2013-10-08
Madam Speaker Purick took the Chair at 10 am.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I table a copy of the Administrative Arrangements Order published in the Northern Territory Gazette No S47 dated 10 September 2013.
I advise the Assembly that on 10 September 2013 Her Honour the Administrator made the following appointment of ministers of the Northern Territory:
Mrs Bess Price, Minister for Community Services, Women’s Policy, Parks and Wildlife and Statehood
Mr John Elferink, Minister for Children and Families.
I also table a copy of the Administrative Arrangements Order published in the Northern Territory Gazette No S48 dated 16 September 2013. I advise the Assembly that on 16 September 2013 Her Honour the Administrator made the following additional appointment of a minister for the Northern Territory:
Mr Peter Styles, Minister for Transport.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the Public Accounts Committee discharge Mrs Price and appoint Mr Kurrupuwu, the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee discharge Mrs Price and appoint Ms Lee, and the Committee on the Northern Territory’s Energy Future discharge Mrs Price and appoint Mr Kurrupuwu. Madam Speaker, this is necessary as a result of Mrs Price being elevated to the ministry.
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received Message No 11 from Her Honour the Administrator notifying assent to bills passed in the August sittings. The message is dated 13 September 2013.
SUCCESSION TO THE CROWN (REQUEST) (NATIONAL UNIFORM LEGISLATION) BILL
(Serial 39)
Continued from 28 August 2013.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, this House has considered much legislation over the course of its life. While all matters considered by members on behalf of Territorians are important, some bills are, by their nature, more functional and operationally focused than others. Some bills are symbolic and iconic, some historic, some are necessary to allow the Territory to play its part as an active participant within the Federation. This bill is very much the latter.
Passage of this bill will mean the Territory will take its place alongside every other state and territory throughout Australia in requesting the Commonwealth parliament enacts legislation to change the laws of succession to the Crown which mirror changes to the law of royal succession in the UK. These changes will ensure an important and overdue step will have finally been taken to remove gender discrimination and religious bias from the succession process applied to the sovereign of Australia and the sovereign of the United Kingdom.
As agreed by the Commonwealth at the 16th CHOGM in October 2011, when the world’s attention was focused on Perth, Australia undertook to take a uniform approach in amending the rules of succession across the jurisdiction. All Commonwealth members at the meeting historically agreed likewise. This legislation is a result of that decision and fulfils the Territory’s part of that mechanism. Changing the succession rules to ensure a younger male son does not displace an older daughter in the line of succession, and removing the prohibition of an heir to the throne marrying a Catholic, would seem to all fair-minded people to be both necessary and welcome.
Regardless of one’s views about whether Australia should have its own head of state in the constitutional monarchy versus republic debate, I am confident all Territorians, indeed Australians, can agree it is important to have a more modern, less archaic model while the current system remains in place.
Following the CHOGM meeting, then Chief Minister Paul Henderson gave in-principle support for these changes on behalf of the Territory and we continue that support today.
While it is true the Northern Territory does not constitutionally need to pass this legislation as our consent is not required by the Commonwealth due to our constitutional position as a Territory, it is, nonetheless, important we do so for a number of reasons.
First, consistent uniform legislation across Australia is desirable, and this legislation reflects arrangements between other states and the Commonwealth. Second, and perhaps more important, it continues to send a signal to COAG that the Territory seeks to, and willingly, act as a fully-fledged member of the Federation. Our desire for statehood requires us to do no less. For the record I say again, this principle should apply on all legislation brought before the Commonwealth parliament which affects the Northern Territory.
Our current constitutional weakness should never be exploited by the Commonwealth, and I welcome the opportunity, therefore, to support this bill on that basis alone. I further note, and support, the actions taken by the Chief Minister with the former Prime Minister to extend executive authority through a formal arrangement by the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Regulations 1978 4(5)(f) to enable the Northern Territory Administrator to give assent to this bill when passed by this Assembly, taking the advice of the relevant minister.
This course of action is consistent with our approach as a jurisdiction to operate, as far as is possible, as a constitutional equal with other jurisdictions on every occasion we are able to do so.
The provisions of the bill are straightforward. Clause 6, while not required with the birth of a son for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge rather than a daughter, provides that the gender of any baby born from 28 October 2011 does not displace any other person wherever they were born.
This clause is important and has retrospective effect from 28 October 2016, the common date of agreement for all 16 Commonwealth realms and the United Kingdom Succession to the Crown Act.
Clause 3 confirms enactment of this legislation, and subsequent legislation by the Commonwealth, has no effect on the exiting arrangements between our current sovereign and the Northern Territory.
Clause 7 deals with the Royal Marriages Act of 1772, repealing the prohibition of a monarch marrying a Catholic. It is fair to say we are unlikely, as legislators, to see too many bills pass this House, and subsequent Commonwealth legislation, which relate to legislation of some 240 years’ duration.
Mr Deputy Speaker, in today’s society of equity and fairness, it is all but impossible to agree that these changes are, to put it mildly, long overdue, therefore, the opposition supports this bill.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I listened to the Opposition Leader’s comments on this matter in relation to statehood, and how the Commonwealth did not have to ask for our advice but did so out of being courteous to the Territory. Whilst I understand that could be an argument to push forward statehood, I place on the record I have not always been overexcited about statehood. I consider the many issues confronting the Northern Territory a higher priority than putting a huge amount of energy into becoming a state. However, I do not disagree with being a state at some stage.
If we are concerned about the Commonwealth having to ask what we think about this, if we are to be a state we should be an equal partner in the Commonwealth. I do not support having fewer senators than any part of Australia because if that is the way we become a state, then we become a 25% state or a 50% state. You either are a state or you are not. Tasmania once had a small number of people in the state but always had equal representation in the Senate. I do not believe we can be half pregnant, if you could call it that. We are either in or out when it comes to being a state.
I appreciate and understand the Opposition Leader’s comments. When I read the bill I had the same feeling, but I have my opinions on statehood which may vary from others in this House. I am sure we will debate the statehood matter again and again, as we have done in prior Assemblies.
It is unusual to debate something like this in parliament. It will probably be the only time we deal with a matter in this House in relation to laws which govern the Queen of Great Britain and the Queen of Australia. This is good for women because they are not bumped out of succession by a male born afterwards, and it is good for Roman Catholics.
I have to laugh a little because, being a Catholic, you have to get used to disparaging remarks due to the church sometimes having faults which need remedying, which has happened in the past. Other times it is because - the member for Fong Lim likes to take the mickey - pardon the pun - out of people like me. In this case we are dealing with removing what are derogatorily called papists; a term I hope belongs to another era. Certain religious groups in the world today could organise quite a demonstration if someone was to refer to their religious beliefs in such a manner. That is in an historical context, and one has to accept that is the way the language of the day referred to Roman Catholics. Today we see the removal of those clauses, something that is long overdue.
It is good to see women now have equal rights in relation to whether they can become the King or Queen of Great Britain, or Australia while we are still under a monarchy. It is also good to see someone can marry a Roman Catholic. The bigger question is can a Roman Catholic, or a person of another faith, become the king or queen?
Mr Elferink: No, and I will tell you why shortly.
Mr WOOD: I thank the member for Port Darwin for interjecting. I am interested in a more fulsome response.
If there was one failing in this legislation - because the King or Queen of Great Britain is also head of the Anglican Church, it would be a little difficult, especially if you had a Jewish king, an Islamic king or a Roman Catholic king. Perhaps it is time that connection also changed because you are discriminating against a person being king or queen based on religion. Perhaps in time, not that I am over-concerned about these matters, that will change as well.
The other thing which changes is that marriages are not void, as they were from 1772 onwards, if they did not have the blessing of the monarch. I do not know how that changes now. I would hate to dig into the technical side of that because I presume one was married and the only way to be unmarried was to be divorced. However, the way I read it the marriage was void so, technically, it did not happen in the first place. I did not know about it until the minister brought this legislation to parliament.
Nobody could complain that there is anything wrong with these changes; they are certainly welcome. It has only taken several hundred years for them to occur. You have to be patient when making improvements in the way we administer our country, and I believe this will be welcomed by any fair-minded person.
It is a wonder we have not had a discussion about the republic and so on. At the moment, the Queen is Queen of Australia and the issue of a republic has not surfaced much of late. It will be something as the Queen ages - it will come back for discussion at another time, but I will not go into that at present.
I welcome the legislation brought forward. I thank the Commonwealth for the kindness of heart in enabling us to discuss this legislation. It should not be the case. Regardless of my thoughts about what type of state we should be, at least we are able to put our point of view forward on this matter.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, I contribute to this debate more to answer questions from the member for Nelson than anything else. I start with the question, which he partially answered himself, as to whether or not a Catholic could become a reigning monarch in England.
It is worth investigating the history of how a Catholic could not become a reigning monarch in England. We have to wind the clock back to the reign of Henry VIII, who had a number of wives and, in the process of marrying one of those ladies - I cannot recall which one – there was a requirement for a divorce. I am doing this off the top of my head so stand to be corrected.
There were always rumblings between the crowned heads of Europe and the papacy based in Rome, and that tension manifest itself in a number of ways.
I suspect if you dig closely into the history of the divorce he sought - no, permission to marry a cousin – what occurred was a papal imposition on the church in England to say certain things could not occur, which did not please the king. The consequence was the king established himself as the head of the church in England, thus creating the Anglican Church.
It is no accident of history that if one visits an Anglican Church, many of the ceremonies and objects inside the church, in fact many of the prayers, are similar to Catholic prayers. The Lord’s Prayer, which we say in this House, is the Anglican version of the Lord’s Prayer. The Catholic version of the Lord’s Prayer does not have the last two lines of the Anglican version …
Mr Wood: It does in Mass.
Mr ELFERINK: It does in Mass but is tacked on much later, as you well know. That separation is basically an argument of cause and effect. You have to remember the Catholic Church in the time of Henry VIII was an enormous political power. To be able to divest oneself of that political influence was of enormous advantage to the Crown. At that time, the Crown had a number of good reasons to separate itself from the papacy based in Rome and, as a consequence, King Henry VIII set himself up as head of the church. He also set himself up as Defender of the Faith. That title resonates through every sitting monarch since the rule of Henry VIII up to and including Queen Elizabeth II, our reigning queen.
Whilst there remains an Anglican Church in England, that title will, in all likelihood, stick. It would be incongruous with the intent of that title, Defender of the Faith - the faith being the Anglican faith - for a non-Anglican monarch to take on that title. You could not become defender of the Anglican faith and then whip down to the local synagogue, mosque or Catholic Church to practice your own faith. As a consequence, it is impossible for anyone other than an Anglican to become the ruling monarch of England and her dominions in the Commonwealth, including us.
Consequently, the short answer to your question based on history is, with cause and effect in the right order, no, a Catholic cannot rise to become Defender of the Faith and the monarch because the two are inextricably linked – unless, of course, there was reunification between the Anglican Church and the Catholic Church. I believe comments have been made in some parts of both churches that may be considered. In recent times there have been a number of transfers, for lack of better expression, of Anglican priests to the Catholic faith and vice versa. That has occurred on a very small level in the Catholic Church.
The short answer is until there is reunification of the Anglican and Catholic Churches it is unlikely a Catholic will ever sit on the throne of England.
Having made that observation, you also made some comments in relation to statehood. I place on the record as, until recently, Minister for Statehood my reservations about the things you said. Whilst you say we either take statehood all or nothing, I argue the opposite. I would be prepared to take statehood piecemeal because even if we take the title of state and were admitted to the standard of the state through section 121 of the Australian Constitution, which was a parliamentary decision to introduce a new state in the Commonwealth, section 121 of the Australian Constitution enables that entry as a new state be done on such terms and conditions as the Commonwealth parliament sees fit.
Of course, that would mean limiting the number of senators and those types of things. However, if we were to be introduced as a state, irrespective of the fact we were limited to the arrangements in place now, we would get the legal and constitutional protection of the Australian Constitution all states enjoy, despite our lesser condition in the number of senators, etcetera. That is important because it gives this House, the one we are part of, a much greater status than it currently has.
In accordance with the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act 1978, we can be overturned by a federal parliament moving a motion within 28 days of us passing a law. A classic example of that law, whether you are for or against euthanasia, is the people who passed that legislation were, basically, dismissed by the federal parliament as lesser citizens.
If we were to take on the mantle of statehood, even in a limited form, the High Court would automatically start giving protections to us for subsequent acts, which other states enjoy, after statehood had been declared. Yes, it would be a piecemeal approach. After statehood was declared, you would have an incremental growth in that direction. However, you would get protections in particular areas from day one. Those protections would include the protections states currently enjoy from federal interference under the Constitution. I would prefer that rather than saying all or nothing.
There is another complicating factor many people do not consider when talking about statehood which would really cause us problems in the federal domain. The Australian Constitution says the ratio between the Senate and the House of Representatives, as near as possible, be one senator to two members of the House of Representatives. That is important because if we were to demand an extra 10 senators, taking us up to the full quota of 12 senators, and if that were to be granted, an extra 20 seats would have to be found in the House of Representatives.
