mind.
The minister mentioned the homelessness partnership agreement, and that 32 homes will be built or purchased and made available for people experiencing homelessness. There will be an expression of interest process of approximately $1m for non-government organisations to provide transitional accommodation options before Christmas. That is another aspect, another development going on in that area.
The Treasurer mentioned Homestart NT which, as we are all aware, provides low deposit home loans and shared equity schemes to help low to middle income earners into home ownership.
There has been much debate in the public realm about Bellamack Gardens, and two weeks ago I made some announcements about a reconfiguration of that development. Instead of 32 units there will now be 28 units with much more open space; approximately 55% of the development will be open space and will provide large setbacks onto the road from the front, and a capacity for gardens at the front. There can also be gardens at the sides and particularly in the back yards, which are all fenced independently from the next property with the capacity for people to have their barbecues and spas and whatever. The actual footprint, the total area of these units is quite large compared to equivalents in Darwin and Palmerston …
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! I move an extension of time for the minister to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS: I thank the member for Port Darwin for his charity.
Back to Bellamack: basically, there is a lot of open space and there is a range of products, from memory - 18 detached two-bedroom units, two one-bedroom detached units which can be expanded into two-bedrooms, and a number of attached one-bedroom units. As I said, the floor area of these units, and the footprint, are quite large.
The other thing is people with Homestart are eligible to apply; that is the eligibility criteria. The type of repayments people would be making on a loan to purchase these properties is equivalent and, in some cases, less, than the rental they would pay in equivalent accommodation in Palmerston. In other words, the repayments people would be paying is equivalent to the rent for a two-bedroom unit in Palmerston, but they are actually getting equity in that property. It is giving people a start, a foot in the market, and giving them equity. As their family and their circumstances change, they can use the equity they have built up at Bellamack Gardens to get equity, for instance, in a three-bedroom home in the wider Bellamack development.
We wanted some green initiatives at Bellamack Gardens, and the design to include space between dwellings, flow-through ventilation, large overhangs with the eaves, and very high ceilings in every room with fans to allow people to live without air-conditioning; this was criticised by some people who call them hot boxes, and ask: ‘Where the air-conditioning?’. It is really up to the people who purchase these units if they want to install air-conditioning; all the circuitry will be there for them to do that. We are not precluding air-conditioners, but in this development we are aiming at a very cool, green and friendly environment.
Already submissions has been made to the consent authority, and we are expecting to sell those units off-the-plan early next year, with completion in October, although I would be happier - and I have made this plain to the Land Development Corporation - if we can have an earlier finish time for this development - August would make me a lot happier.
I realise it is 28 units and there is a big demand for this type of housing at these prices. The research we did engaging particularly with young people trying to enter the housing market, suggested these are the price points they are interested in, and the size and layout are the type of development they are looking for. I see Bellamack Gardens as being the start, a test of the market not really occupied by any private developer to any large degree, particularly in Darwin, at this stage. Depending on the success of Bellamack Gardens, we will look to expand that model to other developments in Palmerston. In discussions with the Land Development Corporation, we will also be looking to see whether we could have similar developments in Alice Springs also.
I am very excited about Bellamack Gardens. As the member for Brennan said when he quoted the ministerial statement, there is a complex set of supply and demand within this whole housing equation, and it is very important, in my view, that many of the problems we are experiencing now are actually problems about growth - growth in the Territory economy, growth in the Territory’s population and, as Christena Singh said during the October Business Month functions I attended in Alice Springs and Darwin, the problems the Territory has, or the challenges of growth, are unique in Australia. Her words were something like: ‘We would much rather have the problems of growth or the challenges of growth than the problems of decline or things remaining static’.
I have paraphrased Christena Singh, but that is essentially what she said to the business people gathered in Alice Springs and Darwin. There would have been 200 people at the breakfast I attended in Alice Springs. At the evening function at the Darwin Entertainment Centre there probably would have been 250, possibly more, business people assembled; not only to hear Christena Singh talk about Sensis business projects she has undertaken, but also, as I said previously, to listen to Mr Ahn Do talk about having a go and his experiences. He is a very motivational speaker.
Government recognises we have much to do. We have a big job to do across the whole spectrum of housing challenges that face the Northern Territory, from Indigenous housing and SIHIP, right through to land release, affordable housing in Darwin, and specialised housing to support people with very complex needs. We recognise we have a lot of work to do. We recognise we should have been quicker to respond to the growth and the patterns that were emerging. What I am saying here today is we have a plan, and we have a number of strategies to address these issues. I reiterate what I said before: I believe in 2010 we will see a marked improvement in many of these very important issues. I believe the Territory will continue to grow right through 2010, and there is a pattern of growth evident for the next three years, particularly in the Top End with the INPEX project. That is why it is very important we consolidate our position and improve it in 2010.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend the minister’s statement to the House.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, yesterday and the day before I spoke about housing in relation to the Chief Minister’s Growing the Territory, opportunities for challenges with growth, and it is very fine to encourage all this growth - but it is about planning. I hear the government say they have this plan and that plan. But, for quite some years I have stood, not only here, but as a member of the public prior to being elected, and I have heard the government expound all these fantastic plans about what they are going to do, and how they are going to do it. The problem is it is all talk and very little action.
I go to the Ministerial Statement, Public Housing, by the member for Daly who is the Minister for Housing. The first line says: ‘This government is committed to housing Territorians …’. I find that quite amazing given they have sold off so many Territory public homes. When the member for Brennan was speaking, I believe it was the Housing Minister who interjected and called across the Chamber that it was, in fact, 2000 houses that we sold. In fact, in his own statement he claims we sold off 1300 homes in our time, and that that was a disgrace. There are figures here - and if the government does not have them already I am quite happy to provide them - which show between June 2001 and the end of financial year 2007, this government sold off 2117 Territory Housing properties.
Dr Burns: I would like you to table those, member for Sanderson.
Mr STYLES: No problem at all.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Are you going to table those, member for Sanderson? You need to seek leave.
Mr STYLES: No, they have my personal notes on them. However, I will undertake to provide documents which do not have my notes on them to the Leader of Government Business.
Dr Burns: Thank you.
Mr STYLES: No problem. So, the number of houses which were sold off and I accepted that he said we sold off 2000, but I would like to make sure we get it right. There were 2117 sold off between the times just mentioned. The Housing Minister makes great mileage from saying how terrible it was that the CLP sold off 1300 homes when we were in government. I wonder what he would say, given the opportunity, about selling off 2117.
Mr Knight: Prove it. Table it.
Mr STYLES: No, I am quite happy - you will get them - and if you have not looked at these, then I am extremely disappointed the Housing Minister is not aware of these documents. They are very telling.
The Treasurer claimed today the Howard government, the Coalition government, reduced the amount of federal money for housing by 21.4% whilst they were in government. She also said that was a lost opportunity and the stimulus catch-up …
Mr CONLAN: A point of order Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! I call your attention to the state of the House.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Ring the bells. A quorum is present.
Mr STYLES: Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker. So here we have a supposed, claimed reduction by the Treasurer and a lost opportunity; then a claim that the Rudd government’s stimulus catch-up package is going to resolve all the problems.
I would like, at some stage in the very near future, to find out how the Housing Minister proposes to do that. The federal government gives the Northern Territory $672m for Aboriginal housing programs under SIHIP and we have yet, after two years, to see one house finished. So, when the Treasurer claims we are going to have all these fantastic things happen as a result of the Rudd stimulus catch-up, I wonder when we are going to see any houses out of the emergency housing package given to the Northern Territory government to build houses for some of our most disadvantaged citizens, and they are still not happening. How long will it take him to do the stimulus catch-up?
The Treasurer also mentioned they will have no enclaves. I ask the question: what about seniors’ villages? A seniors’ village is an enclave. Are we going to have seniors’ villages as the Housing Minister mentions in his statement? They are, in fact, enclaves. The Treasurer says we are not going to have enclaves, so there seems to some confusion on the government benches as to what they are going to do and how they are going to do it.
The Treasurer also makes a statement and, I believe, the figure was around $200-odd million for 289 upgrades of properties coming back online. I just ask the question, a rhetorical question, of course: does that mean at the moment there are 289 properties off-line? Because that is what she said - there are 289 houses to be upgraded so they can be brought back online - and 22 new houses, of course.
That seems remarkable when the Chief Minister said in a previous statement we need 1700 house blocks each year just to keep pace. So, when you look at the housing lists and how long they are, I do not see they actually give you the figures of how many people are on these lists. We have 289 homes which appear to be off-line at the moment, and I have people walking into my office who are living in cars and tents. I have people who are about to be evicted from homes because, unfortunately, due to medical conditions, owners have to sell the home and this person is going to be tipped out in the street. They have been on the housing list for four-and-a-half years - an absolutely terrible situation so many Territorians find themselves in.
It becomes quite tedious after a while to hear the Treasurer say: ‘We have put more money than the CLP has into everything.’ My understanding is, first of all, the Territory budget has doubled over the last over eight years, and they have had enormous amounts of GST. I would imagine any government in the Northern Territory, given the rivers of gold which have flowed into the Territory and a doubling of the budget, could put more dollars into things than any previous government had the opportunity to put in. So when you have this massive increase in the budget of the Northern Territory, and you have this great windfall called the GST, and my understanding is it is generally about $1.3bn, of course, you can put more money into anything you choose. Then to stand up and claim you have put in more money than the previous government, I believe, is just slightly misleading, because we are not comparing apples with apples; we are comparing apples with oranges. It would be better if the Treasurer was to actually compare it percentage-wise of the total gross income of the Territory in today’s dollar value; then we might get a better indication.
I move to page 2 of the minister’s statement, which says: ‘We have high and complex needs in terms of the Territory’s population and, I want to be clear, public housing wait lists are complex issues.’ Well, the people who come into my office and sit at my desk crying their eyes out because they are living in tents, living in cars, or about to be evicted from private homes that have to be sold - I do not believe these people think it is too complex at all. What they are looking for is somewhere to live, a safe place to live and a safe place where they can actually lock a door and keep their children safe so they can get a decent night’s sleep. These people do not want much.
But what happens when you sell off at a time when the government is claiming it is their policies and it is they who have created the economic activity in the Northern Territory - as opposed to business and private enterprise and gas - they are creating all this economic growth and economic stimulus, and it is through their actions that we find ourselves in this fantastic economic situation, as they describe it today. Surely if you are going to do that and have confidence in your ability to do these things and to create this fantastic economic environment, you would also have the ability to plan - plan for sufficient land release, sufficient medical staff, and all those things that go with forward planning.
I would suggest the government, if through some miracle all this does occur, and by the Treasurer’s own admission they were planning for a 1% increase in population, and then she says: ‘Well, they are the ABS figures’; if I was sitting in a closed room with all my colleagues and said: ‘We are going to do this, and we are going to have this fantastic development in the Northern Territory, and everything is going to be wonderful, everyone is going to come here because of the fantastic lifestyle and the jobs’, I would be suggesting we have to house them, provide them with medical services, good law and order - education, health and law and order are the three main ones for a start. Then you need to do other things, like recreation, for them and provide a good community infrastructure where everyone can enjoy the fantastic lifestyle they are selling. However, what we have is a government which has failed to release enough land, to the point where middle class workers in the Northern Territory appear to have been pushed out of the housing market by other people who come in with sufficient money.
I also heard the Treasurer say: ‘We have built 2000-something units in the CBD’, and that is fantastic, but not everyone needs that. I heard the Housing Minister, or it may have been the member for Fannie Bay, say the priority is seniors and singles. I will talk about the singles. Of course, we need to relate to everyone in this particular discussion because everyone needs a safe place to live and a roof over their head. However, singles might be able to get a room or bunk up somewhere. It is probably easier for singles in a very tight accommodation market to seek a safe place to live with either family, friends, or just a bit of carpet somewhere to roll your swag out.
When you are dealing with seniors and families with kids, kids cannot – well, they can live in high-rise apartments - but the trouble in the CBD is the high-rise apartments are enormous and the kids who come into my office need a bit of grass and somewhere they can kick a ball around, even if it is a small back yard.
The actual type of housing the government is claiming is helping to resolve the issue, is for a different market. Many people sell their homes in the northern suburbs and move into units, and that is great, but the problem is because insufficient land is being released, the price is jumping enormously. On page 2 of the minister’s statement it says:
- We are committed to providing housing for all Territorians. Housing assistance in the Territory is provided for those on low to middle incomes, and for families and individuals with special needs.
I have people coming to my office on a daily basis for appointments who, I believe, have special needs. A lady came to see me on one of my mornings at the supermarket, and she has special needs through circumstances beyond her control. She found herself in a situation where she needed to sell her family home. As a teenager she got into her first home; she is a hard worker and she has always owned her own premises. She has two young children. Unfortunately, she had quite a severe accident a couple of years ago which left her with a leg problem. She had her family home modified, at her expense, so she could actually get around and get into the shower and things like that. The problem, as a result of this accident, is if she breaks her leg again, she will have to have it amputated. That is a condition I quite felt saddened by. She has difficulty getting around with her two young kids, but she manages.
Now she has to move out of this house which has been modified, and she went to Territory Housing and said: ‘I am, basically, out on the street. I do not know where I am going to live as a result of this situation, and I have to leave this particular house. I need to go on the emergency housing list’. ‘Sorry, cannot help you’, was the answer. She told me she has trouble getting in and out of a many properties, and she, with the two young kids, are staying with friends, and just getting in and out of a bathroom situation is dangerous for her to the point where she is now paranoid about getting in and out of showers and washing because, if she breaks this leg she loses it.
That is just one of numerous situations I am confronted with in my electorate office almost on a daily basis, and I find it terrible to go out there and say: ‘Well, the government sold off 2000’. How many are on these waiting lists? If we still had 2000 premises, I believe it would make a huge difference. When you say, in the first line of the statement: ‘The government is committed to housing Territorians’, and you sell 2000 properties, then you choose places where you can get a good return for the taxpayer, you sell ones in areas of high return and, instead of not replacing those units, you build replacement units in areas where land is a lot cheaper; so when you do put people in through schemes the government has brought out and other initiatives, young people can actually buy these premises and get a hand up. When they do that, you build other premises to replace that one. I would have thought that would was quite basic to a government committed to housing Territorians - the opening line of the minister’s statement.
What happens to these 2117 places that were sold off? Do we see 2117 dwellings replaced? And, if they were selling houses, and my understanding from the advertisements I saw in the paper at the time the government was selling off quite a number of these places, is they were three-bedroom, as the member for Johnston explained, boxes, hot boxes they called them, but they were three-bedroom units. I have to say, I lived in one of those three-bedroom hot boxes for about 12 years, and I survived, and we had three kids. And I was very grateful for the fact I actually had a home, as opposed to some people out there who do not have anything except the back of a car.
If you are really concerned about housing Territorians, you would have replaced these places with something suitable. I note the minister has said the greatest percentage, I believe 60%, are looking for one-bedroom dwellings. If you sell all these houses off …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker! I move an extension of time for the member for Sanderson, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr STYLES: Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, and thank you to the member for Fannie Bay, I appreciate that.
Then we move a bit further down the page where it says:
- Combining these facts with the Territory’s growing population of just over 2% per annum, much of it within the Indigenous population, it is clear that demand for public housing is unlikely to diminish until the socioeconomic status of Indigenous people improves.
To go on with the quote:
- We know that there is a significant gap between public and private markets, so we need to improve housing and rental affordability to ensure people can transition out of public housing into their own homes.
I applaud the minister for saying that, it is great. First of all, we have a 2% increase in population, which they obviously have not identified along the way. I do not believe this happened yesterday, this has been going on for some time and they have been running the programs to get more people here. So people come up from down south, and we hear them say day in and day out: ‘We come up here, we are looking forward to a great lifestyle, great weather, employment opportunities, earn a bit more money than I did where I came from, but the problem is we cannot afford to stay here because we cannot afford to buy or rent a home’. These are not low income people. These are people from middle class Australia and have public service jobs; they are our essential services people.
If these people cannot do that, I do not know how the government is going to go ensure that people can transition out of public housing into their own. There are so many people out there who need a hand up and cannot even get into public housing, so I do not know how they are going to even save a deposit for a home. Given the recent global financial situation and the banks tightening up on who they lend to and the type of deposit or percentage of deposit needed for homes, many of these people are going to find themselves in dire straits, if they are not in dire straits already.
So, it comes back to the price of housing, which comes right back to the actual release of land and not doing that. I reiterate something I said in this House recently: I spoke to a project manager who builds homes and he enlightened me that they are slowing down because they cannot get land to build homes on. So what does that say? Does that say we have builders here in the Territory who want to build homes, but they cannot buy land to build the homes on? This guy is saying to me that his job is now in jeopardy because they cannot buy the land. They know there are people who want to buy homes, but he is talking about the cost of the land and the cost of the house and he is wondering how these young people who want to get into the market will ever be able to afford to buy a home - even a simple home - we are not talking about the five-bedroom, three-bathroom, two car/three car garage, and a pool and spas and all those flash things. We are talking about basic homes - that is what they need. They need the government to actually release land at a greater pace than they are at the moment.
Again I say that here is a government that has absolutely failed to plan. I mentioned this yesterday, and I use the same analogy again. If one is going to increase the size of the family you normally take into consideration, if you are living in a one-bedroom bed-sit and you are going to increase your family from two to three, the need for extra space. You can get away with it in a bed-sit, but once you start having extra family, one has to plan to actually move out and into a home. So many young people come into my office have say: ‘When we got married we put name on the list because we are going to have kids’ - and four years later they are still waiting for something.
I note in this statement the minister claims there have been reductions in waiting times, and so many percent of people have been housed in two years, and that is wonderful compared to the rest of Australia. The problem we have in the Northern Territory is that we are not the rest of Australia. The reason so many of our tradespeople are leaving now is because they say - and low income people also say this - it is cheaper to live in another state. It is cheaper to go to Adelaide. You can buy a home there; you can rent a home there. Some homes are half the price and you get a fabulous home in a nice place and the cost living is reduced for obvious reasons. So, they can actually get these things and not try to survive on very little money left over from paying high rents or high mortgages. I wonder when the minister tries to compare us to the rest of Australia if we are actually comparing apples to oranges, as opposed to apples to apples.
Let us move down the page; we are only on page 3. It says:
I am confident, over time, there will be housing options for all seniors which are appropriate and safe.
…
… provide an additional 44 units of seniors’ accommodation.
It will be interesting to find out how many people are on that waiting list. If the number of seniors who come into my office looking for accommodation, and the seniors’ meetings and forums I have been to, and I look around those rooms, there are many people out there wanting to obtain seniors’ accommodation. Many people have been in the Territory a long time and they may or may not be responsible for the predicament they are in, not owning a property or whatever, but there are people out there who, as seniors, still need a hand up from the community.
It says here:
- Recently, public housing wait times have received particular attention in the media. There has been the suggestion this is primarily due to housing stock being sold off. This notion is, quite frankly, simplistic, and in recent years, simply wrong.
Well it may be that in recent years they have not sold off as much stock; maybe they have actually woken up and realised, a couple of years ago, that they have a problem. Well, if you woke up a couple of years ago that you have a problem, then why are we not seeing urgent and emergency planning put in place to actually release some land?
Here we have a statement, and the figures are here - 2117 at the end of year 2007 - and the minister is saying: ‘In recent years we have not done that.’ Well, in recent years, if you are not selling off the property, maybe, perhaps, one could hope the minister has woken up, and previous ministers have woken up to the fact that - they have a problem. Yet, we still do not see any action.
We hear about plans, and we hear we have spent more money than anyone else - I might remind the Treasurer that money and expenditure is an input - it is not an outcome. Putting more money in does not necessarily equate to greater outcomes. It is about planning, and it is about leadership. It is about the direction you take your policies to actually give people a roof over their head. Quite frankly, we do not see too much of the action. A lot of planning, a lot of consulting, for instance, SIHIP - two years down the track and we do not even have a design. I do not know how they are going to solve the housing crisis; if they cannot deal with an emergency in two years, how long is it going to take to solve it?
The Treasurer very proudly says: ‘In the next five years we are going to release 6000 blocks of land’. Fantastic! The problem is the Chief Minister and the Treasurer are saying we need 1700 blocks just to keep pace. So, 6000 blocks in five years, - and the Chief Minister says we need 8500 - we are still going to be in dire straits in five years time; we are still going to be 2500 blocks of land behind the eight-ball.
Mr Bohlin interjecting.
Mr STYLES: Maybe the government’s plan now is to make it so expensive that everyone leaves. And if everybody leaves the Territory …
Mr Bohlin: That is one plan.
Mr STYLES: … you do not have a problem any more, because you have no people to house.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Excuse me, member for Sanderson. I ask the member for Drysdale to keep his comments to himself. The member for Sanderson is on his feet talking about an important issue. Thank you.
Mr STYLES: Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker. So, if we are going to boast proudly about 6000 blocks when we need 8500, I encourage the minister and the government to take a serious look at where they are taking the Territory and what they are doing about housing.