They would not necessarily come from the Northern Territory, and it is unlikely they would. However, you would have an extra 20 seats scattered around the country and I imagine many people in the federal parliament would baulk at such a suggestion. Moreover, and something I am mindful of, is that the House of Representatives structure on nominating where representatives come from is done on a population basis.
Currently, if memory serves me correctly, north of the Tropic of Capricorn, which is about half the land mass of Australia, there are only a dozen or so …
Mr Giles: Eight.
Mr ELFERINK: Eight seats in the House of Representatives. If we followed that population model we would load up more seats below the Tropic of Capricorn; Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide, and those places would get extra seats in the House of Representatives. You would not necessarily get any more seats north of the Tropic of Capricorn, perhaps one if you were lucky. The demand for 12 senators would have a large effect on retarding the advancement of statehood for the Northern Territory.
The member for Nelson proposes full statehood, and I understand why he runs that argument. I would rather the pragmatic result of the protection of a state as offered by the interpretation of the Australian Constitution through the High Court as a starting point and then work our way up to 12 senators rather than say, ‘We will be little old weak us until such time as we get everything’. There will be high levels of resistance to us having 12 senators for the reasons described. That is an argument for another time but I ask members to be mindful of it.
Having dealt with those issues, I thank members opposite for their support of this legislation and I will see the debate continue.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Nelson, and the Leader of Government Business for their support of this bill. The speech each member made, along with my second reading speech, outlines why the legislation has been brought in; we are aligning ourselves with the British parliament. As a Territory we do not have to pass this legislation, but my agreement with the federal government, and the previous Chief Minister, Paul Henderson’s, agreement with the former Prime Minister that we would proceed down this path confirms the position we are taking today.
Allowing women to automatically assume the lead role, and also Catholics having the opportunity, not just the Church of England, presents a change in the times, demographics, and a change in social positioning of how we see ourselves around the world, particularly in the Northern Territory, so I commend the bill the House.
I also want to comment on the conversation around statehood. I took on board what the member for Nelson said about statehood, and I listened intently to the opinion of the Leader of Government Business and where things should go. I am mindful that a strong position of the Country Liberals for many years has been to support statehood for the Northern Territory. There will be an opportune time to debate section 121 of the Constitution and the ability for the Northern Territory to become a state. It could be done with much ease rather than constitutional conventions and at much less expense than previously proposed.
Representation is an important concept for a number of people, member for Nelson. What the Leader of Government Business explained around representation models through our proportional population base and the type of representation we have above the Tropic of Capricorn needs to be taken into account. However, pursuing any motion around section 121 changes and support from the federal government and the Prime Minister to position the Northern Territory to be a state should be discussed in the public arena to test the confidence that people want to move to a state through an ease of transition approach. That is a debate for another day.
Without going further regarding this bill, our debate has already covered much of those aspects and we have broad support from parliament. I commend the bill to the House.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister)(by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Mines and Energy): Mr Deputy Speaker, mining and exploration creates jobs, helps build our regions, grows wealth for Territorians, and contributes to improving our essential infrastructure such as transport corridors. Mining and exploration delivers long-term benefits to the Northern Territory’s economy. We are lucky the Northern Territory has a wealth of mineral and energy opportunities.
Historically, much of the development in the Northern Territory has been encouraged by the search for and sale of our natural resources. Indeed, past Country Liberal governments recognised the importance of this industry, and today Territorians are still benefiting from major projects established over 20 years ago.
The development of the Central Australian gas fields and the pipeline to Darwin which fires the generators at the Ron Goodin and the Channel Island power stations, which in turn delivers electricity to many Territorians, was an achievement of past CLP governments. Support which ensured the first oil and gas discoveries in the Timor Sea was provided by past CLP governments.
Facilitation of the decision by ConocoPhillips and its partners to deliver the Bayu-Undan gas field and its pipeline to Darwin was also done by past CLP governments. The necessary support for the operation and development of world-class mineral deposits in Gove, Groote Eylandt, the gulf and Tanami regions, all operating for over 20 years, was provided by past CLP governments.
The current Country Liberals government is continuing the tradition of making use of our natural resources to benefit Territorians now and well into the future. We want to use the wealth created from ecologically sustainable mining to develop jobs, regional centres and infrastructure. We are building on the past successes of Country Liberals governments in order to deliver for the next generation of Territorians.
The mining industry is the Territory’s largest industry sector and every indication points to this continuing for many years to come. The global demand for energy and minerals is set to increase as the appetite of developed and emerging markets for materials for infrastructure, construction and manufacturing continues to grow. Currently, the petroleum and mining sectors represent more than 25% of the Northern Territory’s gross state product.
Today’s Country Liberals government continues the strong tradition of recognising the importance of mining for the Northern Territory’s future and has made mining and energy a major sector of our multi-level economy. In the Northern Territory we welcome mining development, we welcome manufacturing, and we welcome oil and gas development and downstream processing.
The future success and growth of the mining and energy and exploration industry in the Northern Territory is largely dependent on this government’s support of these industry sectors. Therefore, it is incumbent on this government to remove obstacles which impede the success and growth of mining, energy and exploration. It is incumbent on this government to put in place initiatives that make good economic and regulatory sense for big business to do business in the Northern Territory. Quite simply, if this industry is growing and succeeding the benefits that flow to the Territory will continue and the Territory will flourish.
Under the Country Liberals government’s Framing the Future, the strategic framework for government, we have developed a road map for the creation of a prosperous economy for the Northern Territory. Of course, mining, energy, and exploration play a crucial role in the Territory’s economic future. The changes we have made in our 12 months in government to mining regulations, to cutting red tape, and to increasing the amount of support this government provides to the resources and exploration industry in the Northern Territory are succinctly outlined in Framing the Future.
This government made commitments to industry and we are putting rubber on the road; we are delivering on those promises.
These changes will ensure an economy that creates wealth and jobs. It will build an economy that is open, competitive and innovative. It will grow an economy built on exports and the needs of our trading partners. It captures ideas, energy, and opportunities from across the Territory in order to deliver an economy that lands new local, national, and international investment.
This government is determined to take a forward view on the role of mining and energy in our economic future so we are acting now. In order to properly plan for our mining future and create a genuine and profitable partnership with industry, we need a stronger agenda within which to progress. One proposal currently under consideration by the Department of Mines and Energy is the implementation of a priority zone system for minerals and energy development in the Northern Territory.
Currently, two zones are mooted. In the north, zone 1 notionally encompasses the area from Nhulunbuy through to the McArthur region and west into the Beetaloo Basin. This includes prospective areas of mineralisation along the gulf coast, and inland in the Roper and McArthur regions. It also encompasses the Beetaloo and McArthur Basins, which are highly prospective for oil and gas and are close to existing pipeline infrastructure.
The second zone, notionally centred around Alice Springs, would include those areas of interest to the north and east of the town where there are a number of mineral exploration activities under way, as well as the Amadeus Basin south of Alice Springs, which has very high oil and gas potential. As a high level of activity already exists in these areas, prior to the final implementation of this initiative the department is consulting specifically and directly with industry in order to reach agreement on mutual obligations.
In order to accelerate exploration activity within these priority zones, the Country Liberals government will support the development of infrastructure, improve and speed up approvals for land access, and provide whole-of-government assistance for qualifying. This government will also provide new geoscience and collaborative programs in conjunction with industry. As a government, we will look at the cumulative effect of a number, or series of, mining developments in a region rather than treating projects individually. Through a coordinated approach, the overall benefits for regional development can be increased beyond the sum of the benefits from individual projects.
We are seeking industry views on how we can better work together to ensure mutual benefit before any commitment is made. For example, the department has sought specific views from industry on the current management of tenement renewals to ensure land remains in the hands of those who can demonstrate accelerated development. This ‘use it or lose it’ approach is designed simply and specifically to kick-start mining and oil and gas projects.
While we are lucky to have some of the world’s biggest global mining companies running world-class operations in the Territory, history tells us it is the smaller players we can expect to uncover the Territory’s next major new discoveries. The Territory remains fundamentally underexplored, and only sustained greenfields exploration can unlock the vast mineral potential we have. All great mining provinces start with greenfields exploration, the foundation of the mining sector.
The Country Liberals government is determined to take a forward view on the position of mining and energy in our economic profile and is acting now. Since coming to government, the Country Liberals have already put in place a range of important initiatives. Recently, I had the opportunity to launch CORE, Creating Opportunities for Resource Exploration initiative. Under CORE, this government has committed almost $4m this financial year to new geoscience and exploration stimulus programs designed to accelerate the Territory’s next generation of minerals and petroleum discoveries. CORE replaces the previous government’s unfunded Bringing Forward Discovery Program. CORE includes new programs by the department’s geological survey team to assess the gas and minerals potential of the Territory’s sedimentary basins, and surveys that will cover over 10% of the Territory with high resolution gravity data to assist exploration.
As part of this initiative, the geological survey team is currently undertaking a major gravity survey in the McArthur Basin, including areas from Borroloola to Daly Waters and north to the Roper River. A number of exploration companies will be substantially investing in this survey to increase the density of data in their areas of interest. This is another example of the Northern Territory government and industry working together for mutually beneficial outcomes.
The geological survey team also recently completed a regional gravity survey over an area between the Tanami and Tennant Creek, which will help explorers see beneath the vast and nearly unexplored sand plain that extends between two of our most important goldfields.
The government will also continue to co-fund selected exploration drilling and geophysical programs in areas that have seen limited past activity, and improve service to the exploration industry by making open file company exploration reports available online.
In September, during NT Resources Week, the department’s geological survey team released the first ever volume on the Geology and mineral resources of the Northern Territory. This 1100-page volume, an essential reference for mineral and petroleum explorers in the Northern Territory, is the first ever comprehensive description and detailed analysis of the geology, mineralogy and petroleum resources of the Northern Territory. The book will provide mineral and petroleum explorers with a single point of reference to access the latest in geological knowledge and understanding of the Territory’s resources.
Promotion of the exploration potential of the Northern Territory also continues through the flagship Annual Geoscience Exploration Seminar and marketing at high profile exploration seminars in the uranium, broader minerals, oil and gas sectors. The 2014 AGES will be the 15th year of this prestigious and important geoscience event. This is another initiative from a Country Liberal Party government of bygone times.
Our continuing efforts in Asian investment and engagement will build on previous good work in this area and will mostly focus on enabling increased investment in the exploration sector. Earlier this year the Territory government joined with the South Australian government to host a ground-breaking event in Darwin, the Australia China Minerals Investment Summit which brought more than 80 high-level Chinese investors together with over 50 explorers seeking investment. Following the success of this event in Darwin, in November I will lead another minerals investment delegation to China.
Last year the minerals investment delegation to China was a resounding success resulting in investments of more than $20m coming into the Territory. By joining this delegation, Territory exploration companies can access top-level decision-makers in China in an affordable way, through dozens of investment meetings and opportunities to promote their project. The delegation will also visit Japan and South Korea for seminars and business meetings to directly introduce companies with emerging minerals projects in the Territory to significant Japanese and Korean companies and trading houses. The Country Liberal’s government is also in the process of revising the role of the Northern Territory Mining Board.
In order for stronger and better communication to exist between the industry and government at a strategic level, it is imperative the Northern Territory Mining Board operates as a high level advisory body. The department has received a report reviewing the current structure, and I look forward to implementing a reinvigorated body that will, as a first priority, consider and advise on closure costings, security arrangements and funding of legacy issues across the Territory.
In the longer term, I see the board becoming a key source of advice to the department and me on a range of issues relating to mining, including regulatory approaches and closure standards amongst others. The regulatory arm of the department has developed a good working relationship with the Minerals Council on regulatory issues, with the most recent focus of work to streamline the mining approvals process.
Since coming to government, we have been working diligently to find a sensible and pragmatic solution to reduce red and green tape and to speed up processes. One key area identified early was the need to reduce the burden on industry of the regulatory process, especially over the form and frequency of approval documents. Central to that philosophy was easing requirements which are repetitive, costly, and time consuming.
Mining management plans is one area that has been a point of focus. In line with overwhelming feedback from industry, the department has now moved to four-year mining management plans for operating mines, supplemented by streamlined annual reports. These documents are also available online and are communicated directly with those mines affected. The Territory’s mining companies are ecstatic with the new regime of multi-year MMPs, a result which exceeded their expectations.
The next step is to apply these improvements to the exploration and extractive sectors. While these sectors tend to be more dynamic than the larger mining operations, all options will be considered in order to improve the regulatory outcomes for both the industry and the department.
The Department of Mines and Energy is also continuing to operate under revised processes which enable provisional or staged approvals to be granted faster. This is being applied to all operations where possible.
One of the intended outcomes of this process is it will free up time for mining officers to be in the field. The department aims to have a strong relationship with all its stakeholders, and there is no doubt an increased field presence will achieve this.