There are 16 pages of this statement, and I have only reached page 3; given extra time, I am sure we could stand here for hours and pick holes in this you could drive a Mack truck through.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, it might be good if the government actually had another look at some of the statements they have made in this, and at least try to do something for Territorians who are living in tents, living the back of motor cars, living in half-finished rooms under houses; and people who find themselves in dire straits as a result of policies of this government.
Mr HAMPTON (Local Government): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I wish to contribute to this most important statement. Listening to speakers on both sides of the House, it has been a really passionate and important issue members are expressing in the House today.
This week, housing has been the centre of attention in our parliament, not only in this afternoon’s debate on public housing waiting lists, but also the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program; housing in our remote regions of the Northern Territory, particularly Indigenous housing; also during Question Time; and the member for Goyder’s MPI on housing which was brought to the House this week. It certainly has been a topical issue.
I acknowledge it is an important issue, we have discussed it at great length and so we should, because it is probably right up there amongst one of the biggest issues and challenges we face in the Northern Territory. I also acknowledge the contributions from all members of the House.
My focus is on my personal experiences within the public housing system, but also on the way forward. I acknowledge that the minister, and the minister for Planning, and the member for Johnston have all focused on the way forward in understanding there is an issue, and huge waiting lists – and also acknowledge what the member Sanderson said. I have met with people in Alice Springs who have said to me the focus is not just public housing waiting lists, it is also finding housing and accommodation for staff, particularly in Alice Springs; and I acknowledge that is also an issue …
Mr BOHLIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I am sorry. This is a very important statement from your government and, unfortunately, there is not a quorum in the House.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Ring the bells. A quorum is present. Continue, Minister for Central Australia.
Mr HAMPTON: Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker. As I was saying, I have people come to my electorate office in Alice Spring and talk to me about their issues and the hardship they are facing in trying to find accommodation in Alice Springs to take up employment. We know what the challenges and the issues are: they are about social housing; SIHIP; remote housing; town camp accommodation, particularly in Alice Springs, which is such a topical issue as well; and it is also about the people who have come into Alice Springs to take up jobs and are looking for accommodation. I acknowledge that is a big issue for us.
We need to stop the blame game. Both sides of politics have failed in some regards in the past and, from our side, we could have done things better. The Minister for Business said we accept some of the blame for this in not planning for the appropriate release of land, and the roll-over of future housing. It is all on the public record - we have all made mistakes - and we need to focus on the way forward. In Alice Springs, we have the Planning for the Future Committee, which I co-Chair with our Mayor, Damien Ryan, and that has grown out of the planning forum held in June 2008, and the report which came out of that planning forum.
Turning back the clock a little, my time in public housing goes back to growing up at The Gap in Alice Springs. I recall looking through the archives online some time ago at the old Gap cottages back in the 1940s and 1950s, the first public housing built in Alice Springs which targeted many of the Indigenous families - the original Indigenous families of Alice Springs - then there was an issue in public housing. If you look at the old records in the archives there was something like 15 to 20 people in a house - it is not a new problem we face. Back then, in the 1940s and 1950s, my family was included with many of those large Indigenous families at The Gap cottages with 14 and 15 people per house. It is all there on the NT Archives website. So, it has been going around in circles, which is a reflection on all sides of politics, particularly our housing policies and our failure to plan. As the saying goes - a failure to plan, is a plan for failure.
For me, 1988 was my personal experience with public housing. Having been recently married with a growing family, I lived in public housing myself and my kids grew up in a public housing dwelling. The government at the time quite rightly, I believe, changed some of their rules for eligibility and brought in income and asset limits. It was around 1995 or 1996 when I had to make a very hard decision. At that point in time I was working in the CES and earning too much to live in public housing. It was a choice of: do I move out, or do I pay market rents in my current dwelling, or do I look elsewhere and buy a private home? My decision was to buy the house I was living in, and back in 1995 and 1996 there were probably another 40 families who made that decision; they were living in public housing dwellings and they had to buy the dwelling they were living in.
I believe the government of the time made the right decision and had to bring in those limits, because that is when the pressure became much heavier for governments; pressure was being placed on public housing way back then, and I believe that was a good choice by the government at the time.
I made the decision to buy the house I was living in, a public housing dwelling, and I am still there 18 years later. Many families who did take up that offer back in 1995-96 to buy their public housing dwelling are probably still there in Alice Springs. At the time, I was about 19 or 20, and it was really hard because we had the ATSIC home loans program and there was a myriad of forms and papers to go through to purchase your own home.
Now we have the Homestart program and there are many other home loans around. As a government, we need to make it easier for young families wanting to buy their own home, because I know through my own experience back in 1995-96 having to go through ATSIC and their home loans program, it was just a minefield of paperwork. It took something like 12 months for me to get approval; so I certainly understand, from a personal point of view. Public housing for me was very important, not only in the 1970s when I was brought up down in The Gap, but when I was raising my own family in a public housing dwelling in Sadadeen. Public housing is important and it is something that will be around for a long time and continue to provide an important part of people’s lives in the Territory.
One thing the Minister for Housing said that really did touch a chord with me was: today, public housing is very much social housing. While reflecting on what I said about how the needs in the Territory changing with staff accommodation and people with middle to higher incomes looking for accommodation, I really believe that is the thrust of it - it has become social housing and that is where the challenges are.
It has changed because, obviously, the demographics of the Northern Territory have changed. Today, in 2009, around 30% of our population is Indigenous, many from our remoter regions and towns throughout the Northern Territory who are now wanting to make their life in places like Alice Springs - and quite rightly so. So the demographics have changed, and that is why the focus of public housing has shifted to social housing.
Other statistics the minister mentioned was over 40% of public housing tenants are Indigenous, and about half of those on wait lists are also Indigenous. That is where the shift has been - urban drift - where many of our Indigenous people from remote communities are now making themselves at home in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Katherine, as well as Darwin. That has seen the shift of focus and has brought with it challenges for public housing.
As I said, I also acknowledge the issues around accommodation on town camps. We know the Alice Springs transformation plan is there with $100m to go towards building 85 new homes on those town camps. While we are on the public record, we support that, and we understand the challenges of that. And those challenges are currently in the High Court. This government certainly wants to the see the lives of those people in the town camps improve, and a very important part of that is building new homes for those town camp residents. That is a challenge. It is a great deal of money, and it is something this government really does want to see occur, and the lives of those town camp people improved particularly through housing.
In the three years I have been the local member for Stuart, I have had a number of representations from people at Ti Tree wanting to buy their own land and build their own homes on their own country. My colleagues know that I continually bang away about land release in Ti Tree and I will continue to do that because I know there are genuine Indigenous people, and people in Ti Tree who have worked in the public service, in the school, in the council office for 20 years or so, who would be able to go to a bank and get a loan because of their work history.
In our regional centres like Ti Tree, and in my electorate I probably have all of them - Pine Creek, Mataranka, Timber Creek - these regional centres are very important areas that need to grow. We need to lift our game in terms of releasing land in these regional centres to provide those opportunities, not only for Indigenous people, but the non-Indigenous people who live in those regional centres, to be able to buy their own land and homes and build their futures in those regional centres. We can focus on Darwin, Palmerston, fine, Alice Springs for sure, but we should not forget those regional centres.
As I said, from the planning forum held in Alice Springs in June last year we have a Planning for the Future Committee, of which I am co-Chair with our Mayor, Damien Ryan, and we also have the native titleholders represented by Darryl Pearce; business and industry represented by Julie Ross, Brenda Meaney and David Forrest, and we also have Fran Kilgariff, who is well-known to everyone in this House. It is a great mix of Central Australians, who really want to drive this report forward. There is a list of actions that we work on together every month and discuss ways forward, and we do put things up to the minister. It is a bottom-up approach and that is what we need to get these solutions through and get land released. As I said, I believe we can do better.
In terms of Alice Springs, it is a long time coming, and I acknowledge that. I have had many representations in my electorate office from people from all walks of life in Alice Springs saying they really do need land released, and it has to be affordable land, not just for the high end of town. There are many working class families who come to Alice Springs for a job who just cannot buy accommodation. As Minister for Central Australia, I acknowledge that and I understand the important work the committee is undertaking, and I will be working with my committee members to progress land release as quickly as we can, because that is really at the heart of our problems in Alice Springs.
When the Treasurer spoke about the budget she said in Budget 2009-10 a record $390m was delivered; a 92% increase on the previous year. We need to acknowledge that. This includes $23m for more public housing, and I will be making sure all of that money comes down the track to Alice Springs. Regarding more public housing, it really does rely on more land release and that is something that the Planning for the Future Committee is working on and driving forward with a bottom-up approach. In Operation Stimulus there is $60m for public and community housing which will go a long way but, once again, we need land released.
The planning committee has been working on the AZRI site, and in talking to the Treasurer I understand that the AZRI site will incorporate 15% affordable and social housing policies. That could provide, at this stage, around 180 new homes for affordable and public housing based on the development of about 1200 allotments. The proposed rezoning for AZRI will go out in November, and headwork studies will also be undertaken. I am pleased that work is progressing, particularly on that site. We all know about the Melanka developments in Alice Springs which are a good example of urban densification, and will provide around 100 units to fill that particular part of the market.
As I said, we need to provide more opportunities for young families to buy their own home and, obviously, land release is an important part of that, so they have more options. I understand the Homestart price point for Alice Springs is around $300 000, and I believe that is promising as well.
In terms of seniors’ accommodation, the Treasurer mentioned that part of Larapinta Stage 2 will see the seniors’ village accommodation developed, and that is certainly something I will keep my eye on. I have had many representations from seniors in Alice Springs about the need for more seniors’ accommodation. I know Loraine Braham in her time in this House talked about providing opportunities for seniors’ retirement villages, and that is something the Planning for the Future Committee has talked about: getting retirement village providers and developers to the committee to present to us what they may be able to offer. That type of market is certainly on our radar.
Talking about seniors, I acknowledge the positive effect the old Gillen House site has had on seniors’ accommodation. I believe there is something like 22 units there which have been built in the time of this government. Before the site was quite ugly, but now it is a fantastic addition to that part of town. I know some of the residents there and they are very happy with the amenities, and the overall accommodation and units are very nice and fit in well with that part of town; it is close to the bus stop and close to Flynn Drive, which is really important in planning, and we need to make sure those services are close, particularly for our senior residents.
I recall sometime ago the old Cawood Court flats in Alice Springs were all public housing dwellings, and the flats at Bloomfield Street; they were places where there were many issues. Cawood Court, on Nicker Crescent, was sold off some time ago, but they look really fantastic now and they have filled that gap in the market for units, and it was a good move to do that. The Bloomfield Street flats had a lot of problems, as well, which I am sure the member for Araluen would recall. I believe Housing at the time did some fantastic work in the design of the units and employing a house manager there - I do not know if it is fulltime anymore - and security as well. Part of that redevelopment had a place where it could be managed, and that is something we need to consider with a much of our public housing dwellings, because it really has made an impact on those flats on Bloomfield Street. They are a couple of examples, when we look at future planning and future public housing dwellings, we should look at that type of model.
Going back to the stimulus package, Stage 1, Mount Gillen Hostel on South Terrace and 9 Priest Street have been provided to Aboriginal Hostels to provide short-term accommodation to homeless people.
Mr GUNNER: Madam Speaker, I move that the member for Stuart be granted an extension of time, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr HAMPTON: Thank you. members. I noticed the other day Mount Gillen Hostel on South Terrace is still vacant; in Stage 1 of the stimulus package that has been identified as getting back on its feet, so I am certainly looking forward to that happening, and I understand Aboriginal Hostels will provide that service to that accommodation venue. The other one includes ASIAS; they are providing a transitional housing program for youth aged between 16 and 21 years who are at risk of homelessness, with four two-bedroom units on Priest Street. That is a welcome addition to the community of Alice Springs.
Under the stimulus package No 2 - I am sure the Minister for Housing mentioned this - we have 35 units for renal patients at risk of homelessness, and I believe that is one area where this government can hold its head up proudly because we have provided many more beds for renal patients in Alice Springs through the extra rooms at Topsy Smith Hostel on Lindsay Avenue, and also the extra units at Yeperenye Hostel. We have eight units on Goyder Street managed by the Salvation Army, which have been spoken about already in this debate, four apartments for public housing, and 24 units for short-term accommodation.
This is a huge issue and I acknowledge everyone’s contribution. I believe we should move on and see what we can do for the future. The need for housing has changed due to our population, particularly our Indigenous population and many of those Indigenous people becoming homeless. We need to lift our game. As Minister for Central Australia, I will be watching carefully the Planning for the Future Committee and the land releases, particularly at AZRI, ensuring that those sites, under the stimulus packages get up and running as soon as possible.
It is pleasing the minister recently issued a media release regarding rents not rising for the pensioners in the Territory because, in many public housing dwellings in Alice Springs, our seniors find it hard - my father struggles with the cost of living - and that will go along way in easing their pain.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will be relatively brief because so many issues have been raised on both sides of the Chamber, and I believe more of my colleagues would like to raise some issues also. I am talking from an Alice Springs perspective, and want to raise some issues that were not in the housing statement which, having considered it, I regard, for the most part, as an excuse why government has not done many things. However, I will not pursue that.
Government has talked about social housing and, in so many ways, there is nothing more social than housing. It is where people live, where friends and family come in and out. There is something decidedly social about housing. My concern, on behalf of my constituents, is those people in public housing who are problem tenants. Let me make it clear: as we well know, most public housing tenants are terrific, but there are some who are absolutely dreadful. Some of those people are my constituents and they affect other constituents of mine. Those constituents ring me up as their local member; many of them tearing their hair out, asking me what can possibly be done to get rid of the atrocious tenant next door or up the road. In Alice Springs, I suggest the stories are much worse than in Darwin. The things some of my constituents have to put up with are just awful, and I wish I could help them. Thank you - I see the member for Stuart nodding his head - I believe he does have an appreciation of the problems in my electorate and in other electorates in Alice Springs.
What was not included in this statement was the number of evictions there has been from public housing. I remember sometime ago I wrote to the then Housing Minister - perhaps 18 months ago or two years ago - and asked how many people had been evicted. From memory, the figure was remarkably low. That is just not good enough. I looked at the Department of Housing and Local Government website and I cannot see that there is a section on it – certainly not on the first page about housing. I suggest to government they make it easier, while always maintaining a balance of ensuring that tenants are not thrown out just because they happen to be bothering someone, however, we all know the tenants we are talking about; they are the problems and they make people’s lives a misery. I believe the department needs to tidy up the website and make it more accessible for people. If the department does not have it already, the minister should introduce a hotline for people to ring in and say: ‘I am at the end of my tether’. Sometimes these people need counselling they are so distressed.
As local members, of course, we say: ‘You have to do this and you have to do that’. We facilitate that; we help them write their letters and so on. I cannot speak more highly of the staff in Alice Springs. They are hard-working and terrific, but working in difficult circumstances. That is a given, we acknowledge that. But it has to be made easier for the people whose lives have been made more difficult by the problem tenants.
I would like the minister, in his reply, to tell us how many problem tenants have been evicted in Alice Springs. I remember the debate in February 2006 when the alcohol bill, which was one bill and was introduced cognate with the antisocial behaviour bill. Peter Toyne was Attorney-General, and Elliot McAdam was the Housing Minister. From memory, numerous press releases were issued, and both of those men thought this legislation they were bringing into the parliament just about addressed all of the problems - they reckoned it nailed it. In fact, Elliot McAdam said: ‘This legislation package tackles the problems of antisocial behaviour head-on’. He then went into some detail about Acceptable Behaviour Agreements.
I am fairly certain I have written to a previous Housing Minister asking how many Acceptable Behaviour Agreements have been issued since their introduction. I believe it was the member for Johnston who was Housing Minister. In a letter from him, again, the figure was remarkably low. It is not unlike the Parental Responsibility Agreement; it is really easy for governments to come into parliament, issue the press releases and the glossies saying: ‘We have this great strategy to tackle various problems’, and come up with these things called Acceptable Behaviour Agreements or Parental Responsibility Agreements, and so on. It is much more difficult for those agreements to come into play in a meaningful way, and I acknowledge that, but you have to make it work. You cannot let tenants off the hook, scot free, when they are impacting so terribly on the lives of their neighbours and other people in the street.
I remember again writing to the present Housing Minister, asking him or, from memory, I invited him to reconsider the legislation because, on balance, my view on behalf of my constituents who come to me, and we are their humble servants, it just was not working. It certainly was not working in the way it was intended when two good men, Elliot McAdam and Peter Toyne, came in here, presumably went through their internal party processes to get to the position, and I believe they were well meaning. We did have some problems with the legislation at the time when we made our views very well-known, but I am sad to say it seems to be the history of this government to get all fired up about something, fire everything off, and then walk away and it is up to local members such as myself to say it is not working. Then we just get really deafening silences.
I invite the minister to undertake a review of the antisocial behaviour bill; have a look himself how many Acceptable Behaviour Agreements have been issued Territory-wide, and what else can be done about problem public housing tenants, because it really just is not enough. I believe we do have to make eviction easier, and certainly make the process easier for people to contact the department. It is very tough for people who want to make a complaint; surely government can make it easier for them.
One final thing: some time ago, perhaps a few years ago, there was what is called a good neighbours policy. I would like the minister to advise the House on its status. Does it still exist? I remember reading it many years ago, and it sounded great. It declared that everyone had a right to the quiet, peace and enjoyment of their home, and it went on and espoused wonderful principles. I believe, if it still exists, it should be revisited because there is no point having a policy if it is not implemented and, if the policy is not working, any government worth its salt needs to go back to the drawing board and have another look at it. I invite the minister to review it.
In relation to one of the documents the minister tabled, ‘Region by dwelling size and wait times in months’, I was genuinely surprised. I knew the wait time was significant. Why? Because my constituents tell me. I did not have an appreciation, I am not embarrassed to say, that it was so significant. Region by dwelling size and wait times in months: one-bedroom non-pensioner, 58 months; one-bedroom, 35 months; two-bedrooms, 31 months; three-bedrooms, 41 months; four-bedrooms, 62 months. That is just horrendous. That is certainly nothing to be proud of - and I do not suggest the minister is, and I am sure he is not - you really need to do better. You have been in government for many years now and you must respond to the needs of those for whom you govern - all Territorians.
I will take this document back to my electorate office and when people contact me, I will tell them about the wait lists. Sadly for me, I am not able to look them in the eye and say: ‘Let me fix it’, because I am not in government. Having said that, I appreciate some of the difficulties and I know that tricks cannot happen overnight, and substantial change cannot happen overnight. However, you have had a significant period of time, and in that time you have had unprecedented amounts of money courtesy of the GST, never the sort of money the former government had; and government really should be doing much more and should have achieved much more.
My final point is, again, the statement and, as far as I can read, the tabled documents did not reveal how many public housing houses in the Territory are unoccupied. I would like them, in particular, for Alice Springs. I have recently written to the department. There is one house in my electorate in particular, in Van Senden Avenue, which I understand has been vacant for nearly two years. I am getting some more information on that, but perhaps the minister - I know he will have much to get through in reply - could assist with that. How many are unoccupied? We really need that data. Presumably government has it, but we would like to see it because if you have a number of buildings that do not have anyone in them for whatever reasons, you need to address those reasons. I understand, in relation to this particular house, it is a maintenance issue. I know it is hard to get a plumber or a sparky, and I speak from personal experience, but it cannot be possibly be that hard to get the appropriately qualified tradespeople to come in and do the work.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, they are the comments I wanted to make in relation to the statement. I know perhaps I am coming from a different angle but I thought it was important, especially given the references to social housing; really, all of us have a responsibility to do what we can to ensure our fellow Territorians have decent housing, because all the people in this room do.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the statement. As I mentioned before in this House, I was born in Alice Springs and grew up in the Territory, often in public housing. I went to numerous schools up and down the track, public and private. I really enjoyed the member for Stuart’s contribution earlier about growing up in public housing as that is the personal experience I have had as well. It is one reason why I do believe it is so important to salt and pepper public housing through future developments, through every community. That is a really important responsibility for government to make sure we do.
That is also a reason I welcome the new policy we have of making sure in every release of Crown land we include a portion of housing for social housing and affordable housing. That is a really important decision to make, to ensure we are incorporating social housing and affordable housing, all those mixes, into every development we turn off. That was a critical decision by this government because it will mean ongoing new stock for Territory Housing.
As we discussed at some length over the course of these sittings, the Territory population has increased markedly in recent years. We have grown at double the forecast rate, and our population is increasing. That has created extra demand for housing, there is no doubt about that. There is a lot of stress out there: many people suffering from mortgage stress, balancing the budget, the incomes to bills, even trying to find a place they can afford in the area they want to live. So there is a need for social housing, and there is a need for affordable housing.
In many respects the market now has a need for a social housing component, a need for a defined, affordable housing component; and the general property market in its own right. There was a time when public housing was essentially workers’ housing and, in many respects, that is what the member for Stuart was talking about earlier. It was much more prevalent and many more people lived in it, and the income caps were much broader. It has now come into a more refined focus as social housing. The Wirrina units which we knocked down were first built for workers, and so we have to find ways to address the affordable housing problem in the Territory at the moment, and we have announced we will be creating an affordable housing rental company in the Territory.
There are a number of different affordable housing rental models around the country, so it is not a new idea, but it is a need which emerged in other areas to ensure, often in the inner city, that housing which meets the needs of people on low to middle incomes is put into the market so they have premises they can afford and close to where they work.
I have seen different models in Brisbane and Sydney. They let their properties to people at a percentage of the market rate. The ones I saw set their market rate at 75%, and I understand under the tax laws you can set it at 80% below. Sometimes they went below that, depending on the property, but essentially their business plan was 74.9%. They had income caps for singles and for couples, and they ensured the rent they were collecting did not put stress on the tenant in terms of their total income. They were charging a higher rent than Territory Housing would charge, and that ensures more funding into the system for repairs and maintenance, and they are looking forward to further developments. I know that they were often approached; private developers would come to the affordable housing company and say: ‘We are looking at building on this block and we would like to have you involved from the start - 15%, 30%, 40% development you get, we have the rest.’ Obviously, for the private developer they were guaranteeing presales, but those mixed tender partnerships were happening actively and often separate from government. Once the affordable housing company was established they formed business relationships in the private sector company to meet those goals.
They recognised there was the need to provide housing in the inner city, and the ones I saw were in Sydney and Brisbane, and they were doing it at an affordable rate. It was quality stock they provided and it was very impressive. They worked hard to find savings in the construction, but they did not do it at the cost of quality. They were very impressive looking developments and they looked like any other private construction. You would not see them and say: ‘That is clearly social housing or affordable housing.’ You would look at it and think it was an ordinary unit.
There are several ways they went about that and I am sure there are many ways you can do these things, but the ones I saw these were the efforts they made to reduce costs. They often built units which were slightly smaller than the private market. I looked at units available on the private market and often there was wasted space and often the square metres were not used. So, when they built the units they were slightly smaller than those on the ordinary market, but everything fitted: the dining table, the couch, the outdoor furniture, the fridges, the beds. The tenants took great pride in their units and were very happy to let us look through, and you could see that everything fitted. They had everything they needed, but in a smaller space than might normally be built. They were quality units, cleverly designed, smart and simple layouts, and they built them for less. And that was one reason how they built them for less - the size of the floor plan and also lower ceilings, which I did not really notice, but the Chief Minister might, he is taller than me - they had ceiling fans and I felt very comfortable in the units with a lower ceiling. I take the advice of the experts - they built it with a lower ceiling, and it was cheaper.
They also had innovative approaches to car parking. I am not sure if Darwin City Council would be happy to get on board with this, but they built their units on public transport routes and they had a good look at their client base; not all of them own cars, so rather than have clearly assigned car parks per unit, they had general car parking available at the unit complex for tenants and guests, and they found they did not actually fill all the car parking spaces; people basically park where they can when they come into the complex. The one I looked at had about 45 units and about 17 car parking bays or something like that. So they found …
Mr BOHLIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I do not want to interrupt the member for Fannie Bay, but I draw your attention to the state of the House again; and it is their statement.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells. A quorum is present.
Mr GUNNER: They made different decisions about car parking space in the complexes, depending on where they were located and what public transport routes they were on; however, they found by reducing the number of car parks they saved a considerable amount of money, and also had more space for units.
They also constructed the units so air-conditioning is unnecessary. The member for Johnston spoke about this in his contribution, and I know many people in the Territory like air-conditioning; I, for one, can live without it and often do not use it at all during the Wet Season. I have a house with good air flow, and often do not need to use the air-conditioner. But some people do. The houses I saw in Brisbane did not have air-conditioning but they were very well constructed and the wind fairly raced through. You actually had some trouble keeping the doors open. They were very well designed and I am sure it has much to do with location; some locations do not get breezes. But they build them without air-conditioning, and that is one effort they made to turn out cheaper units.
As I have discussed before in this House, the first project for the affordable housing rental company we are creating will be the public housing redevelopment on Parap Road. I drove in this morning past Wirrina on the corner of Parap Road and Gregory Street and that two-storey unit complex has gone; there are a couple of mounds of rubbish which the demolition company, R.U.B. Pty Ltd, appear to be taking away at the moment. The demolition is ahead of schedule; I thought it would be happening in a month or two, but we found new homes for the tenants faster than expected.
It is always an anxious period of time when you are moving to a new home, or you are not quite sure where you are moving to and a number of tenants came to see me and my electorate officer looking for assistance and reassurance. We were very happy to work with them through that time. They all found homes in the areas they wanted, so it was a good outcome. We still get a few people drop into the office, which is excellent, and some of them still drop into Parap Fine Foods and keep in touch with Rene and Paul and the staff. Those who wanted to stay in the local community, everyone I have spoken to, have stayed in and around the area.
I hosted a number of meetings in the Wirrina complex. I went there a number of times with Clare Martin, the former member for Fannie Bay, who set up a barbecue and cooked up a few sausages and had a casual chat with the tenants about their issues and ideas, just staying in touch. I took a leaf from the member for Nightcliff’s book and started taking pizzas instead. I found that was much easier than lugging a barbecue around, and very popular, I might add, with the tenants. The Minister for Housing came a few times as well, which the tenants much appreciated, and they discussed general concerns they had about the complex and, obviously, around the time of change, finding a new home in a new location, and what was happening on-site.
Talking to the tenants, visiting the place and seeing it over a period of time, there is no doubt in my mind the model of high density public housing does not work. I have lived in that local community for a long time and I do not believe that model works. The building was also past its use-by date and was built many years ago now. We were talking to the people demolishing it, and there was some debate about which year it was built. I thought the late 1950s, but the bloke who was knocking it down said he thought it was built in the early 1960s – anyway, it was past its use-by date.
I was down there once on a beautiful Dry Season day and the area in the middle of the horse shoe design, which was common ground, was stifling and I was drenched in sweat. It was very badly designed with no breeze or ventilation through that common area. I was able to encourage a few people to come down for a pizza, but I do not believe anyone, on a voluntary basis, would spend time in that common area. It was a very poorly designed complex, it was past its use-by date, so we knocked it down, and we are moving into a new era of Territory Housing.
We are ahead of schedule on our promise from the last election, and we are moving on from a failed housing model. There is no doubt in my mind the housing model at Wirrina does not work - and not just at Wirrina - it does not work at Kurringal, Shiers Street and so on. The member for Goyder, the shadow minister for Housing, has made it clear these sittings that the CLP does not support the demolition of Wirrina and they want to rebuild it as it was - 100% public housing. That is their policy, which I call a proven failure as a housing model, and I do not believe it is the right idea. What we are doing right now is the right idea, trying to find a better way for people to live. However, that is the CLP’s plan, their policy, and they are allowed to have it, obviously - I just disagree with it.
They have raised in this House and in the media, quite reasonably in some instances, issues which have emerged from Territory Housing unit complexes - as I said, I do not believe these housing complexes provide a great living environment. They have raised the issues, and that is fair enough. I thought the members for Fong Lim and Port Darwin might have agreed with our decision that these complexes do not work and we need to find a better way. However, the CLP policy position is that those units do work and that housing model is the best way: do not knock down Wirrina; leave Shiers Street as it is; leave Tomaris Court as it is, and so on. I find that perplexing; I do not agree with that position and I find it quite extraordinary. We believe we need to find a better way to house Territory Housing tenants. The housing conditions in these complexes are not good enough.
We believe the better housing model is the mixed tenure model where you combine affordable housing, social housing, and private housing. That is what we are moving forward with on the site of Wirrina. We are about to enter the expressions of interest stage, and I expect a large number of people to be interested and a large range of views put forward. It is a big site and it will include the six town houses which were behind Wirrina and the house on the other side of Drysdale Street behind Wirrina, so it will be a large site. Once it is finished there will probably be more people living on that site than there is now - it will have a higher density, which makes sense to me.
Wirrina is on a main road, Parap Road. It is on a public transport route, it is across the road from shops and is the right place to do that type of development. I believe it will be a very positive development for the local community, for Territory Housing tenants, for the new affordable housing rental company and the people who will move in there - low income earners, middle income earners, and anyone in the private market who decides to invest in that location
After Wirrina there is further development. Three more public housing complexes behind Wirrina along Parap Road, which many people do not realise: there is Somerville Gardens at 10 Parap Road, and the Pitscheneder complex which we are looking at redeveloping and have already flagged for seniors and looking at different options for seniors. We have built many seniors villages in the past around Darwin and they work very well, but it is always good, where you can, to provide people with different choices. We are looking at building units on that site to provide variety in the market and different options for seniors and Territory Housing tenants. Not everyone wants a garden, and that provides a different option and, I believe, a very welcome option. I am confident Territory Housing, given what they have done in the past, will be able to deliver a quality product at Pitscheneder.
The Kurringal Seniors’ Village is just down the road and is a fantastic little community. I try to get down there monthly for a community barbecue; everyone brings a plate, throws a few dollars in, and you get some quality food. I do not organise that; I enjoy local community barbecues, but I cannot take credit for that. It is a really good Friday night, and I look forward to that when that is coming up and I am free to get down there. They have developed an Open Garden scheme in the last couple of years, and I remember last June shovelling nine or 10 trailer loads of top soil at the weekend. They take great pride in their gardens, and the Open Garden scheme over the Saturday and Sunday was fantastic. I went again this year and they are talking about taking next year off to give the gardens a bit of a break, to give themselves a bit of a break, and then opening up the Open Garden scheme again in 2011. I encourage all members to go out there; it is a fantastic community.
Accommodation for seniors is a priority for many reasons: with the growing seniors’ population we need to provide more seniors’ public housing to free up three or four-bedroom Territory Housing homes for families. I sincerely believe we can do that, and the Pitscheneder complex is part of the Parap Road redevelopment.
The other project going on in my electorate at the moment is the Southern Cross Care Retirement Village. With 85 aged care beds and 85 homes between the flexi-care apartments and the independent live-in townhouses, it will be an excellent development, and Stage 1 will start soon. I commend all the players in that project and it has certainly sparked a great deal of interest in the community. A large number of people have come into my office very interested in the project, and many have put their names on the wait list.
What I did not mention is the number of people who called my office and called Southern Cross Care saying they have heard about this retirement village happening at the old Waratah Oval at Fannie Bay, and they want to move back to Darwin to live in Fannie Bay in the retirement village; and they were quite excited. For whatever reason, they are living down south at the moment and are looking at their retirement options and, instead of people in Darwin moving down south to retire, we have people down south looking to retire to Darwin to live in Fannie Bay. That is fantastic, and is a reflection of the quality of Fannie Bay, Parap and Stuart Park as great places to live. People in the south are now looking to retire and move north, which is fantastic.
We have a positive plan in my electorate to address many of the housing needs we have in the Territory - social housing, affordable housing, and seniors’ housing.
Madam Speaker, I commend the statement to the House.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Madam Speaker, I welcome the statement because it gives us an opportunity to talk about public housing and Territory Housing, not just in Alice Springs, but Tennant Creek, Katherine and Darwin. It is something this parliament should talk on a regular basis.
About 10 or 15 years ago, ABS had data which showed an increase in the number of people from the bush moving into towns like Alice Springs, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Darwin. The government said they really did not pay any attention to the increase of populations in Darwin, Alice Springs and Katherine and, I guess, that is why we have this lack of housing for people.
If you go around Alice Springs you will see the homeless in the creeks, in the Todd River, up in the hills around Alice Springs, as you have here in Darwin in the long grass and in buildings in the city. It is really sad when in a young country, a rich country like Australia, we have ourselves in a situation where we have people with mental illness, people in poverty, people who are struggling, living on our streets. For a rich country, for a Territory which is new and small, we should never have put ourselves into this situation where our people are struggling.
One of the questions I would like the minister to answer is: in Alice Springs you had what was called Aboriginal Housing based out of Territory Housing, and early this year Aboriginal Housing closed. One of the things that Aboriginal Housing did was collect money from Indigenous people who were living in Territory Housing and put it into a bank account so that these people could use their own money for the maintenance of their houses. So if a drunken relative came one night and smashed a window or bumped into the gate, they would use their money out of Aboriginal Housing to fix the houses, rather than going to Territory Housing. It would be very interesting to hear from the minister why Aboriginal Housing was closed down. At this time, when we have a huge increase in the number of Indigenous people in towns like Alice Springs, we need a social policy within Territory Housing. I do not believe they have the capacity, at the moment, to understand how people live in Territory Housing.
Some of my earlier dreams in Territory Housing were in Gnoilya Street and Standley Crescent and it has really given us some opportunities, but we have moved on from there. I believe why we get ourselves stuck is because there is really no plan within Territory Housing to have a look, case-by-case, where those people live when they come to apply for housing. I know there are people who live in homelands 15 km, 20 km, or 30 km out of Alice Springs, who have a home out there built by the federal government because they are classified as homelands and also hold Territory Housing houses in Alice Springs. This clogs up the system for people who really need housing in Alice Springs for someone who has a house on a homeland 15 km or 20 km away, to then be given another house in Alice Springs. That is something we really need to look at; we really need to scrutinise people when they apply for houses.
One of the things I want to get to as well is antisocial behaviour; I know the member for Araluen spoke about that. I live in the member for Braitling’s area, and you heard about this last year and the year before - Saltwell Street and Lindavale Drive is just hectic - because Territory Housing has lumped every Aboriginal person who applies for Territory Housing in Alice Springs out to Larapinta. It has really degraded that area. We need social housing, we need private housing, and we need the two to get on. At the moment Larapinta is the hot spot because of the inability of Territory Housing to spread people out equally across Alice Springs. There is a whole influx of my people living in one area causing all types of grief to their neighbours, to shop owners and to people simply walking their dogs or walking with their children in the parks. I believe we have to get away from lumping people in one area and have a plan within the department which understands the town, understands the social problems we have in the town, and spreads all the people equally across the town so we are living as good neighbours, like the member for Araluen said, looking after each other and making sure we support each other. That is certainly not currently happening in Alice Springs.
Another issue I wanted to talk about is seniors’ accommodation. As the Minister for Central Australia said, for years Loraine Braham spoke in here about a seniors’ village in Alice Springs, and we are still waiting for our seniors’ village in Alice Springs. As I said in my statement on Monday, you have a lady with dementia sitting down in the creek; you have an amputee crawling around underneath the bridge in the river in the heart of Alice Springs - I certainly hope he is still there when parliament meets in November in Alice Springs so the government can see him crawling round in the creek because he cannot use his wheelchair and he depends on drunken relatives to get him up to hard ground so he can sit there and wait for them.
It is very unfair that people, no matter what their colour, who have mental illness, amputations and dementia struggle and suffer in a very rich country like Australia, and specifically in the Northern Territory. It should be a huge concern to us, not as politicians, but as human beings. These people are someone’s uncle, someone’s auntie, someone’s dad or grandparents; and I have seen children with these people, as well.
I will finish up by encouraging the government to really have a look at a social inclusion plan in Territory Housing and, hopefully, engaging Aboriginal Housing to be part of Territory Housing so it is taking the initiative and the direction to work with Indigenous people who live in Territory Housing in Alice Springs. They were doing a very good job; they were talking to people about antisocial behaviour, keeping their yards clean, keeping their houses clean, and making sure those people were putting money aside to keep up their own maintenance.
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Madam Speaker, quite frankly, I have had a gutful of this nonsense. We come here today, everyone knows about all the problems in this joint, and these guys have the hide, the audacity, the absolute gall to come in here with a statement about public housing and saying how committed they are.
First line of the minister’s speech is: ‘The government is committed to housing Territorians.’ Well, what a load of absolute nonsense! The government is doing everything they can not to house Territorians. They have sat for two years now on $672m for probably some of the most disadvantaged Australians in this country. Have they got their act together and built a house or two? Not one single one, and they have the audacity to come in here and tell us how committed they are to housing Territorians. Well, it is an absolutely appalling situation where they sit on $672m for two years and cannot build one single house.
I am not going to go on too much about SIHIP; the member for Macdonnell has spoken about it, the member for Braitling and a number of other members have spoken at length about SIHIP. Everyone in the country knows this government’s handling of SIHIP has turned into a complete farce, and it is an absolute national disgrace. It is right up the with the Little Children Are Sacred report, which also highlighted what a disgrace this government is.
The minister said they recognise they have some challenges because people have moved to the Territory in the last 10 years, the population has grown, urban drift has increased, and people are getting older. Goodness me, blind Freddy could have told you the population is ageing. I remember when I was in the superannuation industry in the early 1990s people were talking then about the ageing population; that is more than 20 years ago. Here we are, it is just dawning on this government that people are getting older in the Northern Territory, and they cannot plan for that for some reason or other.
We sat in Question Time today and heard excuse after excuse from the Minister for Health why our waiting lists for elective surgery are getting longer and longer. Every other mendicant Labor state in this country has the same problems. He said we are doing better than Tasmania and the ACT; well, that means we are doing worse than Queensland where they have Doctor Death and Goss with his old mate who is now who is the Prime Minister. They call him Doctor Death too, because of all the hospitals he closed in Queensland, and the nurses and doctors he sacked and put out of work. The health system in Queensland is an absolute disgrace.
We saw a Four Corners program only a week or so ago which shone a spotlight on the system of government in New South Wales. New South Wales is on its knees - absolutely broke - but they have a better health system than we have here. I made a bit of a jibe in Question Time saying I am surprised the minister did not compare us to Zimbabwe or some Middle Eastern countries, and say we have a better health system than there. However, all this is a backdrop to the fact this government, over the last eight or so years, has received a windfall of money, an additional amount of over $1.2bn - $1200m – more than they expected to get. In fact, in the last eight years, revenue into the Northern Territory government has doubled - yet, things get worse.
Mr CONLAN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells.
Mr Conlan: I honestly cannot believe the government cannot form a quorum. This is ridiculous.
Madam SPEAKER: Resume your seat, member for Greatorex!
Ms Lawrie: Have you heard of an empty vessel? That is what …
Madam SPEAKER: Deputy Chief Minister, cease interjecting.
Mr Conlan: You are the Belinda Neal of the Northern Territory parliament.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order! A quorum is present.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It is interesting to hear the member for Karama firing up yet again. My colleague described her as the Belinda Neal of the Northern Territory parliament - an empty vessel that makes the most noise - because the Treasurer has a great many problems organising the finances for the Northern Territory; and it is the work the Treasurer does which has seen the $1.2bn windfall squandered. Whilst revenue has doubled, it seems we are getting less and less for our money. What a failure the member for Karama is. This is the same person who described her own electorate as a war zone ...
Ms Lawrie: No, I did not.
Mr TOLLNER: What a disgusting situation when the Treasurer of the Northern Territory describes her own electorate as a war zone. However, I digress, Madam Speaker.
This week we heard the story of 70 demountables shipped to the Northern Territory as part of the intervention from the Woomera Detention Centre. They were shipped to Alice Springs to provide emergency accommodation for people as part of the intervention and organised by the Commonwealth government. The only thing the Northern Territory government had to do was find a place to locate those demountables. We are going through the worst housing crisis the Territory has ever faced, mainly due to lack of planning, poor planning, and the fact these guys could not organise a chook raffle in a pub – and that is putting it politely. In any case, 70 demountables sitting in Alice Springs for well for three years gathering dust, not located anywhere, just sitting in a park and lo and behold, what happens? The Commonwealth says: ‘If you guys do not need them, we will take them.’ So they have gone there this week to collect those demountables, and guess where they are using them? They are going to use them in detention centres for boat people, because Kevin Rudd relaxed Australia’s immigration laws and practically encouraged illegal immigrants into this country to the point now where they need to take 70 demountables which were for Indigenous people in major disadvantage to house illegal immigrants. What a shameful, shameful situation.
When you look at public housing, what has the Labor government done there? Admittedly, I agree with the Minister for Housing, the previous government did sell off houses; it sold off more houses than it built, but that pales into complete insignificance in comparison with this government. This government has sold off more than 2000 public housing dwellings - what a shameful situation. We now have a situation where the waiting list for public housing has more than 2700 people on it, with a minimum four year wait. This plays out terribly right across the Northern Territory, because we have people living in car parks, living in tents, living rough, the likes of which we have never, ever seen.
We have always had a problem in Darwin and some of the regional areas with itinerants, but the way the itinerant population has grown under this government has to be seen to be believed; there are itinerants everywhere. The car park for my electorate office most nights has cars parked where people are sleeping; their washing is strung between cars, simply due to a lack of proper accommodation in the Northern Territory.
Antisocial behaviour abounds in public housing locations - drunkenness, the most disgusting behaviour you can imagine occurs in some of these places, and what is the government’s response? Well, they knocked down a big block of units in Parap with no thought to where these people were going to go; but it had to go because it was impacting negatively on the member for Fannie Bay. That is the only reason they demolished those units and, the fact is, those people are now turning up in other places.
In my electorate, in the area of Reynolds Court - Madam Speaker, I am sure you would be aware because the other side of that street is in your electorate – there is a wonderful seniors’ retirement village, you could describe it. There are some wonderful people. I heard the Minister for Business talking earlier about the wonderful way people keep their gardens, and this place is an exemplar of that. These people work hard and diligently on their gardens, nothing is out of place, and you could not find a nicer group of seniors anywhere in the Northern Territory; and I am sure you would agree with that statement, Madam Speaker.