The department is also currently reviewing the Petroleum Act and related acts to ensure best practice regulation for gas and petroleum activities in the Northern Territory. Amendments will be implemented to the Petroleum Regulations, the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Regulations, as well as the Energy Pipelines Act and Regulations to allow for increased recovery of fees, levies and rents to offset departmental regulatory costs. Amendments will also be made to the Mining Management Act to enhance its effectiveness and secure necessary revenue to begin tackling the Northern Territory’s significant legacy mining liabilities. The department is participating in the Commonwealth review of the 2007 amendments to the Aboriginal Land Rights Act to improve access to land.
Under the Country Liberals government’s Framing the Future, the strategic framework for government, we are striving to achieve a balanced environment; an environment which is sustainable, balances approval of developments with environmental controls, and an environment that is well managed.
To that end, this government is unashamedly pursuing a stronger approach to dealing with legacy issues across the Territory. It is in the collective interests of the mining sector to see legacy sites addressed as their continuing presence serves to reinforce community opposition to mining, especially when new developments are being proposed. The introduction of the new levy is a positive step forward in this regard and will deliver remediation to some of the affected areas.
Turning to energy, it is estimated there are approximately 240 trillion cubic feet - TCF - of possible reserves of unconventional gas in the Territory. The industry rule of thumb is one trillion cubic feet is enough gas to power a city of one million people for 20 years. This includes the Beetaloo sub-basin, which has a possible 164 TCF; the McArthur Basin with a possible 40 TCF; the Bonaparte Basin with a possible 10 TCF, and the Amadeus Basin with a possible 25 TCF.
Another industry rule of thumb is 10% of resources become recoverable reserves. However, even with one-tenth of 240 TCF, the Territory could still be an energy powerhouse to the world for decades to come. All areas which hold possible reserves of unconventional gas currently have seismic surveys under way or wells already drilled in order to establish the full extent of gas reserves.
The Territory has a great future in supplying expanding global LNG markets, supplying gas to resource projects across the Northern Territory, supplying gas to hungry interstate energy markets and gas processing industries.
Notwithstanding the impact of the global financial crisis on the world’s major economies and their energy demands, the outlook for LNG and natural gas as a fuel is bright. We are now seeing a return to strong growth in the powerhouse economies in our north to Asia. With this growth comes increased energy demand, and natural gas, with its greenhouse and environmentally-friendly qualities, will grow more strongly than competing fuel sources.
As economic activity and energy demand grow, demand for gas will grow at a much faster pace. The potential for new gas and LNG projects in the Northern Territory is bright. Not only is there a site and approval for up to ten million tonnes per annum on Wickham Point, but land has been allocated for four extra LNG trains at Blaydin Point.
Our supply, service and resource construction industries are growing in size and capability along with the Ichthys LNG project and other resource projects. Our Marine Supply Base is well advanced towards completion, providing a dedicated purpose-designed service to offshore exploration and development activity.
A key issue for all industry players is energy availability and cost. In recognition of this, the Northern Territory government has established an Energy Directorate in the Department of Mines and Energy. The directorate will bring together a range of energy-related activities from across government. A particular focus is the potential for energy infrastructure to be linked to regional areas to provide supply options for existing and new developments.
The Energy Directorate is responsible for the full life cycle of all energy, including petroleum, oil and gas, pipeline, geothermal, and renewables in the Territory. The directorate will enhance the existing upstream energy regulation and policy responsibilities of the department to include all matters of future requirements, associated business, and supply for downstream matters. This will undoubtedly take some time to achieve, but it is encouraging to hear companies such as the APA Group talking about the possibility of linking the Territory gas network with the east coast grid.
In the gas sector, there is a need to secure the Territory’s energy future while addressing the urgent need to provide gas to Gove and to take advantage of considerable export potential across the world.
I acknowledge the status and progress of some of our major resource projects. The Territory currently has the largest number of potential mine development projects in play than at any time in the past three decades. There are 16 projects in construction or approvals processes, representing a capital investment of over $3.3bn, 2800 jobs for the construction phase, and 2400 jobs for ongoing operations. Of these 16 projects, nine have an estimated mine life of 20 years or more, and three are only stage 1 of much larger projects.
In the first quarter of 2013, Australian Ilmenite Resources was granted approvals for their SILL80 ilmenite project in the Roper region. This project is still in construction and commissioning phases. The first shipment of ilmenite from the port of Darwin is expected later this year, and will mark the commencement of a new mineral export industry for the Northern Territory.
The $360m phase 3 expansion of McArthur River mine was also approved in the first quarter of 2013. Construction and commissioning is expected to take between 12 to 18 months and will result in doubling the production of zinc concentrate from the mine. This expansion will also extend the life of the mine by 11 years, from 2027 to 2038.
The Roper Bar iron ore mine by Western Desert Resources was granted approval in August 2013 and construction is progressing rapidly. Western Desert expects its first shipment of direct shipping ore will occur later this year. The project will be exporting three million tonnes of iron ore each year through the Bing Bong port facility through agreements with McArthur River mine.
All three of these projects have an estimated mine life of greater than 20 years.
The Sherwin Iron project has commenced mining a 200 000 bulk sample which has been prepared for export from the Darwin port.
In mid-September, I undertook a road trip through many of these operations, visiting MRM, Western Desert’s construction at Bing Bong, the haul road and the mine site, as well as Sherwin and Australian Ilmenite mines. I called into the Mataranka lime plant and then went on to ERA’s Ranger Mine, where the exploration decline at Ranger 3 Deeps is progressing well.
At Ranger, I was honoured to be present for the official opening by the Chief Minister of the new $320m brine concentrator, which will reduce by 80% the volume of tailings being transferred into the tailings dam. This, of itself, is a significant step by ERA to meet its environmental responsibilities, but also adds in no small way to the longevity and viability of its overall operations into the future. However, it is the achievements of our junior and mid-tier explorers that continue to underpin the growth of this industry.
The Country Liberals government understands some exploration companies are facing tough times. There are difficulties in raising finance which translates into reduced exploration, particularly greenfields exploration.
Governments also face challenges. At the moment, this government is subject to many of the same economic forces that are causing difficulties in the mining sector. This government faces the potential prospect of significant revenue decline over the next couple of decades as the major royalty streams decline or cease.
Notwithstanding these issues the next few years, in an overall sense, look very good for the Territory. Last month I had the pleasure of attending an economic briefing by renowned Westpac economist, Huw McKay. Mr McKay gave a fascinating insight into the current state of the Australian and Northern Territory economies.
What was apparent was something we all know. That is, the mining boom in Australia has reached its peak and is now trending down. In that context, it is reasonable for one to ask why the Northern Territory’s mining sector is still steaming ahead – look at the new projects. Mr McKay expressed the view the Northern Territory mining sector is somewhat behind the rest of the country, at least in its position in the boom and bust cycle.
He espoused the view the Northern Territory still has between two to three years of growing economy around the mining sector. In light of that, Mr McKay was also complimentary of the current government’s approach to our economy, indicating the contraction of government stimulus at this point in the cycle was both correct and appropriate. We all know two to three years is short term, and we must prepare for tighter times ahead. That is why this government is committed, right now, to setting the scene for the continuation of a strong and vibrant mining sector. Not that I believe the opposition would understand but creating, right now, an environment conducive to growth and significant sustainable increases in investment is critical to keeping our economy strong and vibrant for years to come; using private investment in the mining sector to smooth out the economic bumps in the road, as it were.
Given the time challenges we face, both mining and energy sectors present quite urgent problems in that lengthy development time frames may well exceed the time available to implement a solution. That is why a range of initiatives are being pursued, driven by the Department of Mines and Energy, in order to make the Northern Territory an attractive and financially safe jurisdiction in which to invest in mining, energy and the exploration industry.
We have simplified the process of submitting mining management plans and have made environmental mining reports more efficient. We have introduced a multi-year cycle of mining management plans, and have sped up the approvals process. We are now transitioning to a compliance program that has an increasingly field-based focus.
The re-establishment of the NT Mining Board will create a direct link, supporting communication and two-way information sharing between government and the minerals sector.
In our first year of government we have made significant progress in cutting red tape, easing the burden experienced by exploration and mining companies doing business in the NT. We have told the world we are open for business. We have facilitated the development of major new mines and have put in place strategies to deal with legacy mines. The department has cut paperwork and is concentrating on putting field officers in the field not behind desks.
It is an exciting time in the Territory and we will all rise to the challenge. There is much work to do. We must be innovative and step up to the mark to ensure our economic future is in our hands.
The Northern Territory government continues to support the growth of the exploration industry through geoscience initiatives by the NT Geological Survey, which is aimed at providing the necessary information to encourage companies to invest in new areas of the NT. We strive to ensure the NT is the first choice for investors. The Framing the Future document captures this sentiment well. Our policy and regulatory environment encourages investment. An investment in mines and exploration is investment in our regions. This government is working to ensure that investment in mining and petroleum sectors benefits the host region.
The NT is the dynamic centre of the Northern Territory, rich in natural resources with very close proximity to key markets in Asia. It has already been the choice for some of the largest investment projects undertaken by foreign companies in Australia, including those based in Japan, France, Italy, China and the United States. The NT government is a small but dynamic government that openly welcomes foreign investment with a very pro-business development attitude.
In closing, the Territory’s best days are ahead. The Country Liberals government has the plan, vision, and the political will to make good things happen. We will go forward, carve out a new destiny for the Northern Territory and for business, expand the horizons of possibility, generate revenue, develop growth, give reward, provide hope and ensure opportunity.
With so many benefits flowing to the Northern Territory from the resources industry it makes sense to make the Northern Territory a jurisdiction in which players in this industry can flourish.
Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Debate suspended.
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Madam Speaker, I speak on the ministerial statement brought to this House by the Minister for Mines and Energy. I was interested to hear what the minister had to say until I received the ministerial statement, which I will describe the same way the member for Greatorex described some of our statements, as puff pastry.
There is nothing new in this ministerial statement. There are no new policy directions or anything new about what this government is doing to attract the mining industry to the Territory. This is a revised history of mining development in the Northern Territory and a litany of initiatives brought to the Territory by the previous Labor government.
From the first page, the minister spoke about developments in the mining industry in the Territory and major projects established over 20 years ago. There is no mention that the reason no new major mines have been developed in the Territory is because about 12 years ago the CLP actively discouraged exploration by sitting on exploration licences because they did not want to deal with native title regulations.
It was then minister for mines, Paul Henderson, who, upon taking the portfolio, found on the previous minister’s desk about 700 exploration licences that had not been processed because they had to negotiate with traditional owners. The CLP, at the time, did not want to do that.
We heard that the previous CLP government facilitated the first oil and gas discoveries in the Timor Sea. Pardon me, but that was the Commonwealth government rather than the Northern Territory. He also talked about facilitating the decision by ConocoPhillips and its partners to bring gas to Darwin. Well, pardon me, my signature was on all the decisions made to establish the Bayu-Undan gas field and pipeline to Darwin and, of course, the establishment of the first ever liquefied processing plant in the Northern Territory.
This little duck had to walk down streets alone because of the opposition by people in Darwin to the establishment of a liquefied natural gas processing plant in Darwin. People were peddling rumours about possible explosions in our harbour the same level as a nuclear explosion where liquefied gas would evaporate and create a huge fireball that would destroy Darwin. We withstood these allegations and battled, one by one, and proved them wrong. Today, Darwin has become a centre for processing natural gas.
We did not see anything in this ministerial statement about INPEX: the establishment of the INPEX liquefied natural gas processing plant.
On page four, the minister made reference to Framing the Future, the Country Liberals strategic framework. He also said mining and energy and exploration play a crucial role in the Territory’s economic future, and that is true. He also said the government has made significant changes in the past 12 months to mining regulation, cutting red tape, and increasing the amount of government support to attract mining to the Northern Territory.
Let us look at it. You are probably familiar with the international Fraser Institute. In 2012, the Northern Territory ranked 11 out of 93 countries, states and provinces in the world in which to do business, and the first state in Australia. In the 2013 Fraser Institute report, the Northern Territory is 22 in the world. Not only is it 22 in the world, but it is third in Australia, below Western Australia and South Australia. That speaks for itself. That shows that in the 12 months of the Country Liberals government the Northern Territory has slipped 11 places to 22nd position.
The minister mentioned the priority zone system for minerals and energy development in the Northern Territory. I am puzzled because I heard the minister make a statement similar to that at a mining council lunch, but he said he had taken it to Cabinet and could not give any details; he could not tell us what is was about. Even in this ministerial statement, which is supposed to advise the House and the people of the Northern Territory of initiatives of the CLP government, there is not much detail. They are talking about two zones, one in the north and one in the Centre, and that is about it. He also made a motherhood statement:
We are doing that already and have been for the past 11 years. We worked as a whole-of-government to accelerate exploration and mining development. That is the reason an enormous amount of money was spent on exploration in the Northern Territory. The Australian Mining magazine of August 2013 said the Northern Territory had $228m spent on exploration in 2011. That was a record for the Territory and one of the highest expenditures in Australia when exploration was reducing.
The minister, on page seven, mentioned the ‘use it or lose it ‘approach. We had that in place. We had drafted the legislation in such a way you could not sit on a tenement forever because we wanted people to come and explore. Either they find something to proceed to mining, or give it to someone else to work the tenements in the Territory for everybody to benefit, especially Territorians.
We expanded that to oil and petroleum and received many accolades from the industry. It was sick and tired of losing tenements because big companies would acquire them and sit there for a long period of time.
The minister also said he launched CORE, Creating Opportunities for Resource Exploration, which is nothing more than part of the Bringing Forward Discovery we put in place in 2007. Remember when I was Executive Director of the mining council and we talked about spending money and subsidising exploration companies dollar-for-dollar up to $100 000 to explore brownfield or greenfield sites in the Territory and share that information with the general community and the department - nothing new.
The minister talked about $4m extended until 2014. Hold on a minute! I have a print out from AGES, 2012. Of course, everybody knows AGES is the seminar held every year in Alice Springs to talk about initiatives in the Northern Territory. In the March 2012 AGES, there was a statement by Ian Scrimgeour, then director of the exploration and geology area of the department, which clearly stated the Northern Territory initiative was extended to 2014.
The minister tells us what he announced, which we announced a year ago. In the same publication from AGES, Ian Scrimgeour noted the further $11.4m was to be spent over the following three years.
Here is a ministerial statement by the Country Liberals Minister for Mines and Energy which reiterates the initiatives of the previous Labor government - exactly the same thing, exactly the same money, and exactly the same period of time.
I congratulate the department for the publication of the first volume of Geology and mineral resources of the Northern Territory. It is 1100 pages and provides information to anyone who wants to know what is under the ground in the Northern Territory. It is a fantastic initiative, but a 1100-page volume is not drafted in 12 months of a new government. The work was undertaken many years before. As a matter of fact, it started before my time as minister for Mines, under previous ministers. I am pleased to see it completed, but it would be a good idea for the minister to acknowledge that work started a long time ago. I have no problem with him launching it, he is the minister. I had the pleasure of launching some initiatives started by CLP ministers.
Page 11 of his statement says:
He claims it to be the first, but it is not. The first one between the Northern Territory and South Australia took place in Adelaide in July 2012. I was there with my colleague and compatriot, the minister for Mineral resources in South Australia, Tom Koutsantonis. That happened because during a trip to China we got together and started thinking about how we could attract exploration, especially to Central Australia and northern South Australia. We tried to facilitate exploration in the region by cutting red tape and, if necessary, adjusting the legislation of the two states so people did not have to duplicate their work with applications, environmental assessments and everything that needs to be done before exploration. A person who undertook some work in the Northern Territory could be acknowledged and recognised in South Australia, and the same arrangement would apply in the Northern Territory.
I still believe it is a great idea. We should continue this idea and we should go on and on about it because that is the way to do business. Rather than competing against other states in areas where we have a common interest, let us join forces and attract mining and mining exploration to our regions.
The minister said he led an investment delegation to China. Hold on, I have been to China 14 times, the first time as minister for Tourism and, after that, as minister for Resources. I refer to the department’s publication which mentions the successful exploration investment attraction by the Northern Territory government which started in 2007. This is a 2013 publication put out by the Department of Mines and Energy, so it is not ours; it belongs to this government. It talks about how the drilling and geophysical collaboration attracted exploration in the Territory, how we managed to acquire geoscience data and deliver it to the industry, and how to promote these exploration initiatives on a national and international level.
I quote from the 2013 paper Helping NT explorers Attract International Investment by the Department of Mines and Energy which says:
that was the Labor government:
The same paper from the Department of Mines and Energy states that the vast majority of investment has come from China.
I have no problem with the minister talking about the investment attraction and the work we have done with China, but it would be a good idea to say his work is a continuation of initiatives started by previous governments and previous ministers. I encourage the minister to promote the Territory and they will come.
On page 12, the minister says the department has developed a good working relationship with the Minerals Council. Really? There was a scathing media release from the Minerals Council of Australia when the minister placed a levy and a new tax on the mining industry in Budget 2013-14. The media release is so bad - I have never seen such a bad media release from the Minerals Council against a Territory government. It ends with the following quote:
Not only that, let us look at what AMEC has to say about the Northern Territory government. A media release from AMEC was headed, ‘Northern Territory government increases tax burden on mining exploration’, and follows with, ‘More taxes could limit investment in the Northern Territory’. AMEC said it was caught unawares; it was caught by surprise by the levy and taxes in the 2013-14 budget which does much to discourage exploration in the Northern Territory.
In Mining Weekly, on 20 June 2013, AMEC CEO Simon Bennison complains about the levy on the industry by the NT government. As minister Westra van Holthe says, it will raise $6m. AMEC CEO, Simon Bennison, spilt the beans saying only one-third of the $6m raised by the tax will be directed to legacy sites. Out of the $6m, only $2m will go to legacy mines and the rest will be spent to hire more bureaucrats.
Madam Speaker, the industry has a friendly relationship with the government in the Northern Territory? I think not.
Yes, mining is important to the Territory. It employs about 4000 people and 20% of our gross state product comes from mining. We have to attract more mining to the Territory. I agree with the Westpac economist who says the Territory is two to three years behind other states with regard to mining exploration and mining. We are behind and have to ensure we continue development of mining processes in the Territory. Yes, many people say mining is not good for the Territory, but it is good for the Territory, especially for people in remote areas. You only have to look at Tanami to see how many local people are employed there. Up to 14% of local employees at the Newman mine are Indigenous.
You only have to go to Groote Eylandt. We went to Groote Eylandt recently and saw a significant number of Indigenous people working in the mine, not to rehabilitate the sites by collecting seeds and planting, but working on the big trucks, driving the big trucks, and doing jobs they were not doing before.
Go to Borroloola, talk to Xstrata and find out how many people go through the simulators and drive the big trucks at the mine site. We have only seen that in the past five or six years. Mines provide information from local people. The Tiwi Islands mineral sand project was a small project running for a few years employing about 14 people. If that project was not there, 14 Tiwi people would be without employment and on welfare. Why, when they have the skills and ability to do the job? If they can do the job the mining industry can pay real money.
Mining comes and goes. We see what is happening in Western Australia. We have seen a decline in exploration and a decline in mining. People say the mining boom is ending. The mining boom will not end while China continues to develop.
There are 1.3 billion people in China. Out of 1.3 billion people, one-third lives in big cities and has what we take for granted. They have a house, electricity, a fridge, microwave, television and car. The others live in the rural area and do not have what city people have. They will want electricity, a television, a fridge, a car and the everyday conveniences we want - a house - but nothing can be done unless you have the resources to construct it, to manufacture them, to produce them and give them to people.
When China has growth between 6% and 8% per year, it means people will have disposable income and will want to spend their money to buy products to better their lives. We should be smart; we should be there to sell what we have. We should not say, ‘If they want it they can come’. No, we have to say, ‘You can do business with the Territory but these are the conditions’. The conditions we place as a government - there is no reference about that in this statement – on new mining companies, ‘If you want to mine in the Territory that is fine, but you have to give us a local employment plan. How many people you will employ in Alice Springs, Katherine or Borroloola?’
We see two big mines opening now, Western Desert Resources and Sherwin Iron, both in the Roper area near Ngukurr. People in Ngukurr have an interest in gaining employment in these mines. We should tell the companies if they want to develop here, if they want a mining licence, they have to employ 100 Indigenous people. In a small place like Ngukurr, 100 Indigenous wages will make a hell of a difference.
We are talking about changing the legislation, and it is always welcome to make things easier. I have a problem with the MMAs. Will they be provided online as they were previously so everyone can look at them to see what they are for, or will they be secretive?
With the multi-year assessment of the mine management plan, what will happen with the environmental levy? Will it be reviewed annually? How will it be done? Will it be reviewed every four years? If it is done every four years, it means the company is stuck with a big environmental levy, despite the fact they have rehabilitated the site in that four-year period. The minister has not answered some of the questions in this statement.
I have been accused of being a strong supporter of the mining industry. I am, not because I have shares in mining companies – I have none – but because the mining industry can contribute greatly to the Territory, not only to our lifestyle, but also to the economy and employment.
Yes, there are examples in the mining industry where the wrong thing has been done, but there is not one mention here of Mt Todd, the mistakes of the past and how we can ensure these things do not happen again. When things go wrong they can affect significant areas of the Territory and the lives of Territorians. We already have 2000 legacy mines left from the 1920s and 1930s: the Commonwealth days. There is nothing in the minister’s statement about that. This is a good story of the world according to the minister for Mines in the CLP government.
There are other things that make me laugh. On page 17, the minister refers to ‘our Marine Supply Base’. Our Marine Supply Base? Was it not your Renewal Management Board that recommended we scrap it because it was too expensive and we could not afford it? I am sorry, I do not care what the bureaucrats say, sometimes, as a government, you have to show some initiative. I am pleased this government made the wise decision to keep the Marine Supply Base to provide support to the offshore oil and gas industry. Again, let us be fair, do not call it ‘our Marine Supply Base’ unless you call it ‘our Territory’s Marine Supply Base’; which I could live with.
I have no problem with the government providing major project status to some of these resources. It is a very good idea and we should continue that.
There are a number of issues in this statement which rub me the wrong way with the complete wiping out of the past and suggesting that in 12 months this government has done enormous things for the Territory and the mining industry.
On page 21 there is reference to the $320m brine concentration at ERA. I remind the minister that the Labor government was the first government to take a mining company to court, where the mining company was found guilty of breaching environmental regulations. ERA was one of them. The brine concentrator is there today because the company realised the government of the day was prepared to take them to court every time they breached environmental legislation. I am pleased ERA decided to spend the money for a brine concentrator, because $320m is a drop in the ocean when you consider the damage this mine has the potential to do to the environment, especially in a sensitive area like Kakadu.
Mining exploration is declining throughout Australia. We have seen the results in Western Australia, and the results published by Northern Territory Treasury in the Territory Economic Review of April 2013 showing petroleum exploration is going up but, unfortunately, mineral exploration in the Northern Territory is going down. Money seems to be drying up. A number of companies have approached me about the possibility of getting people to invest in projects in China. My information from China is that money is drying up. Companies are not prepared to invest in long-term projects; they want short-term projects that will make money quickly. We have to be clever and support industry and, most importantly, promote the Northern Territory.
I welcome the minister’s statement House. Sometimes puff pastry is good to see what is happening, but please give us more information and do not ignore the past. Sometimes you have to remember the past in order to avoid mistakes in the future. At the same time, you have to remember the past because the new structure did not just appear in August 2012, it was done before that. It had its page before your time and, at the end of the day, irrespective of which political side we are on, I want to believe we all work for the betterment of the Northern Territory.
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Madam Speaker, I support my colleague’s statement to the House on the mining industry and Framing the Future. It is a fantastic way to put forward what the Northern Territory is expecting for the future and it encourages all of us in the Northern Territory to see and be part of that journey. I quote from page four of the minister’s statement:
Under the Country Liberal government’s Framing the Future, the strategic framework for government, we have developed a roadmap for the creation of a prosperous economy for the Northern Territory.
What a way to put it. It is fantastic to talk about the future of the Northern Territory and the mining industry and to welcome everyone on board for a prosperous future. There is opportunity in this area which we can see with all the mining happening in the Northern Territory, opportunities we have given as the government since coming to power, and the benefits we all have as Territorians. It is fantastic to see this government opening all avenues and ensuring we send the message to other countries saying we are open for business. We are willing to work and build partnerships with them. Please come and enjoy the Northern Territory and help create a different place to what we had over the last 11 years under Labor – crippled, with no future direction.
We have a new government laying the foundations for a future any Territorian would consider exciting. It is a road map which encourages those of us in our mid-50s and over to think about what our children and grandchildren will be enjoying. If this is the kind of road map the Country Liberal Party can build, there is real encouragement and enthusiasm for Territorians to be focused in this area. The mining industry does a lot in the Northern Territory. The shadow minister spoke about mining opportunities opening up near Ngukurr.
One thing I would like to suggest to my colleague, the Minister for Mines and Energy, is Indigenous opportunity. There is a lot of opportunity in the mining industry for Indigenous employment. We continually talk in this House about the lack of Indigenous employment in the mining industry. We have three large mining operations that have been running for decades in Gove, Groote and the Tanami, and we have not seen that potential utilised. I suggest to my colleague that we start ensuring Indigenous people in the Northern Territory are part of the wealth journey and part of growing the Northern Territory in true partnership with the mines on Aboriginal land.
This government has given all Territorians that opportunity, but we are open for suggestions. It is fantastic to suggest to my colleagues in this House, and the minister, ways to improve Indigenous employment in this area. We have to look at the opportunities. Through Centrelink, we can look at the age groups in the regions and see what potential these people have with literacy and numeracy. Are they capable of job opportunities in the mining industry? Do they have licences? All the checks and balances of growing the Northern Territory and bringing forward Indigenous Territorians should be assessed.