A couple of weeks ago, one of those people passed on and the unit became vacant. They shipped a man in there from the Wirrina Flats in Parap. The man is in a wheelchair and has a mental disability. Every night he is drunk and he has a team of hangers-on like you would not believe. All of sudden, that quiet little housing estate has become a nightmare for the residents there. And this is not just occurring there; it is occurring in a range of other places very similar to it.
In my electorate there is a big block of Housing Commission units in Runge Street, and another big block in Shiers Street. These places spew antisocial behaviour throughout the surrounding suburbs, and it is quite disgusting what some people do. I have gone all through the statement the minister has put out, and I have seen nothing in there which says how the government is curtailing, or trying to even stop, the antisocial behaviour in these public housing units.
Mr Bohlin: They have lost the war.
Mr TOLLNER: They have lost the war. My view is if you want to live and carry on like an animal, move out to the scrub where the animals live. Decent, civilised human beings should not have to put up with the disgusting behaviour of a minority of these people. It is just not right. I would like to ask the minister how many tenants he has evicted this month, or in the last six months, or in the last year or last five years. I bet it is not too many. There is not a Housing Commission block of units in the Territory where you do not see trouble and strife wherever you go.
Most of these places have alcohol warning signs all over them saying they are alcohol-restricted areas. I put it to you, minister, you say you go to these places; go there any time during the day and tell me whether people are sitting under trees drinking. I tell you right now, it happens in every single one of these places. What do the authorities do about it? Absolutely nothing. The minister presides over this type of nonsense and seems to think it is all right. The reason we know he thinks it is all right is because the guy has the gall to come into this place and make the dodgy statements he makes. It is an absolute disgrace.
Nowhere in these places are people being evicted - nowhere. I tell you what, if I rent a unit in the private sector, and most real estate businesses have a property management arm, if I rent a unit through one of these and I carry on like the tenants of Housing Commission places do - before you blink, you are booted out. There is no way known a private owner will have these animals housed in their places. The minister does not even acknowledge this sort of behaviour happens; and does not acknowledge people are living in terror.
At the Shiers Street block of units only a few months ago, A Current Affair came up here and described them as the worst Housing Commission units in Australia. What an indictment on the government. I see the minister sitting over there chuckling, and thinking: this is all fine. He knows at the back of his mind it is not really the worst place, because there are plenty of other places in the Territory which are much worse. He knows it, and I know it. I watched A Current Affair and saw the way they portrayed this place, and guess what? It was pretty damned accurate.
Before they did the story that day, I was standing there with a gentleman who lives in that block of units, and the A Current Affair presenter asked me: ‘Do you think there is any point us keeping a film crew here tonight? Do you reckon there might be an incident?’ I said: Look, mate, I don’t know, I suppose there is a 50/50 chance.’ The old bloke who lives in there looks at me and says: ‘Go away, Dave, you are bloody dill. Every night something happens in here. Every single night I can guarantee we will have the police around here, every second night there is an ambulance here, and once a week we will have the fire brigade.’ Sure enough, A Current Affair decides to hang around to get a bit of footage, and what do they see? Whole places getting smashed up, and a bloke hacked up with a machete. Incidentally, the same fellow who only a few months later passed on, the Housing minister had his 14-year-old daughter callously kicked out of that block of units. He can kick out a 14-year-girl, but he cannot kick out people who throw TVs out of units, throw fridges out of units, who smash in doors, who write graffiti all over buildings, who urinate, defecate in the stairwells – no, no, it is all too hard – but he will throw a 14-year-old girl out in the street. It is just appalling, absolutely appalling.
Mr CONLAN: Madam Speaker, I call your attention to the state of the House, once again, please.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells. A quorum is present.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It is good to see some people on the other side are interested in hearing someone else’s problems here in the Northern Territory.
Madam SPEAKER: I ask you to withdraw that comment, bearing in mind you are not supposed to comment on the presence or absence of members.
Mr TOLLNER: I was not, Madam Speaker. I just said I am glad to see there are some members in here who are interested in hearing about the housing problems we are having here in …
Dr BURNS: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker, it is the presence or absence.
Mr CONLAN: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker. The member for Fong Lim made no reference to anyone being present or absent. He simply said it is great to see people are here to listen to him.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Greatorex, resume your seat, please. Member for Fong Lim, you have the call; continue your comments through the Chair, please.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I know you were hanging off every word. As I say, what goes on in these commission units is absolutely appalling, and the most vile behaviour I believe any of us can imagine. I get into these places on a regular basis talking constituents, and it is terrible the lifestyles …
Mr CHANDLER: Madam Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order 77, I move that the member be given an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and member for Brennan, and all those on the other side who supported that call.
The people who live in these places have to put up with horrendous conditions. I heard stories about people whose kids cannot come home in the afternoon from school for fear of what is going to happen to them in these blocks of units. There is a man in that Shiers Street block of units who tells me quite often his daughter will not come back until after dark because she has to hide and sneak her way into the place for fear that in daylight someone will see her and come down and assault her. I have heard of stories of people who sleep with hammers under their pillows, with spear guns, with all types of weapons for fear they will be broken into and bashed.
For us, in this place, that sort of scene is unimaginable, but for these people it is a very real threat and it happens on a regular basis. They have a real fear, and a real reason for the fear they will be broken into and bashed. And what is the government doing about it? Has the government stood up and said: ‘Right, we are going to reform the way these places are managed. We are going to come in here with legislations which make it easier for us to evict problem tenants?’ As I say, if these people want to live like animals they should do it out in the scrub where the animals live. That is where they should be, not in a civilised society. I do not believe we should be showing much heart to a bunch of people who get drunk, smash up public property, urinate and defecate in stairwells, smash other people’s motor cars, throw fridges and televisions out the window, because they do not deserve it - they do not deserve it one bit.
Public housing should be seen as a privilege, not a right. I know there are people out there who are suffering, and who have copped all sorts of problems in life, to whom the privilege of public housing should be extended. However, there are other people in those places from whom that privilege should be withdrawn. To me, that makes perfect sense.
Going back to that Shiers Street block of units, where the minister so callously evicted a 14-year-old girl onto the streets. At 5.15 pm that afternoon, I received a phone call from one of the tenants ...
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member is asserting the minister himself was a party to these proceedings, and any reasonable person would know that is not the case.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Fong Lim, I would like you to continue, but just bear that in mind.
Mr TOLLNER: Put it this way: someone in the minister’s employ …
Dr Burns: Who the minister is responsible for.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr TOLLNER: … who the minister is responsible for and wears the ultimate responsibility, had this kid turned out onto the street at somewhere around 5 pm, because I received the phone call at 5.15 pm saying: ‘Come down to this block of units’ - no reason given. The person just said to me: ‘Come down to these block of units and see what these mongrels have done’. I get there and a 14-year-old girl is sitting there with a whole heap of bags, outside a block of units at around 5.30 pm.
Contrary to what the minister has alleged in this place, the first phone call I made was to Territory Housing. However, it being 5.30 pm, interestingly enough, there was no one about. The next set of phone calls I made was to the minister’s own office, thinking: I can understand a bunch of public servants knocking off before 5.30 pm, that is quite understandable; their hours of work do not extend to 5.30 pm, but as sure as God made little apples, there would be someone around to take a phone call in the minister’s office. But, alas, no, it must have been one of the few days in the year where everyone left the office by 5.30 pm.
I then contacted someone in the Opposition Leader’s office and explained the situation, and they started to work the phones. Around 6.30 pm, we managed to get onto Family and Community Services - a 24-hour, 1800 number. Contrary to what the minister told the parliament, these people were not even aware this girl had been evicted. They knew the girl well, but they were not aware she did not have a place to stay. What happened then? The minister accused me that it was all grandstanding - no concerns for the child - does not come in here and explain why this child was turned out, and how many other similar instances had occurred, and what changes to his internal departmental policy he has made. No, he accused me of grandstanding because I had the audacity to contact the media.
Of course, I admit it, I did call the media. I called the media because nothing seems to happen in this place until the media gets hold of it; then, all of a sudden, the whole joint seems to go into damage control mode - complete and utter damage control mode. I am surprised it took so long, but at 10.30 pm or 11 pm the police turn up to the block of units wondering who kidnapped the kid. This is the minister who said he cannot understand why I contacted the media. He seems to believe I should have contacted the police, as if he suggested some type of crime had occurred. My understanding was it was Territory Housing who kicked the kid out, and they must have had some reason. I do not believe sooling the police onto Territory Housing was the right way to go. In any case, maybe I should have called the police. The fact was, the police turned up at 10.30 at night looking for the kidnapper. What a ridiculous situation. How coordinated is this government and their departments? It is absolutely appalling.
Public housing is a disgrace in the Northern Territory, but it is not only the disgrace this minister has to his name. Territorians suffer regular blackouts. We are coming into the Wet Season now, and it will be interesting to see what circumstances occur in relation to electricity in the Northern Territory in this coming Wet Season. I hope it is much better than it has been in the Dry Season. The minister’s response to all these blackouts is telling people to buy a generator - go and buy a generator. What a silly response! The price of generators has gone up in the Northern Territory because no one can trust the power system.
Not only is he the minister for blackouts, but he is also the minister who is now trying to restrict hard-working public servants having a decent pay increase; and that goes back to the Treasurer we have here, because the Treasurer has squandered the Territory’s money and now realises she cannot afford to pay the public servants a decent pay increase which would bring them into line with the Consumer Price Index. But no, public servants now have to take a pay cut, in real terms, because of this Treasurer’s failure to manage money properly.
Dr Burns: You were going to slash the jobs; that is what your leader wanted to do.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr TOLLNER: Well, that is absolute rubbish. The fact is, this is a shambolic government; there are so many shambolic ministers here to go through in just a 30 minute presentation, but one thing is for certain, the Housing Minister must go, and anyone with decency or common sense would get rid of him. Unfortunately, we have a Chief Minister who is weak, who is only hanging on by a thread, and who is desperate to hold government and knows he has nothing left in the cupboard – nothing - so Territorians have to suffer this fool for as long as his dodgy deal is maintained, and that is a poor indictment of the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I am at my wits end. As I said at the start of this speech, I have had a gutful of this nonsense, of listening to the absolute trash the minister comes in here with. It is sickening, particularly when you take it back to the real lives of real people out there.
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, I would like to talk about two particular couples in my constituency, and I will mention only their suburb as they have asked not to be further identified. I will talk firstly of a young couple with two small children and another one on the way, who visited my office complaining about their neighbours in a Territory Housing tenancy in Driver. The wife was distraught, and she fought back tears through the first half of our meeting. These are very unassuming people, they are not dramatically out there in either way, but this lovely lady, in the later half of her pregnancy, with two kids in tow, could hardly hold back her tears.
Territory Housing is well aware of the complaints from this couple. In response, they have conducted neighbourhood surveys, and are currently in the process of conducting a second neighbourhood survey after our complaints to them.
A member: To be sure, to be sure.
Mr BOHLIN: To be sure, to be sure - a very good comment. They have been involved with the Antisocial Behaviour Officer who conducted mediation sessions - with no real results. Further, Territory Housing officers, on a recent visit told this couple their complaints were not worth complaining about. The department which is supposed to help our people said their complaints are not worth complaining about.
I will read some of the complaints. They are verbally abused when they are in their yard - not the neighbours’ yard, not the offending yard, but in their own yard. They are verbally abused with words like: ‘What the [expletive] are you looking at?’ Another complaint: the neighbours trespass and hide in their yard; they do not stay in their own yard and cause trouble, they will actually climb the fence and go into the victim’s yard. I will call them the victim because they are victims - victims of circumstance, victims of failure to act. Food scraps, rocks and rubbish are thrown into their yard, and they are personally afraid to allow their children to play outside in their own yard. They have caught the young boys next door trying to lure their young daughter next door to ‘something’ them. They actually caught the young boys saying: ‘Come here, come here’, trying to entice the much smaller girls across the fence line. Unbelievable.
The complainants are afraid to leave their house, fearing for their personal safety. They had to get rid of their dog. They had a dog and they feel they need a dog still, but because the Territory Housing tenants next door threw rocks to the point they significantly wounded the animal, in the best interest of their animal, they sent it away for friends to look after. The neighbours pegged a large lump of concrete at their dog and caused substantial injuries.
Most of the windows in the Territory Housing property are smashed, and the yard is a mess with bags of rubbish present. The house has an alcohol prohibition sign on it, but drinking still occurs. Police have been called several times and when they attend, they are also subjected to abuse. Police report they have been asked to attend this premises by most of the other residents of the street. The complainants participated in a Territory Housing facilitated mediation session some time ago and, as a result of this intervention, the Territory Housing tenants left the premises for two weeks, but on their return continued their abuse, drinking and antisocial behaviour. The complainants believe after the mediation an agreement was actually entered into by the offenders, and their way of dealing with it was to go walkabout for two weeks, the time for which the behaviour order was put on them.
Staff of Territory Housing in Palmerston have been there, and I commend them for going there, but the officer there at the moment seems to have ignored the previous efforts to deal with this, and has said: ‘Right, let us wash our hands and give everyone a fresh chance. The evidence has been gathered previously, it is with the police, it is with the neighbours and it is time to just wash our hands and start again. We will even chastise the victims, and say your complaints are not worth complaining about.’ They mirror the standard of complaint and what is required to deem it to be a complaint. I am seriously concerned about the lack of leadership, and that this type of behaviour can happen.
How can we control and maintain good order when the agency in charge of the facilities will not do anything, or will do everything in their power to repeat the process until someone, and it is normally the victim, gets so frustrated that they leave. But the people who are wrong, the offenders, stay in the house - they get their way - their abuse and intimidation has worked, and the victims have to suffer.
The Minister for Housing is aware of that particular residence. If the minister would like to approach me afterwards, or on Monday, I will give him the correct details of that address. I will make sure there is no confusion whatsoever as to where this problem is. I will even go as far as to state to this House that someone within the government’s employment, the Chief Minister’s employment, lives in that same street and is appalled by the behaviour of that family, and is appalled by the response from Territory Housing, and is shocked at their insistence to go down another mediation line when it has already been conducted. When will you get tough and say: ‘Enough is enough?’
Mr Mills: Hear, hear!
Mr BOHLIN: I will move to my second couple and say they live in the suburb of Gray. This couple formally complained to Territory Housing and did not receive an acknowledgment of their complaint which later complicated the formal advice the minister received in regards to the number of complaints made, and the duration of the problem. So, could there be a problem with the way in which complaints are handled, managed and recorded? I would like to suggest there is a massive problem between the initial phases of complaints being made, and the next stage where a Complaints Conciliation Officer is appointed. There seems to be a void, as if concrete door panels between the two offices prevent vital information being shared and, in this instant, I believe this was the case.
In the first case I have talked about, it is obvious either the Case Officer from Territory Housing has totally ignored all the evidence gathered over the last year or two; or is so self-important of their own position they think they are much better than anyone who has previously tried to deal with it. I am not sure; it is a surmise, that is all.
So, this couple in Gray have lodged a complaint and never received an acknowledgment of their complaint. When they complained further to try to get some action, the minister, it would appear from this information, was unable to get the information because the complaint was not recorded properly in the first place; so the escalation of the problem was not appropriately recorded by his department. This couple have participated in two Territory Housing neighbourhood surveys and mediations. But it took successful, independent, court action and an apprehended violence order, which resulted in the Territory Housing tenant, the offender in this circumstance, signing a conditional undertaking to keep the peace.
The couple took this independent court action at significant financial cost, after verbal and off-the-record advice from Territory Housing officers who said their hands were tied. They gave this advice to the couple: ‘Our hands are tied. You should take court action.’ Territory Housing is the agency in control or, probably, out of control. They have control to deal with the problem tenants, and they said: ‘Our hands are tied. You are better off seeking private, legal advice.’ Well, they were successful, and they got a court order. So a magistrate has found that this tenant is a problem, this person is a problem, but nothing changed in Territory Housing.
An interesting point will come later about that order; so do not forget that violence order was taken out on their behalf, at their cost, from April 2007 until they were forced to sell their home. Now this couple are personal homeowners, being directly affected by a bad Territory Housing tenant; they had to sell their house due to the actions of the adjoining Territory Housing tenant. It was so bad they had to sell. Some of the things they had to continually endure were loud music; intimidating behaviour at the back fence of their property, including objects thrown and kicking the back fence; and verbal abuse which, on one of many occasions, saw the wife, the victim, transported by ambulance to hospital due to stress and trauma. I have spoken with this couple a number of times, and it has been going on for so long, with no help at all, that this beautiful lady, the victim, has essentially had a nervous breakdown, because they would not do anything.
I spoke to other neighbours around, and they said the same thing. I would love to bring some other information into this House, but I believe I am precluded from discussing some information about this particular case. If the Housing Minister likes, I can tell him about this case afterwards, and he can take it back to his department and say: ‘You are kidding me, aren’t you? Why have you not acted?’
This couple lost the use of their back yard, their veranda, and all peaceful amenities normally afforded a person in their own back yard. This was their own house. On one occasion, guests were invited to a barbecue at this home, and they ended up packing up and leaving due to the antisocial behaviour the Territory Housing tenant hurled at them. They could not stay there; they were there for a beautiful barbecue with their friends, and because of the abuse they were copping, they had to leave.
There have been rats entering the property from derelict car bodies left in the adjoining tenancy, which ended after our intervention when Territory Housing removed these cars, but at no cost to the tenant at fault, so he would not be financially disadvantaged. He left the wrecks there; he put the wrecks there. The department finally had the gumption to do something to get rid of them because there was a potential public health issue, so they moved them on his behalf, but they did not charge him with any costs. They did not even say we will take it out of his payments over the next however many months. So, we, as a Territory, have paid for his failings, the offender’s failings. By the way, the tenant, the offender, has subsequently obtained more car wrecks, and I believe they are still there today. So, on one hand, Territory Housing has got rid of the cars, and then a couple of weeks later the bloke gets another couple of cars. Still nothing; still no direct action.
The victim’s teenage son has been verbally abused while in the yard, and he just will not go there. The wife was verbally abused and physically assaulted by the tenant at the Palmerston Shopping Centre. I am told this resulted in a fine being applied to the offender, the Territory Housing tenant. So the matter was technically dealt with, but it should have been dealt with by way of proper court action, because there was an apprehended violence order which precluded the offender, the Territory Housing tenant, going anywhere near the victim. But he got away with it. Let us say this has been dealt with; he did get a fine, I have been advised. I am also told; again, off the record, that this Territory Housing tenant has been relocated several times, and is well-known to both Territory Housing and to the police over many years.
It is unbelievable this type of behaviour is happening right across the Territory, and no definitive action is taken. The victims and the public are suffering because the department internally will not stand up, or because they do not have the strength of leadership to guide them through the process to stand up against those who are offending against the rest of the Territory community.
The statement talks about what you are going to do. Eight years, I remind people, eight years to change not one thing but, in fact, make matters worse. Let them stew and stagnate so they become festering sores upon society and people have to sell their houses; people have nervous breakdowns; people are in fear, and hide in corners of their own houses because offenders next door come and crash on their veranda and argue with their partners. And it is all due to lack of management. It could have been dealt with much better over the years if there had been appropriate land release. You had the GST revenue, dramatically larger than any budget the CLP ever had and, during that time I am not sure what you have done with that money, but you certainly have not renovated the Territory Housing houses. You have not done maintenance.
One of my colleagues, who may stand up in a few minutes to give me more time, mentioned checking the oil of your car. It is about preventative maintenance. If you do not check the oil in your engine, if you do not check the water in the radiator, if you do not check the tyres and change them occasionally, something will go wrong, something will happen. So, if you do not maintain the houses, if you do not check the condition of the houses and the tenants, and keep an eye on what is going on, something will break. Instead of protecting the government’s investment, through neglect - and it is long-term neglect; eight years you have had control of the ship to do what you needed to do to effect the change you claim you so badly want make.
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, I move that the honourable member be given an extension of 10 minutes to conclude his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr BOHLIN: I thank the House. It is about maintenance, and if you had maintained it properly there would not be these dramatically large bills. If you had checked the tenants, and kept them in order, like any other rental agreement, we would not have this antisocial behaviour. Those people would understand the boundaries and the consequences of stepping outside those boundaries.
Territory Housing should be a privilege; it is a necessity, but it is a privilege. If you abuse that privilege, you need to be set straight. You need to be given the right guidance, and if that is some form of education and training and reform, then give it to the people. They deserve that extra help. To ignore them and let them continue to create this festering sore of discontent amongst society, this anguish upon the victims, is not acceptable.
I skip to some talk from this side this week about high rise apartment, about places like Kurringal having to be knocked down and how horrible some of those places were; they needed maintenance, but they were a solution at the time. Yes, there are different practices but, if you do not maintain, if you do not control the situations within them and execute consequences for bad behaviour, of course they will get out of control; of course, they will be horrible.