I am a great believer in breaking down the barriers of language. I take this opportunity to congratulate the Territory company Sprout, and especially Anya. What a magnificent person to come up with talking posters in Aboriginal language inside clinics, schools, shops and workshops where Aboriginal people utilise the facilities in their own communities. We can be getting the mining industry’s message and the government’s message through One Talk. This is not just about getting the message of One Talk out, it is about preservation of language because certain people use their language and you can have it in English as well.
I had the pleasure of having Sprout giving me a presentation, and I have seen the opportunities they have created with Menzies around sickness, lung infections and STIs. These messages are put in all the right places in remote Aboriginal communities and we can utilise One Talk, which was born and bred in the Northern Territory; it is not from Victoria, China, New South Wales, or Western Australia. It is fantastic that when we utilise this we are utilising our own product. It is like a child who was born and bred in the Northern Territory. I take the opportunity again to congratulate Sprout and Anya. I will read some of the remarks from the material they have put out:
This is a way of getting the mining industry’s message out. If Menzies is already using it for health issues, we can use it in the mining industry to say, ‘There is a mine 50 km or 40 km away from your community. We are looking for 50 to 60 young, strong blokes, or women, if you want to work there. You can go underground, be a truck driver, a backhoe driver or a grader driver.’ All those opportunities can be put into their own language, and it is interpreted only because the person recognises the photo. It might be their local member, it might be the member for Arnhem or Arafura, the minister, the member for Stuart or me. Your photo is there, but your voice is also there. A person sees it, presses the button and there is Bess Price in Warlpiri saying, ‘We need 60 or 70 blokes, or women, from this region to work on this mine’. How fantastic is that? It is all done in language and it is a product born and bred in the Northern Territory. It preserves the language and it gives Aboriginal people an opportunity to listen to it and say, ‘I am interested in that job. I have a grader driver’s ticket, a truck driver’s ticket. I will see the bloke who works there.’ They then put their name down.
Those are the incentives we should use. We have to look at the great opportunities. With policy we develop so many opportunities, but we also have to look at the products and mechanisms to make things easier for people who have communication barriers. It is a fantastic way for government to interact, not just with the mining industry, but with a born and bred Territory product. We are working together to ensure all Territorians understand there is a mine there that might need 60 blokes. ‘Do you have a truck driver’s licence, a grader driver’s licence, a backhoe or bobcat licence? Would you like to work underground? Would you like to work above ground? Would you like to be a receptionist? Would you like to be the caterer? Would you like to be the cook? Would you like to be the cleaner?’ There are so many different opportunities and we have to take them all. This is a suggestion for my colleague, and I believe he will be listening: we have to make life easier for people.
We have to look at employment opportunities for Indigenous people. The socioeconomic indicators tell us in this parliament. They are 36% of the Territory population and we are not doing well in that area. We can utilise the materials Sprout and Anya are producing. There are talking boards you can use in education, health, and the mining industry. You can use them for anything. It is a little board which goes up at the shop, clinic or school and you press the button and have Tiwi, Luritja, Arrernte, Warlpiri, Pitjantjatjara, Alyawarra, even Greek, Italian or French.
There are great opportunities and we have to look at all of them because we have to get Indigenous people engaged in employment opportunities. We have set the road map and foundations to encourage industries such as the mining industry and welcome them to the Northern Territory, to be operational in the Northern Territory, to have a working friendship, and the Territory is open for business.
I thank the minister for his statement.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing a statement on mining to the House. It is obvious this statement has avoided the political advisors upstairs and not been politically manipulated; it is a basic chronology of events. The member for Casuarina, the previous minister, was able to highlight the correct chronology which shows the previous government having a clear strategic plan and processes to develop what is an extremely important industry in the Northern Territory.
It comes down to giving credit where credit is due. We know those on the opposite side have great difficulty in the simple value exercise of giving credit where credit is due. However, let us concentrate on the statement and avoid the one politicised comment from the minister about the opposition having no idea.
The member for Casuarina, the previous minister, over many years walked me, as a new member of this House, the member for Barkly, through the development of the Western Desert Resources project, step by step by step. He showed me the building blocks of what is now shaping up to be a major mining project for the Northern Territory in the Barkly region which will deliver those aspirational goals the member for Namatjira spoke about.
It is good to have it chronologically. It is good to hear the history from the previous minister, and interesting to watch the new minister with carriage of this important work. Quoting from the minister’s statement at page 3:
What an enlightening paragraph that is. Let us see if he gives more detail:
That seems to be the flavour of this statement – reducing obstacles, the favourite CLP clich of cutting red tape. However, minister, let me draw you back to the challenges and reality of getting exploration projects, mining projects, energy resource projects out of the ground. If you want a really good example of that, research the Ichthys project, the INPEX project, and how the previous Territory Labor government put those foundation stones in place and set that course to build with big business – global giants in the energy sector – to deliver that project for the Northern Territory. Ask yourself, minister, what the fundamental building blocks are based on in a global context. It is a politically stable country, a great resource sector, very good relations with the Indigenous traditional owners, and being able to consult widely and work with the community to deliver a project on a global scale such as INPEX.
That is the whole story. You do not need to concentrate on removing obstacles as much as you need to understand the job of building the project and supplying the supporting enabling infrastructure. That is part and parcel of the deal. If a government cuts the infrastructure budget they are already putting themselves at a disadvantage in encouraging the mining sector, the mining giants, the energy giants of the globe, and they really have to play catch-up to restore that confidence.
When I talk about enabling supporting infrastructure, you should go to the example of Middle Arm, Jenkins Road, the Arnhem Highway, and the East Arm port. You will see pragmatic examples of how those building blocks, that supporting infrastructure, were put in place step by step over successive budgets to secure the INPEX project. When you talk about those individually, you are also talking about good planning and forward thinking.
I continue to bring into debate in this House that the previous government supplied the headworks infrastructure to Middle Arm in roads, power and water to support what is the biggest oil and gas project we have seen in northern Australia, but also had the good planning outcome of providing access to residential development. Yet, I continually have put to me, ‘No, we are going across to Glyde Point. We will have residential on Gunn Point and our big industry on Glyde.’ Whatever!
This statement gives me some hope when it mentions capacity to develop four new LNG trains at Middle Arm. I will reinforce every chance I have the opportunities with the headworks infrastructure for land release in the city of Weddell. There are so many benefits and efficiencies that could be presented to a Cabinet with a very strong argument to biting the bullet and going there.
It is an especially important statement for me as member for Barkly, because the Barkly features in this statement. The Barkly would take at least 70% to 80% of the opportunities presented in the statement. When we talk about that as an area in the Territory, the government has to focus on the supporting and enabling infrastructure into that region to encourage and support the explorers that will eventually deliver the projects. Once again, the road map I see is the Territory budget, and we have seen that same mentality: a pull back, a hold back, no major infrastructure in the pipeline to support the Barkly region, only rhetoric.
Contractors in Tennant Creek and the Barkly are raising alarm bells and talking strongly about how work has finished and there is no new work on the horizon. There are two ways to think about that: the business community, and setting up the enabling and supporting infrastructure for projects that will deliver Barkly, once again, as the breadbasket of minerals throughout the Northern Territory.
We cannot get away from ports and rail in supporting infrastructure in the macro sense, and the minister neglects to talk about either in this mining statement. I thought there might be some talk about the Tiwi port, and working with Genesee & Wyoming in the necessary passing loops on the rail to support these new projects coming online in the Roper gulf area of the Barkly. Alas, there is nothing. Perhaps that is for another time, but we should see that investment working hand-in-hand with big business to deliver that infrastructure in successive budgets. If it is neglected, you are stifling mining and business rather than promoting it, as the minister is so keen on.
Quoting from page 5 of the minister’s statement:
I applaud that, minister; that is a great strategy. You have two zones identified but the first zone is the Barkly, there is no doubt about it. For those who are not familiar with that area of the Northern Territory, there is potential for gold and copper, manganese, phosphate, for tailings of previous major mines, iron ore, silver lead and zinc, ilmenite as a new project, and oil and gas. These commodities, these minerals and energy resources, are there for development but will need supporting infrastructure to encourage the exploration phase, support the explorers, and support the developing project out of the ground.
An example is that main road transport infrastructure projects are needed on the Carpentaria Highway, the Savannah Way, the Roper Highway and the Bing Bong Road. That area is reflected in Budget 2013-14 with simple maintenance and what normally occurs on an annual basis in road transport infrastructure. However, there are some capital works, being the Little Fletcher Creek on the Savannah Way. I had planned a big culvert river crossing. That aside, quite a number of projects were stripped out of the Barkly but there is money for the Little Fletcher Creek crossing. I applaud that, and thank you very much. We will take whatever we can. When we talk about this statement, mining, and the macroeconomics this government is crowing to support, we need major infrastructure projects.
The recent test sample from Sherwin Iron, the 200 000 tonnes on the Roper Highway, highlighted the challenges of that road infrastructure – the safety and delivery of the product. There is one example. Some of the major road transport links need to be looked at.
I encourage the minister to start working with the minister for regional development to get your heads around how budget appropriations will be put forward and examined by Cabinet in partnership with the miners and explorers, as we have seen with the Western Desert project.
Minister, I acknowledge the priority zone system, but do not forget the Georgina Basin in southeast Barkly. You will find some very good results there in exploration for oil and alternative gas.
We move on through the statement. There are a number of paragraphs I will not quote, but I have highlighted them for my knowledge and for anyone in the Barkly who is interested when I translate this information through the electorate. It talks about the geological survey team and the work in relation to the major gravity surveys in the McArthur Basin around Borroloola, Daly Waters and the Roper River. I congratulate the minister and the department on that important work which will provide the extra support and geological mapping to assist explorers in their endeavour to find new resources but, more importantly, to get a gauge on the size and value of those resources.
There is some talk about amendments to the Mining Management Act to enhance effectiveness and secure necessary revenue in tackling the Northern Territory’s significant legacy mining liabilities. Let us face it, that was the CLP’s mining tax. The well-versed and experienced member for Casuarina, the former minister, highlighted to the new minister how that possibly was a retrograde step in policy coming from the CLP and could have been done much better.
In regard to the minister’s rsum as a liberal, he should have the two dot points that are Mt Todd and Redbank mine. As the member for Casuarina rightly pointed out, we have to learn by our mistakes.
I acknowledge that the members for Brennan and Katherine visited Redbank mine and spoke to stakeholders and constituents of the Barkly about the legacy issues of Redbank. Unfortunately, I was not able to be there; a Toyota can only travel so far in 24 hours and I do not have access to an aeroplane. However, I keep pace with what is going on. I continually advise constituents, and I put to the minister that one of the best ways to address the Redbank issue – the tailings, the leakage and the acid sulphate contamination in Redbank Creek and the threat to Settlement Creek – is to get the mine up and running again.
That is the best way because if we have operators on site and know there is exploration going on – they are very confident of another hit in a rich copper deposit. Not only will it create jobs and opportunities, it will also have a working operation with infrastructure capacity onsite to start dealing with the tailings and rehabilitation work. It will provide efficiencies in dipping into the bucket of the CLP mining tax to support rehabilitation of the project. I would be arguing for that in Cabinet, and be pushing hard to get support wherever possible so the mine could be up and running again and the contamination and rehabilitation issues could be addressed.
Having said that – back to supporting infrastructure – Calvert Road and the Tablelands Highway were being looked at closely in the last plan to re-open Redbank mine. They are major road transport infrastructure networks and will need a lot of work. A government needs to be planning for that because if the Calvert Road and the Tablelands Highway link to the Stuart Highway, or the Barkly Highway is upgraded, you will not only see Redbank take a close look at it, you will also see other projects in the area interested in the road transport link, possibly even some projects in north western Queensland.
One of my concerns in this statement relates to one very short paragraph. On page 15 it says:
That is all it says. There are pages and pages of this, but only one tiny paragraph on land rights and native title. It gives us a hint, but no facts and no content. It lets the imagination run wild. I wonder how regional members of the CLP in the seats of Namatjira, Stuart, Arnhem and Arafura are discussing this paragraph. I wonder what questions they are asking about this plan. Does this involve Tony Abbott’s new Indigenous Advisory Council? Does this involve Warren Mundine’s new theory? Will it put Warren Mundine against Noel Pearson, the champion of native title and Aboriginal land rights? Where do these regional Liberal members sit? What questions are they asking? I would like to know, because my constituents would like to know.
The previous Labor government can cite many examples of good consultation. The INPEX project would have to be one of the biggest, most contemporary in working together with Indigenous traditional owners around delivering big business and opportunities. I wonder where the minister is going with this. That tiny paragraph in the statement poses far more questions than it answers.
Moving through the statement, there is a paragraph saying the new potential for gas and LNG across the Northern Territory is bright and I …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request an extension of time for the member to complete his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr McCARTHY: Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Fannie Bay.