The member for Karama said: ‘All those people jammed together is not good’. Maybe the buildings themselves may not have been in the best state of repair after eight years, but look at high rise buildings just over here, there are several apartments with people jammed together. We are building new ones all the time and people get along with each other to a fair degree, because there a consequences. There is someone in charge, and there is a corporate body in charge of what is happening. People know there are consequences, and there is respect for the facility.
There has also been talk this week of the unexpected growth rate – unexpected - never saw it coming. I know over three years ago there was talk in the building trade and the industry began identifying a land shortage then. That is over three years ago. Whilst I was the Officer-in-Charge of Kintore police I kept in touch with many of my contacts and they kept saying: ‘We have a problem’. I asked: ‘What is that?’ ‘There is no land, mate. We have a problem; these guys are not listening.’ I said: ‘I cannot believe that; there is land everywhere.’ I came back to Darwin and, yes, there is no land. Now, all of a sudden, it is the result of an unexpected growth rate over the last three years or more. As I pointed out in a speech yesterday, it is because of a government plan to restrain land release to help boost the economy and become a great investment hub - a deliberate act which has backfired and hurt all the Territory.
I want to point out clearly to people that this week the government has continued to rest their hat on the catch-cry of ‘an unexpected growth rate’. Every excuse they have used, whether it is health, housing or crime, is due to unexpected growth. That is what they have rested their hat on. That is their excuse this week. That is the political spin they have used: ‘We have unexpected growth, so there is a lot of tonsillitis’.
Every time we come in here we have new spin, a new catch-cry for the week. What can we blame the crisis on? This week let the public know, if they have not picked up on it, it is unexpected growth - that is why we have Territory Housing waiting lists beyond four years; that is why we have Territory Housing tenants whose houses are run down and have not been repaired for years; houses that have been vacant for years and not refurbished, and when work is done, they need major work because there has been no control over them for years; there is no land released on time and when land is released and sales occur, they are off-the-plan so there is no physical soil a builder can take and make a dream come true - the unexpected growth did all that. Unplanned and unexpected - no plan for it. As I said, three years ago we could see it.
There has also been discussion about making sure we had the right houses to build with SIHIP, making sure we build the right houses that are strong. The Housing Minister even said: ‘I could buy a tin shed house, put it on a block for X amount of money - done, finished’. If he can do that, why has he not done it? Maybe it would not be the most sustainable house, but as an emergency, it could have helped; it could have eased the situation. I clearly state I am not saying that is the answer, because I probably would not use that method, but there will be other styles of housing that work.
I know one company, and I will not state their name because I do not want to give bias to any particular company, which makes a transportable-style house with a concrete floor so it cannot be burnt - unlike the imitation wood slats discussed on this side of the House, which are a recycled product, and can burn - and cement fibre sheeting for walls with tin cladding on it. I have seen them in an Indigenous community, and after a period of six months the only major damage and neglect to the house was caused by the residents either not cleaning the house and not respecting the fantastic dwelling they were given or, in one case, a person got angry and took a 25 mm piece of square tubing, which was about a metre-and-a-bit long, and started jamming it through the cement fibre sheeting on the walls. He used it like a javelin to cause the damage - he could not do it with his fist, so he got a great chunk of steel.
So, there are buildings out there, and that company is putting buildings into communities in the Northern Territory, and interstate, yet I do not believe they have any SIHIP work. They will be great to talk to - this stuff works - it is proven on communities, and can be adapted to anything. I know they made a childcare centre in the same format. So to say we have to consult, and it has taken two years to fail to deliver even the plan for appropriate housing is just mind blowing.
It is a very passionate topic. If the Housing Minister would like to see me later, I will give him my two example cases so he can follow them up and make sure appropriate action is taken. If he would take any action, I would be very happy, in fact.
I thank the House for the additional time. This is a major problem and needs some major change on this side. It needs to stop doing the spin. All we have heard this week is spin, spin, spin. It is not about unexpected growth; it is about a failure to plan; a failure to even talk to the people who know what is going on, and then take action.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, the title of this statement is: Improving Public Housing, which could mean many things, whether it is a better house or a shorter waiting list.
A member: Or get a better minister.
Mr WOOD: You will have to ask him that. What we need is better outcomes.
A member: Get a better minister.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr WOOD: That is what I would like to talk about today. Over the years I have looked at the waiting lists for public housing and, there is no doubt, the public housing waiting lists have become longer and longer. Part of the agreement I have with the Chief Minister is to set a goal that over the next five years we need to reduce those waiting lists. It is not satisfactory that people have to wait four years for a house.
I have been to a certain caravan park this evening where it is very likely that about 26 people will be asked to leave. Hopefully, with negotiation, that will not happen in the two weeks they thought they were going to have to pack up and go; hopefully, we will be able to stretch it out to the end of the Wet Season. We had a member of the department of Housing talking to residents, who said if they wanted to get into a Housing Commission house, and they were not regarded as priority or emergency, they would have to wait four years.
I believe there is a definite need to have a goal, and a goal to try to reduce waiting lists over the next five years is a reasonable goal, which is achievable. Unless you have a goal like that, we will continue to wander on, and waiting lists and the numbers of people who cannot get into a house will continue to rise.
There are many things which can be done. When I looked at this statement by the minister, one thing which stood out was the number of programs about housing. I sometimes wonder whether half our problems with housing are it is so complicated. There will be some money from the Commonwealth government for this, there will be money from the Commonwealth government for that, and there will be something from the Northern Territory government. There are all these buckets of money, and you wonder why we cannot get these buckets of money into one bucket and use it to build houses ...
Mr Chandler: They have $670m and they could not build one.
Mr WOOD: That is right, but it is for one group. When you look at the other groups, you have the National Partnership Agreement, the Commonwealth government’s stimulus operation; all these buckets of money going around. It is sometimes hard to work out where all the money is going. That is one issue, but there is probably not much the Northern Territory government can do, because we get our housing money from the Commonwealth. It would be good if we could simplify the process, so we do not have all these subcommittees and committees, and everyone doing things, and perhaps that is where some of the money goes in the end.
There is no doubt - and even the minister alluded to that - to put it simply, if you want to reduce public housing waiting lists, we have to do a couple of things: we have to increase the number of public houses but, at the same time, we have to make more land available at an affordable price to get people to buy their own house. We need to attack it from both ends. Unfortunately, yes, the government has got behind in the amount of land which is available, especially affordable land.
We can also look at other options. Even caravan parks are a reasonable option. There are people who like that style of living, and it is one area the government should be looking at. A well-run permanent caravan park is a legitimate lifestyle. It is usually an affordable lifestyle and many people like the lifestyle because they live relatively close to other people, but they do not live on top of them; they enjoy that style of living. Of course, if you do not like living there, you can attach the car to your home and drive away; it gives freedom as well.
I also mentioned the other day about seeing whether we can build more houses for professional people such as nurses and teachers, and whether we could have a public/private partnership, so those people coming up, instead of putting their names down on the waiting list - and I will come to that in a little while - would know they can get into houses which have been set aside for that profession at a reduced rent. The concept is that those houses could be funded partly by the government - they might give the land - but they might be funded through superannuation funds which teachers put their money into, using that money as an investment and getting some return on their investments through a cheaper rent, which would encourage people to stay in the Northern Territory.
The other issue is one I probably did not take much notice of. I realised when I spoke to the minister about this, the waiting list also includes people you would not necessary say fit within the income bracket. I suppose most people would think public housing was generally for people who are on a fairly low income. However, we do not make those distinctions; we just charge a higher rent. It makes me wonder whether we need to review that. Do we have many people on the waiting list who, if we had enough affordable land - and that is the other side of this equation - or affordable housing, should be putting their money into the private sector, not the public sector?
My feeling is that public housing has always been for those people generally on a low income who cannot afford to get into the private market. But if we look at the waiting list, it would be interesting to know how many people on the waiting list are in an income bracket that really should put them into dealing with the private market. That is an area we should be looking at, and the same, even if it is with the people on the emergency housing.
Another area to look at is how many people actually have two houses? I know there are concerns some people have a house out bush, which is supplied, perhaps by the Commonwealth government, and they also have a house in town, and I do not believe that should happen. If you are supplied with a government house, that is the only house you are entitled to, unless you buy your own house - that might be a different matter, I suppose - but if you are supplied with a house, that is it. It would be good to do an audit of people who live in the town, but also have a house, maybe even on an outstation. I thought the idea was that you get one house and that is it. You should not be using the government purse, you might say, for a holiday home, or a place out bush. That is an area which needs to be investigated as well.
The other area is the number of houses that are empty. It is good to hear the government has put out a second tender to repair houses, and I notice there have been quite a few houses come online. But when houses are being refurbished, the quicker we can get that done, the quicker we have people moving back into houses. I will quote from an e-mail I received today, which highlights the fact about empty houses, and it said:
- I would like to point out, as a resident at Litchfield Court, Nightcliff, Territory Housing units, I have noticed up to eight vacant units in my vicinity alone. One close to me has been vacant for nearly five months now. I enjoy living in Territory Housing, have no complaints about maintenance issues, and many of our antisocial behaviour problems are being addressed by Rob Knight and others very well. But vacant units cause kids to trash and break into them and, of course, if they were filled, it will alleviate homelessness for many who could be moved in pronto.
Even today, we have an issue about vacant units. I know it is something that the minister is looking at but, again, there is no point having vacant places when we have such a long waiting list. We need to make sure vacancies are turned around very quickly.
There is another issue, and I remember the previous member for Braitling often talked about public housing in Alice Springs and problems with security. She spoke about it many times. I believe that if you cannot look after your house, you are out. They are the rules. These are taxpayer-funded houses, and they are there for people to live and sleep, but they should be treated as such; public housing which is for their benefit.
There is talk about knocking the units down near The Narrows, near the Winnellie Supermarket. I know there was a fight not so long ago, where one person was hurt climbing a fence. I believe the reason they are looking at knocking them down is partly because of security issues. I wonder whether we ought to, in some cases, where we know problems exist, fence those units off and put in full-time security. If you own a house, like we come into Parliament House, you show your card. If people come along and want to visit you, the security person rings him up and says, ‘you have some visitors, do you want them?’ If you say no, they cannot come through the gate or humbug you, you can tell them away from there that you do not want them in the house. That would give people security. It would also stop many relations turning up in the house that you did not particularly want, who might be under the weather, and you know you have much difficulty moving them from that house.
Mr Elferink: Been tried, did not work.
Mr WOOD: I did not quite catch what the member for Port Darwin said, whether it worked or not, but I believe it is …
Mr Elferink: It was done at Wirrina Flats when Jack Ah Kit was the minister, and someone ended up stealing the gate.
Mr WOOD: My solution is to get a bigger and stronger gate. I still believe it is an option, especially where security is a problem. People want to live in Housing Commission houses. I listened to some of what the member for Drysdale was talking about. Security is really important. People expect to feel safe living in a Housing Commission house.
The member for Drysdale mentioned the Kurringal Flats. Back in the 1970s, they were a very popular, safe place, and many public servants, when they first came to Darwin, stayed in the Kurringal Flats. They were reasonably cheap accommodation and they were probably regarded in those days as luxurious, and they were solid. They went through Cyclone Tracy with hardly getting a scratch on them. Whilst people might say they are not the best today, they fulfilled a purpose in the old days, and gave people a chance to have accommodation when they first came to the Territory.
We might be saying goodbye to them, but they served a very good purpose for many people. My sisters-in-law lived in them for quite a while, but the lack of security started to kill them. I used to visit and there would be drunks on the lawn, people humbugging and all that sort of thing. Unfortunately, that continued to the point where the government decided that type of housing was not suitable. That was sad. But if the security is there, with strict enough rules - if people are not willing to look after their house, please do not come and blame us for not worrying about them if they are homeless. You can give people an opportunity to live in a home, but the home should be treated accordingly. It has to be a two-way street.
The minister talks about seniors, and I believe we need more seniors accommodation in the rural area. There is some seniors accommodation going up in Howard Springs. But Humpty Doo is a classic example where the government could immediately release some land and say to a private developer: ‘Would you like to build seniors accommodation in the rural area?’ Sometimes we forget the rural area, which is also a legitimate place to live, but there are not as many government services. Until recently, there has not been a new house built in Humpty Doo. In fact, the first duplex was advertised in the paper the other day. This is probably the first government house which has been put there for about 15 years, when there is plenty of opportunity for houses to be built in Humpty Doo. The government should look at that. It needs the mix of both private and public, but they could speed it up quickly because the infrastructure at Humpty Doo is all there: water, sewage and electricity. It needs some roads put in and you could get that up and running by mid-next year, if the government desired.
If we want to change the way things are, if we believe our figures were not right, we can go back to the past and say, perhaps you should have some independent assessment of where we were going. If we did not really recognise the growth that was happening in Darwin or the Territory, so be it. The point is: we have to move on. By all means, you can criticise the government for being slack; I have criticised them about their waiting lists for a long time, but we have to make a concerted effort to turn that around.
This will require land - cheaper land - which will provide affordable housing. I know this is going to sound terrible, but we probably need a few Bellamack Gardens - I call it Bellamack Village. You do not want too much of it, because you crowd many people into a small area, but I see it does have the possibility of affordable housing for people, in a pleasant area, with park land that is an option for people living in the suburbs. A few more of those and see how the expandable housing goes, and we should not lose sight that expandable housing may be a good option. I believe we should be trying to talk to builders about not having these huge houses we have today. I know those are the ones they sell, but it would be nice to see a few builders promote smaller houses which can be built on in the private market.
The government needs to make a concerted effort. We are building Johnston. If you want to go ahead with Zucchini and Mitchell, then you have to make the effort to do it now.
A member: Zuccoli.
Mr WOOD: I said Zucchini? Yes, it is Zuccoli. What is a zucchini? What is a Zuccoli, aye?
Members interjecting.
Mr WOOD: The next suburb will be Broccoli. What is wrong with you blokes?
We are doing Johnston now, but I believe we should be continuing straight through in building Zuccoli and Mitchell. Let us not do it little by little; that keeps the price of land exorbitantly high. We need to get those suburbs online quickly. That end of Palmerston is growing very fast and, if we are trying to overcome this waiting list, we need more land and more public housing.
What form the public housing takes is open for debate, whether it is old style public style housing or some new type of public housing. Minister, I am interested to hear more about this affordable housing company. I presume it is part of Land Corp, I might be wrong. I am interested to see what the concept is and what part of it is the government and what is private, is it totally government, or is it another name for public housing in a new format? I do not know. Again, we have to try to change things around. It is no good seeing people struggling for a living.
A lady told me tonight she could not even afford to get assisted rent, she did not earn enough money because of her children, and if she did get assisted rent for a house, she would basically be going down to the Salvation Army or St Vincent de Paul every day for meals. There are people struggling and we need to do something about it.
Madam Speaker, we can talk for ages, but the proof of the pudding will be if we come back next year and the year after and start to see this plateauing, and then start to see it going down. Then we can come back to the government and say: ‘Well done’, but until that happens, we cannot.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, as the member for Blain for 10 years, housing issues have been my main concern or, probably more correct to say, the main concern of the greater number of my constituents, also across Palmerston.
I moved to Palmerston 20 years ago and, at that time, it had plenty of cheap land and some of the earlier suburbs were largely occupied by public housing tenants, and with that came some accompanying challenges. My electorate contains some of those older suburbs, Moulden and Gray, and it is a particular challenge to manage these issues on a day-to-day basis.
Neighbourhood issues can be particularly taxing, and the challenges presented with these issues are of real concern and, if left unattended, can become real problems. The core of this is the need to establish real standards. But, of course, the whole matter has now moved to a place, where I am very concerned about what lies ahead, in terms of poor behaviour in public housing, which has been an ongoing concern. I will go through a log of the sorts of issues we currently have on our books. The Minister for Housing knows the level of correspondence that comes from my office intervening, requesting support and assistance, and advocating on behalf of constituents; it is constant.
On that note, I pay acknowledgement with respect to my electorate officer, Tasma McCall; we have worked together for 10 years. I go through a log of the current issues we have in hand, which result in listening, writing, speaking, writing again, following-up and doing our best to make sure we can oil the wheels, so there can be some speedy process. All of these matters and issues have been going on but, in recent times, with the shortage of housing, it takes on a whole new dimension.
When someone presents their story to you and it is quite clear they are in need of priority housing, and their case is so compelling, you wish you could do something yourself. Then you learn the best case scenario is six to 12 months - there is no refuge, there is no place - between six to 12 months is the best you can hope for. Balance that time of waiting six to 12 months with someone who is facing the most horrendous situation right here, right now, and you are at a loss as to what you can say to that person.
The wait lists in Palmerston are: pensioners - 47 months; one-bedroom, non-pensioner - 46 months; two-bedroom – 38 months; and three-bedroom - 46 months. These are people who are in need. In Darwin and Casuarina: one-bedroom - 45 months; one-bedroom, non-pensioner - 45 months; two-bedroom - 40 months; and three-bedroom - 55 months.
We were talking about this three or four years ago. At the time we were calling upon the government to release more land - it would probably be the same talk. But, with those waiting lists extending outwards, and we get some sense of where the poverty line is, we now find, though, the poverty line has moved to a very different place. There are people who simply cannot afford basic rents. They tell you their story, they know how to do their sums, and they are forced to live in cars or in tents. This is not an exaggeration, minister and members of this government - it is not an exaggeration.
The Minister for Housing receives much heat, and so he should. I am alarmed to hear some of the contributions from the government members, who speak of sausage sizzles and how people are getting on so nicely in certain places, blindly ignoring the underlying social problem which is developing before our eyes.
The Housing Minister is front and centre when it comes to housing matters. But, to unravel this, I place the larger responsibility on the Planning minister, the member for Karama, for her obstinacy when there were calls to release land over three years ago. We went through that, I believe, on Monday. They maintained a strong position, which is a policy position of the government, not to release land, because the release of land posed a great danger of flooding the market. In the failure to do so, to heed those calls, we have now reaped what we have sown. Sadly, as leaders, we have an obligation to respond to this.
I go back, first, to talk about the problems we have in public housing, to give you some of the ideas of the matters ...
Mr BOHLIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Sorry, member for Blain. Madam Speaker, I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Ring the bells, a quorum is required. Ring the bells, please. A quorum is present.
Mr MILLS: In analysing a problem, a current, growing, and impending social problem, the analysis would have us recognise the core of this problem, the failure - the obstinate and blind failure - to release land, summed up in a defence, arrogantly put by the member for Karama, saying:
- We could have done what previous governments have always done in the Territory, which is just release the land to developers. We are not going to do that this time because we want to address the need in the marketplace without distorting the market.
You have distorted the market and you have not met the need in the marketplace. Now there are fellow citizens who are reaping the consequences of that foolish position adopted by the government to date.
The sorts of pressures which have been brought upon public housing, these are the sorts of matters, one page of a log of issues which are on hand at the moment through my own electorate office. By the way, minister, none of these are a surprise. They are on foot at the moment, but this is the constant work of the office. Behind each of these are people, fellow citizens.
A senior citizen applied for priority housing in April 2008. The file was lost until July 2008, then it was approved. However, in September 2009, they were still on the priority list waiting for accommodation. A senior citizen waiting for accommodation - no apology or no follow through for the lost file - was about to become homeless due to current private housing being put on the market while she was waiting on the priority list. She asked permission from Territory Housing to live with the family interstate: ‘Can I just seek refuge interstate with my family while I am on the priority list waiting’, even though the file had been lost, and now is found? They said no, it is against the rules. She had to stay, where? A senior citizen, on a priority list, has to wait on someone’s couch, because if she went interstate to find refuge, she would fall off the list, even though the file had been lost.
There is another report of a woman who has been on the priority housing list. She is approved and on that priority list and has been waiting for three years. Reflect on what it means to be qualified to be on a priority housing list. Another case is: neighbours report loud music, and yelling and screaming every evening. Territory Housing staff are unable to catch them in the act, so they cannot do anything. They encouraged neighbours to complete Noise Abatement Orders themselves and deal with the problem. Some neighbours, and this is a constant, are afraid to complain due to the intimidation, and the threats by the problem tenants. These are law abiding citizens, who feel they have no protection and yet, if they take matters into their own hands and go through the system, they are then threatened. As a result, they do not report, they do not complete Territory Housing surveys, so Territory Housing cannot deal with the problems they know are occurring; lawlessness and disorder then increases.
In another circuit, there is constant intimidation by teenage kids at a Territory Housing tenancy towards neighbours. It has been ongoing for years. Neighbours will have to put up with abuse while Territory Housing tries to work with other agencies to deal with the problems. As soon as the incident occurs outside a Territory Housing property, the officers from the agency say: ‘We have no jurisdiction’. The neighbours are then told: ‘It is not our problem, it is a police matter’.
Nine months of reports of abuse by a Territory Housing tenant to her own children; neighbours needing to have windows closed, air-conditioners on to shut out noise; their own children unable to play in their back yard because of the yelling and the foul and abusive language. Tenants are finally moved on, but reports say she is still a Territory Housing tenant. The reports were to deal with the underlying problem. Much leg-work went into that, but rather than fix the problem, the problem was shifted. The tenant moved out of a two-bedroom unit into four-bedroom house because a daughter was in crisis and needed a place to stay. The daughter was allegedly on a wait list for less than a month - this one is on foot - it seems to be that someone has found a way through the system and we are investigating that.
How could it be some are on the waiting list for 45 months, someone else only on the list for a couple of months? There are a number who watch this; we are investigating that. Reports by neighbours of Territory Housing tenants going away for months at a time, and letting family and friends live in a house, causing further disturbances to neighbours. These are ongoing issues that we are investigating.
A tenant in a unit complex has a meter box for other units on their unit wall, and pay meters installed now mean the tenant has to endure visits from pay meter tenants, re-crediting their meter, at any time of the day or night, causing disturbance and trespassing onto their lease. The minister dismissed the tenant, advising the meters will not be relocated. After considerable correspondence between the tenant and minister, the minister has offered to move the tenant. This will not fix the problem for the next tenant.
In a large unit complex where visitors moved into unit with tenant, there were complaints by neighbours about overcrowding, noise, nuisance, etcetera. Territory Housing acted and spoke with the tenant. The visitors then moved to the back of the unit complex, camping in the complex once Territory Housing officers went home for the evening. They have since moved on, but they left a couple of vehicles in the complex, which have been there for months.
A legitimate tenant has his vehicle in the car park waiting to get the registration renewed while he is saving up. He is an aged pensioner. He does not have it there for very long while he is saving up, but he is immediately jumped upon and asked to remove his vehicle. Yet the other vehicles, from the illegal tenants, are left and there is no concern or standard maintained, yet, it applies to the law abiding one. Swift action for the law abiding tenant and a dead hand for those who violate the standards of the community.
These examples are a snapshot of the sort of stuff we deal with on a daily basis through our electorate office. If you want to check up on them, minister, you will find they are issues which are on foot with your office at the moment. These are the types of issues we have been dealing with on a weekly basis for 10 years, but things have changed.
We talk about the housing crisis, but the poverty line has moved to a very different place; a dangerous place. The pressure on public housing will require pressure on maintaining standards. There are people in public housing who do not care about standards and the standards are not being reinforced. There are waiting lists of good people who, through no fault of their own, are in need of a place to stay, because they cannot afford to find a roof or shelter in the open market in Northern Territory. They are waiting and would comply with the standards; they would be good citizens. Yet, you have people in public housing who do not maintain standards and are accommodated again and again.
If you want to bring order to your community, you have to enforce those standards. It would be different if there was no waiting list. But when you have a waiting list, as we have in Palmerston, of 46 months for a three-bedroom house, there is a whole line of people waiting to go in. If any one of those people looked around and saw people abiding by the law and maintaining their properties, fine. But when they find, in some cases - as I have already reported - someone jumps the queue – an interesting case, which we are investigating - people running amok, treating the houses like a dump, and have people come in and make it so unpleasant for others, then you have a real problem. You send a message down the line to those waiting 45 months, forming a view of: ‘to heck with standards, I can do whatever I like’. This has a flow-on effect to the detriment of the tone of our whole community.
We have a serious obligation to maintain those standards. However, there are now so many, who do not qualify to get in, and are required to go to other places. Once it was line-ball: it is going to be heavy to pay the rent but, unfortunately, I have to do it. Now it is impossible to pay the rent. You do the sums. A lady, with three children, explained her story to me. She has waited for three years, and receives $2000, I believe it was, in a pension, but if she paid the basic rent she would have nothing left over.
I put a posting on Facebook the other day to communicate to people about this issue. My grave concern is the working homeless. This is a demonstration of how serious the problem has become. It was sparked by a telephone call, and, in some ways, I am grateful for what occurred when the NT News put my mobile number in the headline of the paper; it produced something quite instructive for me, because I learned so much. Things I had heard a little about all came together in one place. There was a tremendous level of support, but the most troubling element of it was the opportunity taken by so many people to tell me their story. I had well over 75 people; I spent Saturday and Sunday listening to calls, made a number of notes; and it is still going on.
I had a phone call two nights ago from a bloke called Doug. He said: ‘Someone has passed your number on to me and he says you might be able to help. I have tried phoning the government but they fobbed me off.’ He said: ‘Someone has to hear my story: I am a stockman, I have been a shearer, I am 70 years of age, and I have arthritis.’ This is perfectly understandable, if anyone knows the shearing game or working with stock. He is six years younger than my father, his voice is calm, and he is not complaining, but he says: ‘When I turned 70, I thought things would turn out better than they have.’ I ask him: ‘What is the story, Doug?’ He says: ‘I am on the waiting list and while I am waiting, I have nowhere to live.’ He lives on the beach at Nightcliff, and he says: ‘Terry, I would like you to come down if you could, because there are many people here, who arrive at night, sleep in their swags in their cars, and when the sun comes up in the morning, they roll them up and they go to work.’ Then he starts to recount the stories of a number of these people. They are people who cannot afford rent and they do not qualify for public housing.
I have heard these stories from other people, where, if you go early in the morning before the sun is up, you will find people all over the place camping, getting up and going to work. They have jobs and good incomes. This is a colossal problem, with severe implications over the horizon. When we have members on the other side say: ‘Public housing, yes, we have a few issues but, by and large, it is going okay; we are having some lovely sausage sizzles at some of the premises and things seem to be going okay, and yada, yada, yada.’ You have this right in front of you; you do not need to be a sociologist to recognise the implications of this. There are people with tertiary degrees who find they cannot afford it, after making a decision to live here. One fellow told me: ‘I was born in the Territory. I have an honours degree, and I will be earning $76 000 a year …’
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask the member be given an extension, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr MILLS: Thank you, I will not go to the limit, just for the sake of it. This is the most startling aspect of this issue. A gentleman made an appointment with me - he would not mind if I said his name, but I will not say his whole name – and he said: ‘I feel an obligation to tell the story. My name is Lawson. I was born in the Territory and spent my primary years here. Although I have lived most of my life down south, I always wanted to come back to the Territory with my family.’ He has an honours degree in public policy, he is married, and his wife is a qualified teacher with a science degree in research. He has an approved position, paid at $76 500 a year, and he comes up to fulfil the dream. He has $160 000 equity in a house in Adelaide, and $60 000 in the bank. He did the sums, and was almost afraid to tell his wife, who is still in Adelaide. He said: ‘Even with that income, I had to go through the marketplace to see what I could afford.’ The bottom five rental properties at Moulden were all he could look at. He chose one which costs $450 to $500 per week. He says: ‘When I do my sums, that is almost half of my income, and I can only look at the bottom 10 properties.’ They will have a limited amount of money left for the family. His wife will not be able to work in the first instance, because the kids are young.
He sent a message back to Adelaide and said: ‘Wife, are you still prepared to follow me?’ She said: ‘Yes’. He said: ‘I thought it was going to be a relaxed lifestyle’. It is clearly not, and he feels an obligation as a father. In Adelaide, they only pay $300 per week for a four-bedroom home with two bathrooms. For a property which costs $200 a week more, they will have three bedrooms and one bathroom. They thought perhaps there were other options, so he explored caravan parks - they were prepared to live in a caravan park in the hope they would be able to be successful in the ballot at Bellamack. If it is stressful for someone who is prepared to make that level of contribution to the Northern Territory, we have a very serious problem.
I had another phone call from a senior teacher at one of our senior high schools - I will not say her name – and her husband works at a middle school in Darwin. They both earn good money, and have lived in the Territory for 10 years. The husband has spent five years in remote service. They love the Northern Territory. One of them has a very senior position within the school as a moderator. Do you know what a moderator is? It is a person with specific skills, to be able to judge standards. They are quite valued within the profession. She became pregnant – joy - they were very happy; they are a little older and it was something they had been looking forward to. She said to me: ‘I know how to do my sums’. They did their sums and found out what they could not believe on first take: they cannot afford to drop one income and find a place in the market. They have looked at every angle. They do not qualify for public housing. The rent was too high to be within commuting distance of the schools where they work. They want desperately to stay here, but cannot afford a mortgage, because they only have $35 000 or thereabouts. She said: ‘That will not pay the stamp duty.’ The place they want to serve is here, but they cannot. They are considering, reluctantly, to go back to where housing is more affordable.
I put the story of Doug, who phoned me the other day, on Facebook. I phoned him again today and I will have a talk to him. Someone has kindly offered some additional support for him, which is tremendous. But I fear what I will see when I go to visit Doug.
There is another person who used to live in Darwin. She said: ‘I used to live in a tent; I now live in Victoria.’ She described her house there, which is half the price she paid in Darwin.
There is a government employee who said: ‘I am a survivor of being described as the ‘working homeless.’ Remember the saying, that most people are only two pay cheques away from being homeless.
Someone from Palmerston said: ‘The rent I pay for a two-bedroom flat in Bakewell is more than my daughter pays for a three-year-old four-bedroom home in south-east Queensland.’ He has a two-bedroom unit; his daughter pays less for a large house in south-east Queensland. ‘I pay more than half my weeks wage to rent, and that is ‘so-called’ good paying. I have a good paying job with a multinational company. Six months more of this and I will have to go back to rural Queensland and make less money, but will be better off, because it will cost less.’
Another person said: ‘I have been told today, our rent has been raised by $20 per week. This is not a place where people can live within reasonable standards at reasonable cost.’ Another person said: ‘When I took over a lease break, the landlord put it up by $100 per week. When I questioned this, the landlord said: ‘If you do not like it, move on’. Another person said: ‘I just want a fair go at buying a house. What is wrong with that? With another power bill at $500, there is quarter of the savings gone again. Ta, Territory government, thanks for the fair go’.
Another person said: ‘It is good to see that Darwin has made the headlines again this morning: “Darwin has the highest rents in the country: $500 a week for a three-bedroom house”. They forgot to say three-bedroom dog-box with no air-conditioning, but, anyway, it is a roof over your head, after all. When is the Territory government going to pull its head out of the sand and do something for people in this town, who are desperately in need? That is right, we have a wave pool and a new convention centre, maybe we can all live there.’ Someone else said: ‘I suggest they build more housing commission houses. They seem to have sold too many of them. Knocking down other places does not make sense.’
Another person said: ‘People are leaving, or refusing to move here because of the combined lack of, and cost of, housing. Even people who are coming here with well-paid jobs are appalled at the cost and are even struggling with the rent. My husband and I are on good wages, but there is no way in hell we could afford to buy. We are blessed to live in my mother’s house, whilst she is away, at a reduced rate. We could struggle with the current going rents, but those in low-income brackets, without that help, have even more limited choices’.
The stories go on. This occupied two days; people buying into this story. Someone made an astute observation and it is quite obvious that you do not need to be a sociologist to work this out. We talk about INPEX coming to town – it is exciting. However, it will need a whole range of backup employees, all the way to the checkout cashier, all the way through. You are going to need teachers and people working in the service industries. How are they, on their wages, going to afford to find a place?
Getting to the final point, key workers like teachers. The education report came out yesterday, and we all know it is an ageing profession. When I did my survey of the 20-plus schools, with a few more to go this semester, in the northern suburbs in Darwin, I noted a number of the teachers live close by, and they have served in those schools, or in neighbouring schools, for around 20 years or more. Many teachers serve for a very long time, and some of the local members in the northern suburbs know what I am talking about. Consider that it is an ageing profession, and those who bought into the market, 25, 30, or 40 years ago, living in Leanyer, or wherever, decide they are retiring; they are going to leave the profession. They will move into a unit or they may move interstate. The next rank of teachers will not be able to occupy that building. Remember when those people bought those places; I bought mine 20 years ago. If I came here now, as a founding principal of a school, I would not be able to, with my income, get into the marketplace. Fortunately, 20 years ago, when Palmerston started and land was cheap, because there was supply which matched demand, we allowed people in. Coming up here today, 20 years later, I would not be able to get in.
These are only some of the stories, and there are many more to be told which demand a response beyond spin. We need to look carefully at this, because what is presented in the next chapter is of real concern. Unless we look at the fundamental, which is the supply of land - it is a tragedy. I know much of it passes to the Minister for Housing, and so it should, because of those issues I have described. But the bottom line sits with the Territory government’s appalling policy position, and its obstinate refusal to release land. That is what we have today, and there is more to come, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Deputy Speaker, I talk on this very important statement. I do not believe the issue is just about public housing wait times. I believe it is housing, more broadly, and land release.
Public housing can only solve part of the problem of housing. I believe housing follows a lineal spectrum where, at the bottom, you might find temporary or emergency accommodation, which moves up the linear scale to public housing, private housing, home ownership and the like. That follows many different aspects, through the private and home ownership models, through varying rates in the market, from what you might call a medium house to an upper-class house, if people can understand that. The point of this statement is the government saying it is doing things for the waiting list. I do not believe that is the case, but I believe it is important to reflect on some of the telling statistics about the housing situation.
I will quote a couple of things. One is from a document called The Road Home: A National Approach to Reducing Homelessness, and I quote:
- In Australia, around 105 000 people are homeless on any given night. While the overall rate of homelessness has been relatively stable over the last 12 years, increasing numbers of children, families and older people are experiencing homelessness.
If you look at the other states in the National Approach to Reducing Homelessness report, you see that New South Wales has a homelessness rate of six per 10 000 people, Victoria has four, ACT has three, South Australia has five, but the Northern Territory has 75 homeless people per 10 000 people - that is appalling - it is more than 10, nearly 11 times the rate of Tasmania. It is amazing to see that the Northern Territory is far outweighing everywhere else. Just imagine if the census people had all the real data.
These are real issues for the Northern Territory, and require a housing solution, not just a public housing solution. But, alas, I saw on the Northern Territory website, titled: Housing the Territory, Fresh Ideas, Real Results, and I quote from the website:
- New Public Housing
Transitional housing
Problems have developed with clients not prepared for living in the urban context. The government will implement a system where clients not used to urban living will be provided with transitional housing where intense urban living skills can be acquired. Clients currently failing to live easily in urban areas can be returned to transitional housing for additional support.
I thought everyone might get a laugh out of that. I am not sure where this transitional housing is; it is not anywhere in the Northern Territory. This was put out - I have the media release somewhere, and that made me laugh too - I believe it was in March this year, I am not sure. It is quite funny though. Nothing has happened since. Maybe it is referring to the 80-something dongas in Alice Springs which Mal Brough kindly brought up from the closing Woomera Detention Centre. I believe they were funded out of the Aboriginal Benefits Account and brought to Alice Springs as part of the Emergency Response, to send most of them out bush to provide some emergency accommodation. Some of those would have been used in Alice Springs, I believe one location was on Dalgety Road, in my electorate of Braitling, and the other location was at the Tyeweretye Club on the south side of town.
The previous independent member for Braitling, reflecting the views of residents in Alice Springs, had concerns with the location on the north side. The government was facing pressure about where to put them on Dalgety Road. Fortunately, the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority happened to find a sacred site there, so they could not put them exactly where they wanted them to go; they have sat dormant since. We have the worst housing crisis in the Northern Territory, and we have had 80 demountables sitting in Alice Springs gathering dust in a little storage area on Dalgety Road.
I knew some of the dongas were going to be used for the town camp redevelopment, 12 of them, but I assumed they all went out bush. It was not until a month ago I found they were still sitting there gathering dust. I thought this was appalling, and I have been trying to find some housing solutions in Alice Springs, not publicly, but privately. I ran into the people who have control of these dongas, if we can call them that, and I asked: ‘How many are there?’ He told me how many there are. I asked: ‘What needs to happen?’ ‘Well, they have to be a retrofitted so they are more accommodating for people’. I said: ‘Do we just need to find a block of land?’ ‘Yes, that is all we need; a block of land and as long as we have the infrastructure and services there - water, power and sewer’. I mentioned a number of places, and one was the Camel Farm, on the Ross Highway going out of town, which is up for sale. I said: ‘What about that?’ He said: ‘Well, you need to upgrade the sewer slightly so they can take them. It would be great as a worker’s camp for working families, who have to leave town or have to sleep in tents, and cars, or caravans or swags, but the Northern Territory government will not pay to upgrade the infrastructure; it will not put the infrastructure in for these people.’
I will step aside for one minute and say it was quite interesting, in Question Time yesterday, when the member for Daly said: ‘We had nothing to do with those dongas’, because the person who was managing the dongas, said: ‘Adam, it is funny you ring up, we have had the Chief Minister’s Department of Northern Territory government ringing up, asking if it can use them for temporary accommodation.’ Maybe it is another case of the mystery, where the member for Daly says one thing, but the reality is another. The Northern Territory government was definitely involved with those dongas, and is taking 12 of them for the town camps. I am quite sure it has got something to do with them. Then to find out - this is a sting in the tail - that 81 dongas are going over to Christmas Island to house boat people.
We have Kevin Rudd’s scum, bringing boat people over, and we cannot house the First Australians, but we can house the next ones, or the people who want to be the next Australians. We can send dongas to Christmas Island to house the boat people, but cannot house the homeless, Indigenous people in Alice Springs, and we cannot house homeless people in Alice Springs. We could have used those dongas across the Territory, brought some up to the Bechtel site. We could have used them to help solve the housing crisis.
But wait, there is more. In 2007, a letter was sent to the Indigenous Coordination Centre - I am sure the member for Daly will quickly remind me this is the federal government - in Alice Springs, by Karen Eva-Stirk from Riding for the Disabled, which said: ‘The facilities are not that good in Alice Springs. We have a couple of steps, probably about two or three foot high, to access the current building we have a dilapidated old building and wheelchairs cannot fit, and they cannot be moved around this demountable. Is there any chance we can have a demountable?’ This is besides the fact the toilet, which is 200 m away at Blatherskite Park, has a step and wheelchairs cannot go up steps. But that is beside the point, for the toilet.
It sent this letter off to FaHCSIA, which has not responded. They have had a chat to the department of Sport and Recreation, which I am sure is the responsibility of the NT government, and said we need some money for this and we need some money for that to try to help us out.
Mr Hampton: Was it 60 000?
Mr GILES: You know about it? It was looking for money and for Northern Territory government support, to advocate on its behalf, to get a donga, and nothing happened.
Mr Tollner: This is cooperative federalism.
Mr GILES: This is cooperative federalism. A no-blame game, forget about the $20 000, Indigenous disabled kids and the non-Indigenous kids in wheelchairs trying to access Riding for the Disabled services. They went back in 2008 and asked: ‘Sport and Recreation, can you help us please access one of those dongas, to utilise it for disabled kids in Alice Springs so they can be trained and supported as they ride the horses at Riding for the Disabled in Alice Springs?’ Do you know what the Northern Territory government said? ‘It is not our business; it is the federal government.’
The sting in the tail is we are taking potential dongas off disabled kids in Alice Springs to house scum, asylum seekers, in Christmas Island. We cannot house Territorians or support a disabled kid, but we can give accommodation to people traffickers over on Christmas Island. That is exactly what happened.
I have digressed. I spoke before about some Northern Territory government initiatives, I found one, but I happened to find another one. I have a lovely little flyer; it is not in colour, unfortunately, we are the opposition, after all. This one is called:
- Housing the Territory – Affordable, Quality Housing:
What are we doing and how:
Housing the Territory is a comprehensive package aimed at getting the balance of housing in the Territory right. It has four elements:
Land to Grow
A land release program right across the Territory, providing space for people to live.
Sorry, Madam Speaker, it is hard not to chuckle …
Mr Tollner: Who put that out?
Mr GILES: It has to be the member for nothing, the member for Daly:
- New Places to Buy
Building affordable homes for people to buy and helping people get into their first home.
First home? I digress again. That is quite funny, because I see the widely promoted Buildstart program - I would love to see the figures on how it worked in Alice Springs. I heard one person was successful in getting the $14 000 Buildstart grant, which I believe is a very good program. I said before it is a good program. Unfortunately, if the government does not release any land, it is pretty hard to build a house. I could be wrong; there might be two people in Alice Springs who have accessed the Buildstart program.
But have a look at the Homestart NT program, which is another Territory initiative. I do not have a date for this; this is one of the lovely fliers they put in our letterbox, member for Greatorex, in Alice Springs - coming out to promote the wares of nothing. This tells us:
- Under the new Homestart NT, from the 1 June, the old capped price is going from $265 000 to $300 000.
I searched long and hard, both yesterday and today, to find a house in Alice Springs for under $300 000, and I could not find one. I am not saying there is not one; there may be one out there, but I could not find one in my search on the Internet of all the real estate companies. Great work, Northern Territory government, you are killing it again. Tennant Creek has a limit of $120 000, but you are doing it hard to find a house in Tennant Creek at $120 000.
I digress, Madam Deputy Speaker. We are here to talk about public housing. I spoke before about two elements under the Housing the Territory: Affordable, Quality Housing package, the third element is:
- New Places to Rent
Growing the rental market for those who cannot afford to buy yet.
I believe this means it is easier to rent than buy in the Northern Territory, but that is wrong. The fourth element is:
- New Public Housing
Expanding the number of public houses for those Territorians who will need the government to provide housing and reforming the way we deliver public housing.