Minister, I had great faith in Paul Henderson, the previous Chief Minister, and the member for Karama, as Treasurer and Deputy Leader, in their lobbying for the next big LNG project. As Woodside is sitting out there making decisions, literally, possibly, floating around in the Timor Sea, the ball is in your court. Let us see how good you are. Let us not have the rhetoric, the vindictive political slaps and the jibe, let us see how good you are because you have put your money where your mouth is. Labor delivered the biggest; set them up next door as a neighbour. Let us see them come to the Territory because, as you say, the environment is right. Let us see what you can do. There is some homework from the opposition.
The statement talks about Australia Ilmenite Resources. That is a new product on the market out of the Territory, as the minister says. It is in a development phase and, once again, represents a regional area of the Barkly electorate that will provide jobs, opportunities, prosperity, and in the enabling infrastructure, presents great challenges. Let us see it reflected in the road map of a good government, and that is budgets and budget appropriations, good planning, good announcements, community consultation and working with traditional owners. Australia Ilmenite is another great project, but it will need investment into the Roper Highway and a decision on whether it is rail transported to East Arm port and those necessary passing loops. We all know how their supply and demand model works. More customers coming online will supply more profits for the companies, who will be keener to talk to government about investments such as passing loops on the north/south rail to deliver increased returns.
Minister, it is great you remind us the project is in its development phase, but what is your government doing about supporting it and ensuring it gets its product out to market and can make money to employ people?
It is good to see the $360m phase 3 expansion of McArthur River Mine in the statement. It is a great project and I encourage everyone to look at it. I also remember the member for Casuarina, the previous minister, walking me through the challenges with McArthur River Mine, which the previous Labor government stayed on top of. It is great to be a local member and see all the work Xstrata has done to correct those issues. They did the study, the planning, and then delivered the infrastructure. When you drive past the tailings stands now you can see the significant increase in height, the wall thickness, and the engineering technology to ensure the tailings dam is doing its job to maximum efficiency for the future of the mine. That is a good announcement.
The member for Namatjira spoke about employment and training for Indigenous people. It was good to hear that; it is so important. The Education department has some real projects running at McArthur River. The minister for Mines and Energy and the Minister for Education should be aware of the incredible partnership funded by the McArthur River mine trust. Students from Borroloola school are doing work placements at the mine, doing training and education on-site at the school, and are dressed in full personal protection equipment with a bus to take them between the two sites in the real world of industry for real world experience. It certainly delivers in behaviour management and support, and also reflects growing your workforce from the ground up.
Forget the Centrelink office, member for Namatjira. You should be putting your energy into these projects. It is reflected with OM Holdings manganese at Bootu Creek which decided, after many years of challenging employment and training programs trying to achieve what they have offered Tennant Creek – they want 30% of their workforce to come from Tennant Creek.
Two years ago, they changed their whole dynamic and marched into the Tennant Creek High School and have now set up formal programs to grow their workforce through the high school. The first apprentice, a female Aboriginal student from Tennant Creek High School, has been employed by OM Holdings manganese at Bootu Creek as a construction apprenticeship. It is a celebration of our town and our region and we want to see more of it.
Minister, the statement completely ignores that aspect of mining in the Northern Territory and the opportunities it presents for regional and remote communities. There are two small examples of that and how you need to get on board.
The Minister for Education can take the Hansard back to Cabinet and fight his way through those immoral cuts to Education based on these obscure reports being dragged out to fuel a politician who has no idea about education and probably has not been anywhere near educational methodology, management, or administration since attending school. That is the risk with politicians; they get big ideas and have to justify their policies. In this area it is cut, cut, cut.
Take those examples and talk about the damage that can be done at Borroloola School or Tennant Creek High School if those cuts are reflected in staff being pulled out of those areas and students are denied the opportunity for support and mentoring into big industry.
I am not all about turning Aboriginal kids into miners or construction workers, but if you get them into real world industry, into big dirty and dangerous occupations, it takes the sting out of behaviour management. It gets them on track, focused, and in a conversation in the crib room with important tradespeople, skilled people who then broaden their world view.
That is why the previous Chief Minister of the Northern Territory, Hon Paul Henderson, took up my mantra of, ‘I want Barkly kids working with the best boilermakers in the world on the INPEX project’. These examples are ways to get there. The cuts to Education are risking that, and every member on the other side should be talking about it. We were hearing jibes today about who is the opposition education spokesperson. You heard this morning that everybody is, and we are speaking on behalf of parents, students and teachers. Get used to it because it is not going away.
Going through the statement, there are some interesting paragraphs on the Roper Bar iron ore project, the Western Desert Resources area and the opportunities that present with the project life. What a great project Sherwin Iron is shaping up to be. However, it presents great challenges with the 200 000 tonne test sample for smelting and the enormous challenges it places on the Roper and Stuart Highways when running those quads. I chose to drive among those quads a few times to test things out, and it will be serious if Sherwin choose that as the model to export their product. The Minister for Mines and Energy needs to be talking about supporting and enabling infrastructure to provide community safety and to deliver Sherwin Iron’s product for the Territory to share the prosperity and deliver jobs for our kids and future generations.
To conclude, the statement reflects a great opportunity for the Northern Territory. I thank the minister for bringing it to the House and hope he takes note of the NT opposition, which presents as well-referenced and well-researched with experience as a previous government. Of course, in the positive light of serving all Territorians, minister, I look forward to you expanding on all the areas the member for Casuarina and I have touched on.
Ms LEE (Arnhem): Madam Speaker, in response to the statement on mining made by the Minister for Mines and Energy, I wish to make the following statement.
Under the Country Liberals government’s Framing the Future, a strategic framework for government leading to the creation of a prosperous economy for the Northern Territory, Aboriginal land under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 and Aboriginal interest in pastoral landholding under the Native Title Act 1993 needs urgent attention. The opposition is talking about the little things this government can do. Why was the opposition – Labor – when in power not lobbying their federal counterparts about making amendments to those acts? They sit here still biting their nails. It will never be changed. Nothing will happen until we lobby our federal counterparts to make the changes because that is where it happens, not here in the Northern Territory. It will go in one ear and out the other the more we talk because what changes will we make?
Education is the key to getting into jobs but not everybody wants a career in mining. One of my brothers-in-law is a boilermaker. He left school in Year 10. By the time he was 18 he was a boilermaker. He did not go from school into the mining industry. He decided after some time. He signed up and did it on his own two feet. He did not need anybody to lead or direct him. These kids need the opportunity to find their career on their own. They do not need to be told by their teacher where they should be going with their future. It is their decision to make. It is like us. No one told us where to go. We had to explore everything out there in the world and find our own way, where we wanted to be, what we liked, and what we were passionate about. We need to give the same opportunities to the kids.
You are talking about the little things and not looking at the bigger picture. If you are so passionate about Aboriginal employment and economic development – are you really fighting for Aboriginal people? I cannot see that. You are not lobbying down south to make any difference. You go along with what your federal counterparts throw at you.
Mr McCarthy: I have a letter for Tony Abbott. Do you have his personal number?
Ms LEE: Yes, I do. I can give it to you later.
Mr McCarthy: I will give him a call.
Ms LEE: Put simply, there is too much red tape around mining and exploring on these lands. Land councils require too much process. These matters need fundamental issues to be dealt with by the new Commonwealth government under the new Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, and the new Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs minister, our NT senator, Nigel Scullion.
We need more direct involvement by traditional Aboriginal landowners – a seat at the table regarding all exploration and mining activities on their land. Also, more involvement by the NT government with landowners, both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal; that is in regard to pastoralists.
These changes will enable people in the Northern Territory to be engaged with the processes of mining, thus making them a central part of our government’s goal in planning our economic future.
This is the direction we should be heading in. Even the former NLC CEOs can tell you this. They have been lobbying and fighting for that for years. However, we are still here biting our nails, fighting over the little stuff when we should be looking at where the big changes will occur. Are we the ticketholders of Aboriginal people and their fate? This House obviously drives that for people out there. The reason you are in opposition is because you were trying to drive their fate a little too far.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, we welcome the statement on mining. There is no doubt that in government, as we heard from our shadow minister, Labor had a very proud and strong record of supporting exploration, supporting new projects to get off the ground and, at the same time, having an eye on the market and where we were placed in it, not just short-term wins, but mid- to long-term stability and an ongoing contribution to the wellbeing of the Territory.
My colleagues have spoken about the importance of mining to regional economic development and how there can be real and strong partnerships between the schools and the mining companies. You heard the member for Barkly give examples in his electorate. We have also seen the good work done by ERA in Jabiru, Rio Tinto, Pacific Aluminium and Alcan over the years in their employment and training programs. There are real benefits and very strong links between the schools and the training programs, and the employment and mentor programs.
To have a debate in the House today where the government saw education as a means of cost-cutting rather than looking at the genuine support and outcomes they need for students across the Territory, irrespective of where they live, shows how bereft they are of understanding the responsibility they have.
The work of our government focused on achieving the best outcomes for Territorians regardless of where they lived. That meant we had to build new infrastructure. We worked collaboratively with all key stakeholders to grow regional economies to deliver significant new jobs across the bush and to ensure the services supporting those regional hubs were ones you could expect to see wherever you live in our nation.
All this was during a decade of very strong growth in regional infrastructure and services and very strong growth in jobs. I know that does not suit the shallow rhetoric of the existing government. They do not want to let facts stand in the way of their fancy but, the reality is, through a series of independent reports we saw these facts and figures come to light.
It is also true that a feature of our economy is volatility within the royalty figures in the Territory budget, which are influenced by international trade and commodity prices given the bulk of our resources are sold in USD. We have seen an industry try to have an eye on long-term contracts to maximise the value of our commodities to the Territory and buffer our economy as best we can from those market fluctuations which, ultimately, the Territory government has no control over. Under a Territory Labor government watch, our gross state product largely was built on the back of these big resource projects and we were placed the third highest in the nation.
Interestingly, in this ministerial statement the CLP, as is its form, claims credit for many of the mining and resource projects coming to fruition in the Territory which, in reality, were under way on our watch. The CLP is laying claim to that work because it has nothing to lay claim to other than taking a wrecking ball to services across the Territory and the reputation of the Territory on an issue of sovereign risk, which I will speak about a little later. I have no doubt our member for Nhulunbuy will touch on that as well.
Mining is our largest Territory industry in GSP. It accounted for about 19.8% of our GSP in 2011-12 compared to 9.7% nationally. You can see how critical it is to the Territory. Economic commentators increasingly put the Northern Territory into the basket of resources states they refer to. That took a decade of hard work to achieve. You heard the shadow minister for Mines refer to the analysis of where we stood in mining jurisdictions globally, and how far we have dropped since the CLP came to power.
While a major contributor to our economy, mining creates 3.4% of resident Territory jobs. We see construction, including mining-related construction work, accounting for 10% of resident jobs. Construction is our third-largest employer.
Back in 2011-12, our mineral production was valued at $2.3bn increasing to $2.4bn in 2012-13 with new projects coming on board. Some of our major mines have increased production. We have manganese at Groote Eylandt with production forecast to rise by 3.4% to $1.2bn in 2013-14; lead production increasing at McArthur River following its phase 3 expansion; bauxite production is forecast to increase from $245m to $269m in 2012-13, up nearly 10%; gold production is continuing at the Granites and our Top End gold mines, and we have heard members talk about the potential of Vista Gold and the work occurring in the re-establishment of gold mining at Mt Todd.
In relation to emerging projects, it is fitting we are debating the mining statement today as Sherwin Iron ships off to China – the$180m Sherwin Roper River mine project producing iron ore anticipated at about five million tonnes per annum. In the same region is Western Desert Resources – the Roper Bar project – expected to produce about ten million tonnes per annum. There are further rare earth garnet sands and new phosphate reserves that are real and present in the potential to be realised as exploration through to production.
The value of our Territory energy and minerals production has been forecast to increase by over 15% to $7.6bn in 2013-14. We have substantial energy resources and are poised to see even more energy resources proven with active exploration of gas fields both on and offshore, including those unconventional gas sources.
The current budget forecasts the value of our energy production to increase from $3.6bn in 2011-12 to $4.2bn in 2012-13. If you look at the exploration prospects happening in the regions such as McArthur Basin and Beetaloo Basin, we are placed extremely well in resources opportunities.
Talking to ENI about their Penguin Deep reserve sitting alongside Blacktip, there is a prospective short-to medium-term potential gas replacement for NT power supplies or feeding into the all-important supply of gas to Nhulunbuy. We have seen the development of Bayu-Undan, and seen both Kitan and Montara projects fire up.
Whilst in this statement the CLP is trying to claim credit for the early work, apart from the very original support for the Mereenie gas production, it was the Labor government that worked tirelessly across a decade to deliver these all-important resources projects. That being said, I mention the two big ones which put the Top End and Darwin on the map well and truly: LNG through ConocoPhillips, and the INPEX Total Ichthys project. That project, of course, is the second-largest major project in the nation and the largest ever foreign investment by both Japan and France.
We were tuned into, through that decade, the industry and its needs, both onshore and offshore. We did so by creating an environment of stability in leadership across ministers and across agencies. What a stark contrast in just a year! We have had a rotation of Chief Ministers, with the damage done to the Territory’s reputation by the betrayal of the former Chief Minister while he was on a trade mission to Japan. We are still feeling the repercussions of that and will for quite some time. Much work has to be done on those relationships as a result of the impetuous, foolish, and ridiculous behaviour of the member for Braitling who could not wait another day for the member for Blain to return.
We have seen restructuring, new structures, rebadging and renaming of so many government agencies that, quite frankly, people are scratching their heads in wonder and questioning what you have to do to see some stability and certainty return to the Northern Territory.
I am pleased to see it is slowly dawning on some ministers that the big infrastructure project, the Marine Supply Base, is a critical game changer in our positioning in the oil and gas industry. How ironic to finally hear the CLP lauding the Marine Supply Base when its very own cadres, its paid-jobs-for-the-mates Renewal Management Board we have yet to see any final report from – that mysterious final report no one can see even though the taxpayer paid $1m for it – in its interim report questioned the viability of the Marine Supply Base. They could not have got it more wrong if they tried.
Yes, we thank the CLP for riding on the back of our work. We see that in a burst of construction activity in 2013-14 through to 2014-15 which will fuel our GSP. In 2016-17, we will see the beginning of that all-important phase of production of gas out of the Ichthys project. We will see it shift from a construction-fuelled boost to GSP to the export of gas products.
The challenge, as my colleague, the Deputy Opposition Leader has said, is where is the big project? We have heard much talk from the current Chief Minister, but we have not heard or seen much action. Where are the major projects he is landing for the Territory? You have heard in debate from this side the prospect of Woodside. They have announced FLNG and, curiously, we have not heard much since from the current Chief Minister.
The challenge, as always in pursuing these highly prospective fields and opportunities, is to get the balance right and ensure you provide the local infrastructure required. Also, that you sign up to the local industry participation plans to deliver on local jobs and ensure you get the community benefit trust signed off, as we have seen and as referred to, particularly in McArthur River and what happened there.
However, what you hear from the relevant minister is silence on the crucial area of local benefits to the community, which is a shame. He has some high-level rhetoric and no detail behind it. Literally, where is the local industry participation plan? Where are the reports on local industry participation coming out of these big production and construction projects? There is silence, but this government shrouds itself in secrecy.
They do not attempt to show any level of open accountability and transparency as they committed to in their five-point election plan. The moment they got in that was torn up, gone, a broken promise.
Going to the announcement that Power and Water have signed up to 15 PJ of gas coming out of the Magellan Dingo field, you have to ask how much that cost the taxpayer with this so-called – if you believe the Treasurer – cash-strapped, financially dire Power and Water Corporation? How much did that gas deal of 15 PJ for 10 years with the potential of 30 PJ cost the taxpayer? Silence. You are not advised. That is unbelievable. On one hand you say we have to split Power and Water into different government owned corporations because it is in such dire financial circumstances and, at the same time, a 15 PJ for 10 years gas deal is done and there is no accountability to the taxpayer on how many millions of dollars that cost. Are you for real?
This is an extraordinary situation of a government shrouded in secrecy and the taxpayer having every right to know because, at the end of the day, they are footing the bill through the increased tariffs the CLP hit consumers with. They are also footing the bill with the community service obligation payments to Power and Water. Yet, we have no right to know how much it cost the taxpayer to purchase those 15 PJ of gas.
As I said, where there are opportunities there also needs to be balance as the public has a right to know. The public right is to know what these deals and investments are costing the taxpayer –but silence from the government.
They also need to know what will occur to our natural resources, for example, water. They also need to know who will foot the bill for the investment required to meet the local infrastructure, particularly, in that all-important Roper region.
What is happening with water use on the Roper River associated with mining activity? How many gigalitres are being drawn down for that activity and how much is proposed to be used going forward? There is significant concern over the Mataranka water allocation which has put increased stress on the Roper River, which adds to a genuine concern as to what the water allocations will be for mines setting up in that region.
Look at the Yugul Mangi Development Aboriginal Corporation. The traditional owners have welcomed the employment and training opportunities provided by the mine, but they want to ensure the physical and cultural environment are not damaged by mining activity. They are working with Western Desert Resources to ensure their traditional environment is protected.
Lorella Springs Station has voiced concerns about the impact of the mine on its wilderness-based tourism venture which depends on the environment remaining intact. The Yugul Mangi Development Aboriginal Corporation has also expressed concern about the impact of the Australian Ilmenite Resources mine which is extracting large volumes of water from the Roper River.
At Groote Eylandt and Maningrida local people are concerned about the impact of oil and gas exploration on sea beds and cultural sites, as well as pristine marine environments. Closer to home, Darwin people and people living in the rural area are concerned about potential gas for exploration in the area of the Howard East aquifer.
We are fully supportive of development, but you need to get the balance right and be very sure of your social, cultural and environmental requirements. People need to have the Roper area on alert because of the water allocation licences granted to Tina MacFarlane by the CLP. That was a dodgy deal for a mate that has come at the same time water extraction is occurring to support mines along the Roper. There are huge impacts on that river and real concerns. Much more explanation is needed from the government about what it is doing with the water management plan for the area.
We have seen hundreds of landowners concerned about exploration access, the potential impact of exploration activity, and any eventual use of fracking in their regions on rural ground water supplies. That is why this government’s parliamentary inquiry into energy supplies was supported by the opposition. It is a chance for a cautious and thorough look at practices, potential yields, impacts, and understanding what a genuine process could do.
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request the member be given an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LAWRIE: In this debate, we also know our local fishermen are concerned about exploration. They are concerned about rumours of dredging that could occur across the river systems of the Territory. It is about consultation and sharing information with key stakeholders, ensuring we have valuable information and knowledge and the right decisions are made to ensure economic development and that all-important balance to the social, environmental and cultural needs of the Territory.
When the government says – and we hear them say it often – they are committed to reducing red tape and green tape, we need to ensure appropriate controls and safeguards to protect the interest of all Territorians are in place to ensure the wise use of our resources.
I am also concerned there are hints in this ministerial statement of finding ways to take shortcuts with land access approvals, particularly those required under the ALRA.
We have heard the member for Arnhem call for a change to the way native title exists. Increasingly, I am concerned the government is, perhaps, rushing headlong into an agenda of breaking up land councils. If that is your view, if you have decided to lobby the federal government to break up the land councils of the Northern Territory, then do so with an informative paper. Do so having fully informed Northern Territory residents of what supports the view you hold to break up land councils and exactly how that will occur in a process sense. How many land councils do you have in mind? Which traditional owner groups do they represent? What process will be in place for the certainty the resources sector would need in pursuing its projects? If you listen to the corporates and where they sit in their work with the land councils they see a system that, whilst you can always improve, is yielding real results for the companies exploring and taking to production mines in the Northern Territory.
If you propose, as we heard from the member for Arnhem today and have seen glimpses and hints from the Chief Minister – it will be interesting to see his response – to change the processes of the land councils, to change the existing processes for local traditional owners who are working well with the resources companies, then do so in a way where you are fully informing the public who elected you. Fully inform the traditional owners across the regions and the residents of our urban centres, rather than have a shroud of secrecy and backroom deals and discussions between mates. That would not be in the interests of the resources companies seeking to explore and bring massive investment to the Northern Territory and mines to production. If you are genuine in wanting to make a change, you will need to present a case for change and the detail around what is being proposed.
There is an opportunity for the Chief Minister to contribute to this debate and provide us with his views around the position of land councils.
There is mention of a change to mining tenement renewal processes and that the government is consulting with industry on those changes. What about the other affected parties: landowners, native title holders and pastoralists? What consultation is occurring there? We need to ensure the government, elected by the people, genuinely talks to the people, consults with local Territorians and meets its commitment to be open and accountable. You need to ensure our taxpayers are not further burdened with the cost of unforeseen legacy and mine clean-up issues. Sadly, of course, the current evidence is what they say and what they do are two entirely different things when it comes to the CLP. We need this government to have an eye to that, as well as short term wins, to keep the Territory’s interest front and centre in all its dealings on the allocation of exploration and mining on oil and gas tenements.
I am concerned about the behaviour of the current Chief Minister in dealing with multinationals. This is particularly evidenced by the way he reneged on the gas to Gove offer then reneged again, changing the parameters of the offer from 195 to 175 PJ. This has shown that major multinationals cannot trust this government. Their word cannot be trusted, they shift the parameters, and that bodes badly for the Northern Territory in the issue of sovereign risk. I have had to put this on the parliamentary agenda in debate and discussion in previous debates, and I raise it again. Stop changing the playing field for our multinationals; you increase sovereign risk. They cannot believe the rate of change that occurs in ministerial portfolio reshuffles, they scratch their heads in wonder at the rate of change in shuffling CEOs and agencies. Of course, they cannot get over the fact you betrayed your own Chief Minister when he was on a trade mission to Japan.
This chaos and dysfunction has done the Territory no good. The sovereign risk has increased, and some investors are starting to become extremely nervous about the prospects of the Northern Territory, despite such a strong, vibrant and dynamic economy left to you when Labor lost in August last year.
There was a bizarre Question Time display today by the Chief Minister when he spoke about the federal election result. Wake up and listen to the people who voted. If a poll had been held in the Territory that day you would be in opposition; you would have lost five seats. Goodbye Sanderson, Arnhem, Arafura, Namatjira and Stuart. You are in all sorts of strife, yet you bury your head in the sand and pretend otherwise.
This statement is a pretence. You pretend the production identified in this statement is your work; it is not. All this work was done prior to you gaining government, and you have missed opportunities that have come along since then. Sharpen up what you should be doing. Stop stripping resources out of vital frontline services such as education, and start, for a moment, to listen to people who are experts in the field, which you would do if you bothered to consult with people before you take rash actions.
Thank you for bringing the mining statement forward. We genuinely have a keen interest in seeing the resources sector grow in the Northern Territory.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I cannot let some of the comments from the Leader of the Opposition go. Territorians look for rational debate. One could be forgiven for thinking the lights went out in August last year and the ‘closed for business’ sign was hung out if you listen to the Leader of the Opposition and members opposite. Of course, that could not be further from the truth.
I acknowledge good things were done by the former Labor government in development of resources in the Northern Territory. I, amongst others, have, in opposition and government, congratulated Clare Martin and Paul Henderson for their work in securing the INPEX deal. I can imagine the frustration of Territorians when they then claim ConocoPhillips as one of theirs. ConocoPhillips was in the final stages of being nailed down by the Burke government, and prior to that the Stone government, for its development of the Bayu-Undan field and pipeline to Darwin and ConocoPhillips’ installation across the harbour when government was lost.
I said prior to the last Territory election there is a predisposition of the government of the day – I counsel my Cabinet colleagues on this – to look at the big projects and think that automatically gains fulsome support from the voting public. Prior to the 2001 election which the CLP lost, there was a lot of focus of the then Burke government, and prior to that Stone government, on the ConocoPhillips deal and the Bayu-Undan gas development, and so there should have been because it was an important project for the Northern Territory, but the government of the day still managed to lose the election.
Curiously, the parallel with INPEX is notable. The government of the day, and the Henderson government in particular, made much of the INPEX deal and still managed to lose government at the 2012 election. The message for legislators and members of this House could not be clearer: whilst we understand the importance of these projects, particularly for the global environment of the Northern Territory economy as a whole, it does not automatically follow that the mum and dad voters agree with us for a number of reasons. There are lifestyle implications for a major project of this nature, and lifestyle has been an issue for the Northern Territory for decades. I have lived here since the late 1960s, and enjoying the lifestyle of the Northern Territory has been very important. At an emotional level – the basis of many people’s votes – the lifestyle changes brought about by these major projects we know are necessary engender a negative emotional response amongst many voters.
Whilst we understand the jobs that roll out of it, people in voter land may not necessarily agree with us. What we do as a government to address issues people have can be deduced from that.
If I ever leave politics I am considering writing a book called ‘Political Maxims that Matter’. Chapter 1 of that book would be ‘All Politics is Local’. Members who work their seats diligently in the Northern Territory and other jurisdictions in Australia have, traditionally, been rewarded by the voting public. Members who care about local issues, the same issues their electorate cares about, are generally rewarded for listening and being engaged.
What I take away from the lessons learned by both the Burke and Henderson governments is that whilst we might be focused on the major projects, I, for one, will never lose sight of the local things that matter to voters on an everyday basis. If you like, it is issues that remain in the troposphere when much of these major projects, for many who live in the troposphere, appears to occur in the stratosphere.
This mining statement, whilst very important, must be seen in the greater political environment of the Northern Territory. We, as a government, must be mindful of the implications major mining projects have for the communities we serve.