We have not even started talking about wait list times for public housing in the Northern Territory. We know it is five years for a one-bedroom non-pensioner unit in Alice Springs. We know it is more than four years for a three-bedroom house in Casuarina. Heaven help you, if you are looking for a one-bedroom non-pensioner unit in Nhulunbuy because that is 75 months. It is like when you have a child, and you decide your child should go into a good school when he gets older: I have just given birth and I will enrol him now. It is like saying, I have just given birth, we are going to need an extra bedroom soon, I better sign up now because in seven years time I will get a bedroom; I believe it is the same correlation. If you are thinking of having a baby, if you have a twinkle in your eye, sign a housing application form.
While we are talking about house numbers, I would like to know how the government can justify having, at least as it qualifies, 58 public housing dwellings in Alice Springs vacant, as of 21 September, with 22 houses being worked on at a time, and 36 waiting to be worked on. We have 22 being worked on, and 36 sitting there waiting for someone to work on them; these houses could have been empty for 12 months. There are also all the other houses which are sitting around empty, that the department does not even know about.
A number of very interesting matters were brought out through the estimates process. I have a great concern about the management of public housing. I believe you can only get good tenants, if you promote good tenancies. One of the things I believe is, you do not just go in and fix the inside of a house when it is vacant and write a condition report. You also fix the outside and make sure it is in good condition, so you can do a condition report and ensure the tenant maintains a good upkeep of the property externally. That is not how this government operates. It operates like most other Labor governments around the country, where it does the internals and forgets the externals, and the place always look like scum as you drive down the street. You can always pick which ones are the public housing properties.
Mr TOLLNER: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be given an extension of 10 minutes to complete his remark, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr GILES: Thank you for your indulgence. Madam Deputy Speaker, we have heard complaints about antisocial behaviour in Alice Springs. I refer to figures I was provided during the estimates process, which I believe were until April 2009 of that financial year. The figures show, during the eight or nine months, there had been 1343 complaints about antisocial behaviour in public housing tenancies, which is a fair number of complaints about antisocial behaviour. I said to the Housing Minister: ‘How many of those complaints have been investigated? You have 1343 complaints, how many have you investigated?’ Eighty-six, you have investigated 86 complaints out of 1343 complaints. I have to say, that is where you start to fail.
I went on to ask: how many tenants have been kicked out for damage and blacklisted from going back to Territory Housing properties because of damage to property? We all know there is a plethora of bad public housing tenants who do not look after the property, who smash it up, cause antisocial behaviour, and damage taxpayers’ investments. This happens across all of our suburbs, we all know households that do this. I thought there would be hundreds of people who get kicked out for damaging Territory Housing properties. We know 86 complaints out of 1343 are being investigated, so I thought, how many? I was told nine people have been kicked out of Territory Housing for damaging a property.
Then I said: we have 1343 complaints, you have decided to investigate 86, how many people have been kicked out for antisocial behaviour? Such as parties all night, attacking your kids, belting your dog, burning things down, drunkenness, verbal abuse over the fence, all those things we put up with in our electorates. The member for Macdonnell made a very good point about my electorate in Larapinta, where the housing policy seems to be we will put all the Aboriginal people in that pocket in Larapinta. We found that out of 1343 public housing complaints, 31 people were evicted for antisocial behaviour.
Is it no wonder I am constantly onto the Housing department asking them to take action? Wondering what has happened in Heidenreich Court, Ellery Drive, Elliott Street and Head Street - the list is endless in my electorate. Those public servants in Territory Housing, Gail Conner and Gaylene Rye, do a fantastic job; the Territory Housing staff do a fantastic job. It is the policy that is the problem. It is not just Territory Housing policy. It is land release, infrastructure, and first homebuyers. The people who are in public housing properties who cause the problems are the ones that create grief for Territory Housing staff and not much can happen.
Here is another example. In the private sector, a property manager will usually inspect a house four times a year. I asked the Minister for Housing during estimates: ‘How often is a tenancy manager supposed to check Territory Housing properties in urban areas?’ He flicked it to Dr Ritchie, the CEO, who said: ‘The usual rate of inspection is once per year’. I asked: ‘Can I confirm that every Territory Housing property is inspected once per year?’ Dr Ritchie said: ‘In all honesty, to say every one is inspected every year would be incorrect’. You do not even inspect every Territory Housing property every year. You have a $400 000 asset - whatever the price is - and he said we do not even inspect every house, every year.
Many of us on this side would know, because we pay attention, we are not incompetent like Labor, and are aware of many visitors coming to stay at these houses. Most jurisdictions in the country have a rule that visitors can only stay for two weeks, but, in the Northern Territory, visitors are allowed to stay for six weeks. How do you know if people have visitors who have been there for longer than six weeks? They do not. They do not inspect the houses so they do not know who is staying there. I went on to ask about how many people have been in trouble for having too many visitors. None. How many people have been kicked out for having too many visitors? None.
I believe, instead of the department employing 12 dedicated communications staff within their agency, with a departmental advertising budget of $163 000, it would be better off spending that money on employing more Territory Housing staff to implement the policies. It sounds crazy, I know, but maybe they could inspect every house once a year. If they had a proper regime, there would be a chance for the government to build more houses, because it would know they are being inspected.
Then we would not see, from 2002-03 when there were 6119 dwellings, that the dwelling numbers had dropped down to 5251 by 2008-09. We might see a change. But we know why that change happened in those years - the government needed $47m to put money into the waterfront. It had to sell the houses to put money into the waterfront; that is exactly what happened. The government will deny it, because it likes to be seen as the great saviours of the socialist brigade, but it sold out on those people to put money into the waterfront.
While there are these dodgy little processes and bad policy practices by the Northern Territory government we will see the following in public housing complexes: rubbish left lying around; graffiti all over the place; dumped cars, caravans, and trucks - creating problems, making our places look like eyesores - grog sitting everywhere, lawns not mowed; and we have the amazingly successful ‘no alcohol sign’, sitting next to a carton of beer - things are going well.
Digressing for a moment, I spoke to the licensing mob that put these signs up. I said: ‘You put the signs up, when does Territory Housing come round to inspect or kicks these people out?’ ‘Territory Housing cannot enforce those signs; that is the Liquor Commission’. ‘Right, we will get the police to come around’. The police have a look and say: ‘We cannot do anything, that is a Liquor Commission issue. That is Territory Housing property. We cannot move people for drinking behind one of those very strong, sturdy signs which say, “No alcohol. Restricted premises”. We have to get the Liquor Commission out.’ We ring the Liquor Commission. ‘Can you guys come out and get these drunks off the footpath?’ ‘We do not receive enough resources to have staff to come around and get people away.’ I said: ‘What do you put the signs in for?’ We were walking around, scratching our heads, saying: ‘What is going on here? Is this the dumbest government ever? No, it is just the member for Daly.’ But I must apologise, I believe I digressed a little.
I believe housing is a very important issue, which needs sweeping reforms. Land release is the key to solving the public housing crisis, and removing the member for Daly. While we have these appalling approaches, we will continue to see problems such as applications for bond assistance go from 429 two years ago, to 305 last year, to an estimated 209 this year. They are very important figures because bond assistance is what helps people get into the private market. When we see more than 200% reduction from two years ago in applications for bond assistance that clearly signifies the private market has outstripped the capacity for the renters to get into the market, right across the Territory. That is the biggest sign of failure because the private market is not responding to demand through capacity constraints, through land release, and a lack of this Northern Territory government to invest in infrastructure to support the growth in housing.
Members: Hear, hear!
Debate adjourned, pursuant to Standing Order 41A.
ADJOURNMENT
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, it now being 9 pm, the item of business before the Chair stands adjourned until the next sitting day.
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: I ask you to resume your seats until I conclude what I am saying. Resume your seats, please.
Honourable members, under Standing Order 41A, I propose the Assembly do now adjourn.
The Speaker has approved, under standing orders, an adjournment from the member for Brennan for incorporation. I table that document.
- Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Given this week’s damning report on the health system in the Northern Territory by the AMA, I would like to provide the following information provided by a local father and is further evidence of a medical system in crisis and a system where the focus may appear more on administration than on patient care.
When a 15-month old baby girl of a Palmerston family was only twomonths old, she developed a lump in the middle of her neck and her parents took her to A&E at RDH. This was around 7 pm on a Saturday evening. After sitting in the waiting room at A&E for around four hours, and having to step over puddles of urine that a wheelchair bound patient was depositing on the waiting room floor and watching piles of rubbish accumulate on the tables between the waiting room chairs, it was not until around midnight that her father spoke to the nurse at the reception counter and after advising her that the lump appeared to be getting larger and that the infant could not feed without vomiting it all up, that they were taken into see a doctor.
At 8 am the following morning, the family were still waiting in a cubical in the A&E ward at RDH and up until that time, they report that there would have been at least six different doctors (or doctors in-training) come and examine the lump on the infants throat. On each occasion, each doctor would ask her parents the same questions and her father would give them the same answers until - after now having been there for in excess of 12 hours and with very little sleep - this had begun to wear a little thin. From about 6.30 am, however, A&E staff had been informing her parents that they were trying to arrange an ultrasound and that she would also be taken up to the Children's Ward at RDH.
They were finally taken up to the Children's Ward around 10 am. The place appeared to be so run-down that it was like they had just stepped back in time about 60 years. There were other children in the room with their mothers and these children continually ran around uncontrolled, dragging furniture around, climbing all over everything and generally causing a disturbance while their mothers sat there completely oblivious to what their children were doing.
By 4 pm the infant still had not been taken for an ultrasound and her father left, while he went home to Palmerston to feed their pets and to shower and feed their four-year-old son who had also been with them all this time. Before leaving, he advised staff that they had private health cover and asked that if his daughter was to be admitted, would it be possible for her to be admitted to the Private Hospital? They said they would look into this.
He returned to the hospital around 8.30 pm and his wife told him that they had taken the infant for an ultrasound while he was away. He then tried to find someone who could tell him what was wrong with his daughter, as 36 hours had now passed since the family first arrived at the hospital and they were still none the wiser. All they could or would tell the family is that it was ‘under investigation’. Nursing staff also advised that there were no beds available at the private hospital. This was confirmed when he went over there himself. Needless to say that he was now tired, frustrated and starting to feel fairly irate, why was he even in a private health fund?
His wife did not feel comfortable staying in the Children's Ward that night because to be blatantly honest, she felt scared and intimidated with the environment. The entire family all ended up staying there with her and in the morning they found that the infant had several hives over her body where it appeared that something had bitten her during the night. Around 10 am that morning, her father was advised that the Private Hospital had found a bed and that a privately practising paediatrician would treat the baby there. She was then transferred to the Private Hospital. She was intravenously administered a broad spectrum antibiotic over the period of one week and was seen by a paediatrician a couple of times per day. Ultimately, the lump in her throat disappeared and she was discharged from hospital without anyone from either RDH or the private hospital explaining to them what it was or what had caused it. Communication was atrocious!
About two months later, the lump reappeared on the baby’s neck and not wishing to repeat their previous experience at RDH and not really being satisfied with the manner it had previously been dealt with, her father took her to see their family doctor in Palmerston. After examining the baby, their doctor almost immediately diagnosed her condition as a thyroglossal cyst and he referred her to a surgeon at Darwin Private Hospital. Upon examining her and her ultrasounds, the doctor confirmed a thyroglossal cyst. He explained that this was not an uncommon condition in children, but that it was rare in a child as young as four months. The doctor further advised that she would require surgery to remove the cyst. He explained that this would need to be conducted quickly due to the cyst being located over her airway.
On 11 November 2008, the baby underwent surgery to have the cyst removed and was discharged from hospital several days later. About one month later, there was still a lot of swelling around the surgical site on her neck. Upon taking her back to see the surgeon, he believed that some of the stitches in her neck had not dissolved and this was causing it to swell/fester. The surgeon felt the best course of action was to just wait and see if her little body would naturally expel the undissolved stitches itself, rather than perform another surgical procedure. Over the next few months, her neck would swell and fester on an average of every few weeks and each time it did, she was prescribed a course of broad spectrum antibiotic to abate the swelling and prevent infection setting in.
On the evening of Friday, 21 March 2009, however, her parents observed that her privates appeared red and irritated and pus was being excreted. They immediately took her to the emergency after hours clinic at Palmerston. The doctor there took swabs and stated that he believed the now toddler was suffering from a form of Chlamydia and provided her parents with a tube of Caneston cream. The next morning they had to race her into the hospital because she had developed big blisters all over her body. Her parents couldn't even remove her clothing without the skin peeling off and eventually her clothing had to be cut away. She was immediately admitted to Darwin Private Hospital, again under the care of the original doctors and was subsequently diagnosed with a serious Staph infection. She was again administered antibiotics intravenously.
I quote directly from the father’s letter:
- Peter, I cannot begin to explain how I felt having to see my baby daughter in this state. It was like somebody had dropped her in a bath of acid. She had big blisters all over her body, her eyes were all swollen and closed. She was normally a very happy and cheerful baby, but at this moment she was totally unresponsive.
On the Saturday and Sunday after she had been admitted, I could not even look at my daughter without tears welling in my eyes and there were even a couple of occasions where I thought she might actually die. And as you are aware, all this was happening less than a month after I lost my mother. Although my daughter fully recovered after spending a week in hospital, I was later told that the Staph infection had probably been the result of having been prescribed a broad spectrum antibiotic for a prolonged period due to the problem with her neck. This was because broad spectrum antibiotics not only kill-off the bad bacteria on/in the body - but also the good bacteria, which is responsible for warding off the Staph germs.
Following this the saga concerning the lump on her neck continued. Eventually, the surgeon basically admitted that he was stumped. The surgeon advised that he intended to confer with somebody from the Paediatric Team at RDH, but several weeks passed and they heard nothing. On Thursday, 13 August, 2009 her parents took her to see a paediatrician at the Palmerston Medical Clinic. The doctor told them that he was almost certain that the cyst in the toddler’s neck had reformed and this normally only occurred when the initial surgery had failed to remove the cyst completely. Consequently, he advised that she required treatment from a specialist paediatric surgeon and that this would be difficult in Darwin, as there were no specialist paediatric surgeons here. He stated that although the surgeon who preformed the operation was an excellent surgeon, he was a general surgeon and not a paediatric surgeon. He also identified several other capable general surgeons in Darwin, but again stated that none of them were paediatric surgeons and expressed doubts about their ability to treat the toddler’s condition.
Ultimately, the paediatrician’s advice was that if they had the opportunity, then they should seriously consider taking their daughter to the Royal Children’s Hospital in Melbourne where she would be provided with competent paediatric care/surgery. The paediatrician subsequently requested that, in the meantime, they take their daughter for another ultrasound and come back and see him when this had been done. Quite damning one would think when a local doctor advice is to get on a plane!
An ultrasound was arranged, examined and the results indicated the thyroglossal cyst had reformed in her neck and further, another smaller cyst had a formed above the initial one. They were informed that there was no doubt that the toddler would require further surgery to remove these cysts and he referred them to the Royal Darwin Hospital. An appointment was subsequently made at RDH and on 9 September, 2009 and the parents met with another surgeon at RDH and two other members of his surgical team.
Although the surgeon stated that he was not a paediatric surgeon, he did, nevertheless, describe in detail and via illustrations how the surgery needed to be performed on the toddler in order to completely remove the cysts in her neck. He further advised that he had performed similar surgery on numerous children and I was reasonably satisfied that, despite not being a specialist paediatric surgeon, he certainly knew what he was talking about and could probably competently perform this surgery on her. That is comforting! Her parents did, nevertheless, express their concerns to the surgeon and his staff about their daughter receiving quality paediatric care in Darwin and that these concerns had primarily arisen out of our experiences to date.
They also informed him about their concerns regarding the cleanliness of RDH and further explained that these concerns were based on the fact that in September, 2008 the toddler’s grandmother had walked into RDH after suffering a stroke and had filled in her own pre-admission forms and that after being admitted, had never walked again, had never beaten infections that she contracted after undergoing surgery in RDH and how after almost six months of being bedridden in RDH, had died. You might understand their hesitation after a horrible six month period where their mother contracted infection after infection while in RDH that led to her ultimate passing.
They told them that due to these concerns and on the advice of their family paediatrician, they were considering requesting a referral for their daughter to the Royal Children’s Hospital in Melbourne. The surgeon and staff stated they understood the concerns however advised there were no more bacteria in the operating theatre at RDH than there were at any other public hospital in Australia (a few days later, headlines in the NT News announced 'Super Bug' in RDH) and furthermore, that she would not receive any better treatment or care at another hospital than she would at RDH. They also stated that, as far as they were concerned, referring the toddler to a southern hospital was not an option because if complications were to set-in following the surgery, then the family could be stuck down there for months.
Basically, the parents felt that these doctors (or surgeons) were doing their best to discourage them from requesting (or forcing the issue) of a referral for their daughter to the Royal Children’s Hospital regardless of whether or not this would be in her best interests. In view of this, her parents asked if it would be possible for the surgery to be preformed over at the private hospital and the surgeon advised them that it was not, because his insurance would not cover it.
The parents then asked if the toddler did undergo this surgery in the RDH, would it then be possible to have her transferred to the private hospital for her recovery but they were again advised this would not be possible. My understanding is that RDH does have an arrangement with the Private Hospital and it just amazes me that RDH would not jump at the opportunity to transfer a patient to the private hospital which of course would free up a bed. When advised they had private health cover and that based on their previous experience in the children's ward at RDH there would be no way that they would have their daughter stay there after surgery, they were basically told by the surgeons that they would have to find a private practising surgeon to perform the surgery in Darwin.
I again quote directly from the letter:
- I am now seriously considering taking her plight to the media. ... I also feel it is an extremely sad indictment on our health system when a family that has top private health and hospital cover, must then utilise not only the public hospital's surgical facilities, but also its beds, etc. for post surgery recovery/care. This is especially so when, unfortunately, the family concerned are rather distressed, if not terrified, at the thought of this due to their previous experience in the children’s ward at RDH and also because of the recent death of a loved-one whilst in the care of medical staff at RDH.
While this terrible occurrence concerns both our public and private system, the elderly and the young, it certainly raises serious concerns about our health care system in the Northern Territory and further evidence the recent AMA report is accurate and that our health system is failing Territorians.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will talk about a serious situation with one of our non-government associations operating in the mental health area.
I have been approached by a group of constituents, and women and families who have serious concerns with the association’s operations, and moreover, the lack of attention by the government to what is obviously a big problem which is not going to go away. These constituents have been involved in the mental health area for many years due to family needs and requirements
The association is Top End Association for Mental Health Incorporated or, as it is commonly called, TEAMhealth. If one works within the non-government community sector in the Northern Territory for a period of time, one is struck by the fear which exists within the system, or so I am told. Funded agencies are afraid to raise issues of concern because their funding may be affected. Clients do not complain because they fear what little they receive will be threatened. Service delivery level public servants do not complain because retribution will come from above. Unfortunately, these fears are based upon recent memory. The result is a system which accepts second, third and fourth best as norm. Change happens at a glacial pace because we are afraid to say this is not good enough.
These issues associated with TEAMhealth are a case in point. The organisation’s staff will tell horror stories about their own and their clients’ treatment. Many will not formalise the complaint because of fear of retribution, or they lack confidence their efforts will see change. Funded organisations tell these people, who are campaigning: ‘You are doing a good job’, but do not want the organisation’s name attached to anything ‘because we are negotiating our funding agreement.’
TEAMhealth was once held in high regard, now it is not. It is not because of the hard work of the carers, who continue to provide the best of care and support, despite the ineptitude of the management of the association.
In mid-2009, a number of staff and ex-staff approached the then Chairman of the board with their stories of bullying, bad management, and harassment in the management of this association. An independent consultant was appointed by the board to carry out an interim investigation and report to the board. After gathering signed statements from staff and ex-staff - 26 signed statements were received - the report, which verified the original allegations, was given to the board.
As I understand the situation, some board members refused to read the report, despite having commissioned it. Following this untenable situation, the then Chairman of the board resigned when it became apparent the other four board members had no intention of doing anything to protect staff, or more importantly, as some would argue, the clients from the excesses of the TEAMhealth management.
A group of members requested a special general meeting of TEAMhealth at which they intended to move a motion of no-confidence in the board. This was stymied by the board, which refused membership to people who thought they were members and had paid their membership fees, in some cases, months earlier than the proposed meeting. Since then, at least 27 membership applications have been refused. The CEO of this association remains in place, and clients continue to miss out.
In 2008-09, TEAMhealth recorded a staff turnover of over 100%. This is nothing short of extraordinary, and should automatically ring alarm bells. The industry average for the community sector in the Northern Territory is about 14.3%.
Since the return to work of the CEO and her deputy on 17 August 2009, who had been overseas on an extended 10-week trip - I am told it was meant to be a business trip. However, I am hard-pressed to know of any business trip in this country which would take 10 weeks. After they returned, at least eight full-time staff have resigned - this is since August, and we are now in October - and at least three are, or have been, on stress leave. This could be an all-time record. If the average of one staff person leaving per week is maintained, there could be staff turnover of over 150% in 12 months.
TEAMhealth is perpetually understaffed; some positions have been vacant for almost two years. In the last two years, TEAMhealth has underspent funding allocations by $2m, or 20%. The organisation has over $3m in cash assets. Tenants of TEAMhealth are charged 60% of their income as rent. It is reported one family of five has been left $250 per fortnight to live on after paying this rent. Up to 25% of the accommodation managed by TEAMhealth for mentally-ill people is empty at any one time. There is a crisis in mental health accommodation in the Northern Territory and, yet, this organisation, which is specifically meant to care for mental health patients, is denying people, who most need accommodation, a secure and safe place to stay. This is something I cannot fathom, let alone accept.
The Board of TEAMhealth has received written complaints over the last three months about the service delivery and management of TEAMhealth from GROW, TEMHCO, Mental Health Carers NT, and the staff of the adult team at the Tamarind Centre. How do I know this? I have seen the letters of complaint.
This association needs to be reviewed through the Associations Act, at the very least, as it is not meeting its obligations under the legislation, nor is it meeting the needs of the staff of the association and, more importantly, the clients, it purports to care for and look after.
Yes, there have been representations to the minister’s office and, the minister’s office has failed to act appropriately, given the seriousness of the situation. The minister had referred the matter to the department, and I quote the minister from a newspaper article on 12 September 2009:
- I have asked the department to continue to actively assess the situation. I am conscious that, ultimately, the central issue here is the wellbeing of TEAMhealth clients.
Nice words, but what do they mean? Of course, the clients have priority, but so do the staff who care for the clients. If they are working in an environment of bullying, harassment, and nastiness, what hope is there for the people who most need the care?
I suspect this issue has been put into the too-hard basket, and the department is actively working to make this issue go away by ignoring it or, at worst, trying to cover it up. I get the distinct impression the biggest problem created, is the fact the whole sordid and sorry mess was made public, and has smacked the minister in the face. Will the minister do something? Get involved, find out why there are empty houses, find out why it has not spent its money. Why does TEAMhealth have $3m in cash? Why could that money not be put to better use? And why is it denying membership to people who really care and want to get involved in looking after people with mental illnesses?
Through you, Madam Deputy Speaker, I urge the minister to get involved, or at the very least, tell the department to get involved, and stop hiding behind screens while people in need are left wanting, and, possibly, suffering further harm due to the lack of care and medical attention or appropriate housing.
It is a disgrace that a once good organisation has got to this stage, and I urge the government to act immediately, find out why there is rot and decay in this association, rectify it, and ensure that the people who most need proper and professional care are receiving it.
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Madam Deputy Speaker, I draw your attention to this wonderful piece I found tucked out behind your chair, underneath all the old Hansards.
I thought it was a terrible shame something so lovely is hidden away and not in the eyes of the public view. I will describe it; it is an hourglass. I will spin it around. I think it goes for a minute or so. Obviously, we have clocks these days, but, I am guessing, in the days of the old parliament, it actually used hourglasses.
I will read the inscription: ‘Presented to the Legislative Council of the Northern Territory by the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia 12 April 1960’. There is much history surrounding this hourglass, presented to the old Legislative Council in the Northern Territory. I notice we have these despatch boxes, which are replicas of the original despatch boxes in federal parliament, which go back a long way.
I thought it would be appropriate for this to be on display in the House. I request that maybe the Clerk’s Office or even the Speaker might look into this request. I have seen in other parliaments around Australia, in the Parliament of Victoria and the Parliament of South Australia, they have these hourglasses on display. I am not sure whether they do use them or not …
Ms Lawrie: Quick, fast-track to the punchline, as entertaining as you are.
Mr CONLAN: Believe it or not, member for Karama, I am deadly serious. It could sit right there in front of the Parliamentary Records on the desk. I believe it is a wonderful piece, which could be on display for all Territorians and, indeed, visitors to this Chamber.
Ms Carney: Bring it to the Alice Springs sittings.
Mr CONLAN: That could even be a very good idea, bring it to the Alice Springs sittings. It is a little frail, but I do not think it would be used.
Nevertheless, in all seriousness, I urge yourself, Madam Deputy Speaker, perhaps the Speaker of the House, and the Clerk’s Office to consider placing it on the Table. It represents a vast history, and demonstrates the history of government, albeit, limited government we had back in 1960 …
Ms Lawrie: The appointed Legislative Council.
Mr CONLAN: when it was presented to the Northern Territory Legislative Council, beg your pardon?
Ms Lawrie: They were appointed.
Mr CONLAN: Whatever.
Ms Lawrie: Do you want a history on ...
Mr CONLAN: Whatever. You would think someone whose family are very involved …
Ms Lawrie: Do you want a history of the Remonstrance?
Mr CONLAN: Beg your pardon?
Ms Lawrie: Do you want to know about the Remonstrance? Go upstairs and read that.
Mr CONLAN: Which one?
Ms Lawrie: No, the one that we have. The Remonstrance signed …
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr CONLAN: Madam Deputy Speaker, I do feel that - we have gone through, I will spin it around again. It is not a time-wasting exercise. I saw it stuck away there, it is not being used, it is out of anyone’s view; no one can see it. It is a lovely antique, and is part of the history of the Northern Territory Parliament. I have seen them in previous parliaments around Australia; in South Australia and Victoria, which have it sitting there. It is simply a request, which maybe the Clerk’s Office might take up, or bring up with the Speaker, instead of having it hidden away, so no one can see it. It could be on display for all Territorians and visitors to this House to view.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Greatorex, I am sure Madam Speaker will give that due consideration.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Madam Deputy Speaker, I express my disappointment in the member for Barkly, and I refer to his attitude towards plagiarism.
I am referring to the Parliamentary Record for this parliament, on 21 October 2008, where the member for Barkly says, and I quote:
- Madam Deputy Speaker, the privilege of parliament is an important one. Elected members of parliament have the ability and opportunity to commit their words in Hansard so that their views, arguments, congratulations, and respects are forever on the public record.
He continues further on:
- It is with great disappointment, that on going through Hansard, I have made an alarming discovery. The act of plagiarism is occurring in the House.
I have discovered, along with my colleagues - in fact, I should probably give credit to the member for Araluen who discovered this, the act of hypocrisy in this parliament. Oh my goodness me. I can give the references from the Internet so I am not accused, once again, of plagiarism. One of the online dictionaries I read tonight defined a hypocrite as: ‘a person who pretends to be what he is not’. Actually, that could go for many of the people on the Labor side of this House, because they pretend to be ministers, and I can assure you, they most definitely are not. Another, the Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines a hypocrite as: ‘a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion’; or ‘a person who acts in contradiction of his or her stated beliefs or feelings’. Dictionary.com describes a hypocrite as: ‘a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions or statements belie his or her public statements’.
The member for Barkly, on 21 October 2008, came out and made a big issue about plagiarism in this House committed by me and also the member for Sanderson. I know the member for Sanderson is going to have a few words on this also, so I will not go too much into what I know he is going to talk about. Lo and behold, on 20 August 2009, the member for Barkly stood in this House and, against all the lovely words, the nice flowery words he used in his speech, he derided the members of the opposition in relation to plagiarism. I quote a couple of other things he said, from the Parliamentary Record on that night:
- As I have mentioned, as a school teacher and an educator, that plagiarism is of great concern to me. I am shocked this has occurred in this House, with me as a new member.
Let me tell you something, Madam Deputy Speaker. Here we are, a year on, and I cannot believe how insincere and disingenuous the member for Barkly is. He stood here in this House and committed the very same thing which he describes in his own words. When we look at the comparison between what the member for Barkly said on 20 August 2009, when he plagiarised another speech that came out of the Assembly in Western Australia, in relation to the bill he was presenting, the Prisoners (Interstate Transfer) Amendment bill, they are almost word for word.
It is bad enough the member for Barkly dared to come into this House on 20 August 2009 and plagiarised from another person’s speech without giving that person any credit for the speech, never mind the fact he stood here a year ago berating us for the very same act. That is bad enough in itself. But this morning, when this was put to him, it came up in debate again, the member for Barkly defended himself.
I will point out now the difference between the integrity of the member for Barkly, and the integrity of the members for Katherine and Sanderson, because, after his speech, on 21 October 2008, I came back into this House the following night, on 22 October 2008, and I said, and I quote from the Parliamentary Record:
- I thanked the member for educating me, and thank him again tonight for him entering into his role as a teacher.
I respected he found out we had plagiarised, that is fine. But I was man enough to get up in the House the following day and admit my mistakes. Not only did I admit the mistakes, the member for Barkly pointed out, but then I continued on, because I found that I had cut another speech, which may have been considered plagiarism by the member for Barkly, when I spoke in another adjournment about breast cancer.
I have admitted my mistakes, seen the wrongdoing, I suppose, as alleged by the member for Barkly, and moved on. I believe that is a far better position to be in, rather than the member for Barkly coming out here, accusing us of one thing in one breath, and then turning around, with 12 months’ worth of parliamentary experience under his belt, and doing exactly the same thing. And then to try to give some lame excuse for defending himself …
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! Plagiarism is the unauthorised use of someone’s work. What the Minister for Correctional Services did was an agreed national speech.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order, member for Karama. You have the floor, member for Katherine.
Mr WESTRA VAN HOLTHE: This is a case of the member for Karama standing up trying to defend the indefensible. I believe what the member for Barkly did, and his subsequent actions are inexcusable. Those actions go to what sort of man the member for Barkly is; he is a man with low moral courage, he has no integrity, and he will not stand in here, like all the people on that side of the House, and accept wrongdoing. He stands there and continues to defend the indefensible.
The members on his side of the House are continuing down the same path. It is no wonder this crowd cannot get anywhere in the Northern Territory, because even when their wrongdoings are pointed out to them, they are so incredibly arrogant, they simply will not accept they are wrong and move on.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I also speak in relation to matters of plagiarism which have occurred in this House.
I was the target last year of the member for Barkly in relation to being accused of plagiarism, something I stood up and admitted. I said, yes, I am sorry, and I apologised to the House, and I apologise again. However, I was new, and in my enthusiasm to promote the Boy Scouts - we are talking about the Boy Scouts, I contacted the Commissioner of the Northern Territory and said: ‘I would like to promote the Scouts’. I had been to a fantastic dinner, and some events to celebrate the centenary of the Scouts, and there is no more homely group of people helping our community than the Boy Scouts. I stood here, in what might have been my naivety, and accepted responsibility for what I did and I was prepared to take whatever it was the member for Barkly handed out. I did not like it at the time, but I accepted it and I apologised.
I listened to the lessons the former principal was giving us like students. I quote from his adjournment speech on 21 October 2008:
- It is with great disappointment, that on going through Hansard, I have made an alarming discovery. The act of plagiarism is occurring in the House.
Wow! Whoopee do!
- The dictionary defines plagiarism and I quote from Dictionary.com:
the unauthorised use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one’s own original work.
I recall the member for Barkly saying to me: ‘The member for Sanderson used this stuff without acknowledging the source’. I also recall - if I am correct - he said something along the lines of: ‘Fine, if you just acknowledge the work’. But, that was my failing. I did not acknowledge the work. Yes, when you are actually quoting what the Scouts say, they, obviously, have the best words. Things like over the past 100 years the shaping of lives of many individuals. Then I went through and talked about a whole range of fantastic people. Some ALP members in the federal government at this point were former Scouts. Member of this side - and I am assuming the government side of this House - were also former Scouts, and made a great contribution to our community.
He went on to say - and I quote again from the member for Barkly’s adjournment debate speech on 21 October last year:
- As a former school teacher, it was important to me, as an educator and a role model, to impress and teach my students about the importance of doing your own work and expressing your own views, and if someone before you had said it better, then give that person the credit deserved.
Here we are, and we have the good people in Western Australia, who have done some very good work. Then, on 20 August 2009, the member for Barclay, the Minister for Correctional Services …
Ms Lawrie: Barkly.
Mr STYLES: Barkly. My humble apologies, member for Karama. The member for Barkly then plagiarised this from Western Australia. I heard him stand up and say: ‘In New South Wales, we follow very closely the wording’. When you copy someone else’s work, that is fairly close. Then I heard him try to justify trying to get out of being accused of plagiarism.
Both the member for Katherine and I accepted responsibility for our actions. I find it remarkable the member for Barkly will not accept responsibility for his plagiarism ...
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker!
Mr STYLES: We have more. He said we should not ...
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Please pause, member for Sanderson. Resume your seat.
Ms LAWRIE: It is important, as Attorney-General, I offer members opposite a briefing on model legislation and the requirements used for common words.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Karama. It is not a point of order. You have the call, member for Sanderson.
Mr STYLES: Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker.
He said – and I do not have a problem if these people want to use the stuff but, like the member for Barkly gave us a lecture, you simply have to acknowledge we have taken this stuff from Western Australia. If he said: ‘I would like to acknowledge the contribution of the people from Western Australia’ – no problem. That is the lecture I got in relation to my use of stuff off websites. I made the error, as the member for Barkly has pointed out, that I did not acknowledge the source. The member for Barkly had not acknowledged the source of his plagiarism on 20 August 2009 in this House.
Then he goes on to say:
- Two of our members unfortunately, do not adhere to that lesson. The member for Katherine and the member Sanderson, I believe, have plagiarised websites and passed them on as their own views.
It is interesting, because, quoting the achievements of all the people who are scouts can hardly be my own view. It is factual information that we were going through. On the next page of the member for Barkly’s adjournment debate, it says:
- I do not want to knock members opposite for adjourning on these great youth programs and organisations.
And I thought he was getting up us for promoting these sorts of things, he continued:
- … but I want to stress to them, that as leading members of our community people look to them and they must lead by example and that does not mean plagiarism.
Here is a minister of the Crown, a former principal of a school, and what does he do? He stands up - and this is about role models, he wants to be a role model, he is a minister of the Crown, a former principal, and he is lecturing other people on being a great role model - and he is plagiarising.
The member for Katherine stood up several minutes ago and gave us a definition of hypocrisy. I find it astounding that one can come into this House, lecture members about their errors, and those members accept it, and then he plagiarises stuff from Western Australia, does not acknowledge it, and expects us to believe he is a great role model and a responsible member of our community to quote:
- … but I want to stress to them, that as leading members …
You do not get much more leading than a member of parliament and, in fact, a minister of the Crown. You do not get much more leading members of the community than that, and the people look at them, and they must lead by example. I hope that is not the example the minister is going to make or continue to do. It would be really nice if the member for Barkly came into this House and said, ‘all right, I made a mistake’. It is exactly what the member for Katherine and I did when we made a mistake. We were brave enough to stand up in front of the people of the Northern Territory, admit our mistake, and cop whatever we were going to cop. Unfortunately, the people on that side do not seem to have the intestinal fortitude to stand up and cop what is fairly given to them, given their own standards.
This is their standards, these are their rules, and this is what he is setting for us to follow. And he wants all the young people who look up to him to follow that, and have confidence in the fact he is a leading member of our community and they are supposed to look up to him. His words, not mine, and I want to stress them again, because I love this stuff:
… I want to stress to them, that as leading members of the community people look up to them and they must lead by example and that does not mean plagiarism.
I suggest that the people on this side of the House are a far better leading example to the community than the member for Barkly. Through leading by example, we teach our kids, students, and everyone in our community that when you are wrong, you should stand up and cop it on the chin for being wrong. I have taught that to my kids. I have taught just short of 40 000 kids in this town in my time as a school-based police officer, and I taught them all they should front up and be prepared to take it on the chin if they are responsible. You know, to be a responsible citizen and do that.
I believe the member for Katherine and I have been responsible; we have copped it on the chin. I now challenge the member for Barkly to come into this House and say, sorry guys, I got it wrong. Accept it and be a leading member of the community, and show us that he actually has the intestinal fortitude to do so.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Deputy Speaker, I launch a defence of the Minister for Correctional Services in relation to this matter and the accusations of plagiarism against him.
I listened very carefully to the excuse he gave today, as well as to the interjections from the Treasurer, the member for Karama. The argument runs like this: a second reading speech may be turned to by a court when seeking to interpret the intent of the bill for the purposes of finding its way through a potential legislative anomaly, which may find its way into a bill. This means if there is an interpretative issue inside a legislative instrument, then the court may turn its mind to the second reading speech only, which means it has to be a very carefully crafted speech, to be able to guide the court in determining what the intent of the government and the minister of the day was. I listened carefully to that particular excuse and I have heard something similar uttered here.
The argument goes like this: we are introducing uniform legislation. Uniform legislation exists in various areas. The government is introducing uniform legislation; therefore, the second reading speeches must be uniform, thus reflecting the intent across the jurisdictions. However, I then raise the question: if the legislation and the intent of the second reading speeches were deliberately designed by the ministerial council to show the same intent, why the minister did not dedicate his entire speech to exactly the same language? Because the language in the rest of the speech - the words which are purportedly his own and have not been tracked down as plagiarism - will now give a different meaning and intent to uniform legislation the government is running a defence on. You cannot be half-pregnant and you cannot have a half-intention demonstrated to a court.
This demonstrates, if you believe the excuse given by the minister and the government, the whole speech should be replicated in each jurisdiction word for word, comma for comma, full stop for full stop, which has not occurred ...
Ms Lawrie: That is not how it works. Each speech also reflects the individual jurisdiction, and you know that.
Mr ELFERINK: Thank you. I pick up on that interjection. That is why we have different jurisdictions: ‘The individual speech reflects the opinions of the individual jurisdiction’. Therefore, it follows, without challenge - any reasonable challenge - the whole speech should reflect the jurisdictional intent of the minister in the particular jurisdiction. To be half-pregnant is not a concept which washes in this place.
However, as I stood up, I said I intended to defend the minister, and the defence run by the members opposite clearly does not hold water. How on earth can I defend the minister when the Treasurer has so fundamentally failed in running a defence of her colleague? I defend the minister in this way: the whole speech is cogent, understandable, and well-written. As we see so often, ministers from the other side of the House come in and deliver cogent, well-written speeches. The problem we have in this House is cogent, well-written speeches delivered by ministers are never written by ministers. They are usually written by bureaucrats or fifth floor staffers. What we have developing in this environment is ministers who think their function is one of being a figurehead.
I remind honourable members of the minister currently under discussion, who, during the estimates process, when he was asked his opinion of something, he replied words to the effect of: ‘Do you want my opinion or my ministerial opinion?’ That demonstrates the level of understanding which actually exists. We can all remember, with great affection, the former member for Millner, Matthew Bonson, being asked a question about government policy. ‘What is your opinion on that, minister?’ He turned to his CEO and looked at him: ‘I will defer that to my CEO’ was the answer.
We know the synchronised swimming team opposite are actually at the shallow end of the talent pool but, to constantly come into this Chamber and consistently hear speeches being read out which are cogent and intelligent, being delivered by people who could not muster an IQ of more than three amongst all of them, is just not credible. What is worse is they do not even have enough critical thinking about their own positions to even challenge, ask, or read the information they are given before they waltz into this place passing laws which affect the people of the Northern Territory.
Is this serious, I ask? A rhetorical question, do not bother to answer it. Yes, is the answer. And how do we know that? Two days ago, we passed a piece of legislation and during that debate it became clear that one of the people who I have the greatest regard for, in terms of their intelligence, on that side of the House, and an element of great cunning, the Attorney-General, was passing legislation without having read the legislative instrument she was bringing into the House.
There is this autonomic belief, entrenched in the hearts and souls of the people opposite, that the people who serve them are infallible. It is like they are running guidance over a bunch of popes, and all of those infallible popes cough up information, which looks good, tastes all right, sounds good, but, at the end of the day, is still capable of being wrong. It is important for a minister, before they walk into this joint, to think critically about what is being served up to them by those people who serve their interests, because the principles of responsible government demand the buck stops somewhere. I believe it was Harry Truman, I could be corrected, who had a sign on his desk, ‘the buck stops here’. Exactly. There is no such thing in the ministerial language, or should be no such thing, especially on obvious things as, ‘I am advised’.
I hear the language so often: ‘I am advised, I am being told’. I can understand that in technical legislation, on technical issues, that if something goes wrong in a power station, that the minister might stand up and say, ‘I am advised’. But to walk into a place like this and glibly spew forth what is being served up by some staffer who was probably too lazy to write an original speech in the first place will invariably mean that outraged members of parliaments will sooner or later be accusing them of plagiarism.
I remember, very fondly, whilst the member for Johnston, who was then the minister for, I believe, primary industries - I could be corrected on this part - was delivering a speech which had been delivered not two years earlier by the former member for Karama. It was as funny as a fit because Tim Baldwin was reading out the speech which was being delivered as a ministerial statement, because the staffer, whoever wrote it, had lifted it straight out of Mick Palmer’s speech two years earlier and dropped it straight into the minister’s speech, and he read it out. They were sitting there reading the same speech as it went along.
A member: Are you telling me they have priors?
Mr ELFERINK: There is a bunch of priors here. Many priors.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the culture has not changed. The culture of: ‘I want to be at home at 5 pm, yeah, whatever, stick it on my desk, I will read it out in parliament tomorrow’ has not changed. I urge the government: please be critical, because if you think your function as the government is to come in and merely vomit up whatever the public servants stick on your desk, then we will end up with legislation that will do ridiculous things like perhaps fine beggars $6500. Stick that in your enamel cup, folks.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016