Having made that observation, I have, since the late 1960s, seen fundamental changes in the Northern Territory. Much of it has been done on the back of major mining projects such as Rum Jungle, development of the bauxite mine at Nhulunbuy, and the mines which exist on Groote Eylandt. Those mines developed for many years and during the late 1960s and early 1970s were important and developed with the support of local people because they provided jobs. However, as people have become increasingly removed from mining in direct employment, the importance of mining in many punters’ minds has diminished.
The mining industry is something we, as legislators, have to see in context. Having said that, the mining industry remains vitally important and the ‘open for business’ sign remains. I acknowledge the efforts made by the former Labor government, but I refute the assertion they were responsible for Bayu-Undan. That is arrant nonsense. They signed the paperwork after the change of government in 2001, and they did not miraculously do all of the negotiations, preliminary work, environmental impact studies and God knows what else prior to 2001. That all started in the Shane Stone period.
Whatever you think of Shane Stone, as Chief Minister he did not lack audacity in the way he pursued the interests of the Territory. I suspect a person with the electoral support of less than an alderman on the Beijing Town Council getting to see the Premier of China to promote Northern Territory interests demonstrates a level of self-confidence which has not been seen in the Northern Territory since.
Perhaps Clare Martin’s pursuit of the INPEX project demonstrated …
Ms Lawrie: Make him a business ambassador.
Mr ELFERINK: I am throwing a few compliments your way. You can relax a bit, Delia.
With Clare Martin’s pursuit of INPEX we saw something similar, and I fully expect the current Chief Minister will pursue similar projects.
We talk about mining, but we should also talk about energy. We do not tend to separate out the two, but it is about time we did because mining is one thing, and energy is another thing entirely. It would be nice to see an environment where we could value-add our mining product which goes out as raw material – iron ore, bauxite or whatever else – onshore. A good example of that is the refinery at Nhulunbuy which produces aluminium in its ingot state …
Ms Walker: Alumina.
Mr ELFERINK: I thought it was aluminium. Alumina. It ships out an improved product and we should look at value-adding. I encourage Rio Tinto to look closely at what is on offer at the moment. From Rio Tinto’s perspective the question will be: will it stack up economically? If the bottom line turns black in the projections for Rio Tinto, I suspect they will sign up. If it does not, unfortunately it will not be a good result for the people of Nhulunbuy, and I hope that does not happen. I am sure all members of this House would feel that way. Having made that observation, Rio Tinto lost some $13.5bn last financial year, of which $11bn was in aluminium production. For some time it has been looking at how to deal with aluminium.
Today we have Sherwin Iron. A media release has gone out saying Sherwin Iron – I have to declare an interest because I believe my personal superannuation fund has shares in Sherwin Iron, which I am happy to see on behalf of the fund and the people of the Northern Territory. However, it would be great if we could develop an onshore energy market which would see us not exporting iron ore but steel. That would be a much better result. I also hope development of the energy market in the Northern Territory would see us developing other forms of manufacturing. Of course, one cannot help but note the presence of Andrew Liveris in Darwin in recent times. Whilst you do not read too much into that …
Ms Lawrie: Of course!
Mr ELFERINK: I will not put words into the mouth of Dow Chemical, but it is nice to see the chairman of that company visit the Northern Territory. If it was not Dow Chemical, then I encourage the Chief Minister – he is working hard on this – to find other ways of bringing value-add products onshore using the relatively cheap energy we have access to and will increasingly have access to over time. This raises the issue of conventional and non-conventional gas, but the volumes the minister referred to in his ministerial statement are extraordinary. If we can bring that to the surface quickly, we are in the same position several Middle Eastern countries were in the post-World War II period. As the world’s reserves reach a peak and it becomes more expensive to extract oil from more remote and deeper places in the world, the gas option is looking better all the time. I would never assert that gas is clean and green, but it is cleaner and greener than other petrochemicals so it places us in a good position to argue in support of developing the gas potential of the Northern Territory for environmental and other reasons.
It is almost inevitable gas will come onshore under good management of a good government, which the Giles government is. I expect that to happen sooner rather than later, and that will give the Territory options. We will see changes in the Northern Territory unparalleled in Australia’s history.
It is not inconceivable that within my lifetime a city like Darwin could have a population of one million people. For that, we need future governments to plan, and this government is planning. The insightfulness of the Mills government in getting the Planning Commission up and running, whilst quietly introduced, will see future Territorians very grateful. The Planning Commission will design Darwin for not only tomorrow but 10, 50 and 100 years’ time.
There has been a lack of overall planning, particularly by the former Labor government. The previous CLP government created land use objectives documents, which were very good plans, particularly for Alice Springs and Darwin. However, they were discontinued by the former Labor government which allowed it to decay into an approval system. This is fine, except there is no sense of planning; you get an approval process for various projects which may not complement each other.
The adherence to and faith the former government had in Weddell does not reflect an important fact about the cost of fuel prices into the future. To have another Palmerston, on the other side of Palmerston, the same distance Palmerston is from Darwin, invites the building of very large roads, Tiger Brennan Drive being an example. They cost hundreds of millions of dollars to construct, and people will have to buy fuel at ever-increasing prices to travel those distances. The current Leader of the Opposition, the former Planning minister several years ago, signalled densification but never followed through with it.
I remember attending a Real Estate Institute lunch four or five years ago when the then Planning minister announced a densification policy to all and sundry, but never followed through on it. The former Henderson government, prior to the election, offered up some words on the subject, but the policy was never rolled out. It is now a matter which this government must turn its attention to. The challenges this government faces in ensuring sufficient accommodation means it has to turn its mind to that issue sooner rather than later.
These are all consequences of an important active and growing mining industry. It highlights, for me, as a member of government, the absence of another element in our economy: a substantial manufacturing industry. Bringing gas onshore as cheap energy will, I hope, become a way to attract companies to the Northern Territory to take advantage of our raw product and turn it into another material onshore before we export it or use it for domestic consumption. That would be the final component to taking all our eggs out of one economic basket and spreading the wealth, therefore enabling the Territory to finally throw off the shackles of the boom/bust cycle it has had for as long as I can recall. If we were able to create a large manufacturing industry, I would be comforted for the future of Territorians as a whole.
Nevertheless I thank the minister for his useful statement which sets a path and makes clear some important issues in the direction of this government. I am grateful the minister brought it before the House.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I would also like to thank the minister for bringing forth this statement on mining. It is very appropriate today, as the minister well knows, with the first loading of a sample shipment of iron ore for Sherwin Iron from the Roper region. That was a fairly impressive farewell, and when referring to the traditional owners the minister said, ‘Some of your land is being shipped over to China for the development of steel’. I had not looked at it that way; part of their country being dug up, with their approval, and taken to China. I asked one of the traditional owners if it would be nice – perhaps the minister could take this up – if the Chinese foundry could send a sample of the iron produced from that iron ore back. It would be symbolic of what has happened today.
Of course, that is one phase of mining. There is always a lot of talk about the benefits of mining to Indigenous people. To prove if that is the case, we need to look 20 or 30 years down the track. Much is said in the mining industry about benefits for Aboriginal people. There is no doubt in some cases there are. If ever a mine put an effort into helping Indigenous people it was ERA at Jabiru. They employ between 80 and 90 Indigenous people. Part of the royalties from the mine has built the boarding school at Jabiru, and there has been a very close relationship between the mining company and traditional owners.
I thank Rob Atkinson, CEO of ERA, for the last four or five years. Rob showed the way it should be done when it comes to mining. He treated Aboriginal people as equal partners and had a real concern about ensuring when ERA finished its work it would do as little damage to the environment as possible. Nothing could show that more than the brine tank distillation plant recently installed there. What other mine has decided it will clean up its tailings dams by producing water that is so pure it cannot be released into the environment until it is put back into a wetland where it can pick up the minerals and salts required and then released into the environment?
Show me another mine in the Northern Territory which has made that much effort, even when running at a loss, which ERA has done for a number of years. Also, its relationship with its workers, with the town of Jabiru, and its willingness – I personally thank Rob. I am a small drop in the bucket when it comes to these issues; I am no big player in the mining industry. Rob Atkinson would come to my office every year to give me an update of where ERA was, where things were good, where things were bad, how many Indigenous people were employed, the issue with tailings dams and the effect on the environment, especially as this mine is surrounded by the Kakadu National Park. Many other mines in the Northern Territory need to take what ERA has done and try to replicate it, because a number of mines throughout the Northern Territory have left a legacy of damage to the environment. I will not go into that. The minister has already heard from me in the last sittings about leakings from tailings dams and Redbank.
There are other mines, and one day I hope to get to some of those mines where I believe there is environmental damage. It is good to hear the government has, at least, set up a fund. We would not need that fund if we did things the right way the first time. There is no doubt in a tropical climate with high rainfall our biggest concern is the tailings dam. Mt Todd is a continuing problem. More research needs to be done into managing that area of mining which continues to be a problem.
It is all very well to say mining is great, but mining has some issues. If we are to call mining a sustainable industry, we should not require the taxpayer to pick up the bill when they have gone, nor for the environment to be damaged permanently. They are the two key issues if you want to prove sustainability of mining in the Northern Territory.
There are issues such as roads. I have travelled the Roper Highway and seen the work Sherwin Iron is doing maintaining the dirt section. They say they will put in extra passing lanes. Mining, in general in the Northern Territory, uses our roads and they come in for a pounding. Mining or trucking companies might say, ‘We pay our taxes to the federal government’. Not all that money comes back into roads.
Look at roads in my electorate. Recently I was standing on Gunn Point Road watching triple after triple coming out of the extractive mining area of Howard Springs. That does not take into account the trucks with rock coming from north of the Wallaby Holtze area. There are trucks coming out from Mt Bundy along the Arnhem Highway, travelling down the Stuart Highway, along Jenkins Road, and there are trucks coming from south of Jenkins Road as well. They do an enormous amount of damage to our roads and that is a cost to the community.
When we talk about sustainability, we want to ensure mining can stand on its own feet and not require the taxpayer to pick up the bill to allow those industries to make profits – not all, some industries struggle. We have to be careful when industries start that they can pay their way, otherwise we are kidding ourselves. In the case of extractive mining, there needs to be a more accurate cost of what it is to extract gravel and sand from our environment.
Extractive mining has been occurring in the rural area for many years. I raised this issue with previous governments, both Labor and CLP, when I was president of the council. If you flew over the rural area you would see numerous gravel piles and sandpits. My concern is in the rush to get so much of the material out because of the growth of Darwin, is there adequate rehabilitation of the area? In the past, we know it was not done very well. In the distant past, it did not occur at all. You can see that by the piles of gravel and old materials dumped. The bush should be tidied up and the topsoil replaced, but that has not occurred in some places. There are requirements of the extractive mining industry to strip the good soil from the top with the seeds and seedlings in it and, when they have finished their gravel pits, they are to bring that back with the hope it will revegetate. That is not easy because when you dig a hole below the surface you create a dam. You get into the acid soils, and in many cases it does not rehabilitate very well and grows weeds.
The government needs to look at the Howard Springs/Humpty Doo area, even Middle Arm, and conduct an audit of the extractive mining areas to see which ones have been left without rehabilitation and what areas are being mined and need to be rehabilitated.
We have also moved into a new phase, even though this has been operative in Central Australia for 30 years, of fracking. Its proper term is the non-conventional fracturing of rock to produce shale gas. I have no problem with producing gas from fracking but the government, if it does not want to be left behind in this debate, needs to be on the front foot. No doubt there are people who have concerns about fracking. Some of those concerns are legitimate, and some are that we are producing more greenhouse gas emissions from another form of fossil fuel: shale gas. We can argue whether we should be producing more gas and, therefore, more greenhouse omissions, but we can also argue whether fracking itself is a problem.
I was listening to a program on fracking of shale on the BBC on Saturday night. It is being debated in the United Kingdom and, as one scientist said, fracking is not really the problem; what happens afterwards can be the issue. I will give you an example. When fracking occurs, sometimes the concerns are about contamination of ground water. If the regulations are properly enforced that should not happen because of the encasement of the pipes that go into the ground to stop water mixing with the shale gas being brought up. That is one issue, the other is sometimes there can be leakages. If methane is leaked, the idea of producing gas with fewer emissions than coal can fall away because methane is a greenhouse gas. You have to ensure there are no leakages in the system when it is brought up from the base or when it is transported.
The issue raised in the BBC radio report was that it is all very well, but do we have enough people on the ground to ensure all regulations are enforced. I will cite a case in the United Kingdom. The company drilling, when asked if there was a government person to ensure all been done, said ‘No, all we do is fill out the form’ and the government said that was okay. They quoted another case where that had happened.
The government has said it will be tightening directions regarding fracking, and I hope we ensure we have qualified staff to ensure those directions are carried out. My concern is if the government is not on the front foot in relation to this – I know the minister spoke about the enormous quantity of potential gas underground in the Northern Territory.
I have a document from the CSIRO which talks about the Georgina Basin, the Beetaloo sub-basin and the McArthur Basin, all of which have huge potential. However, we have to bring the community with us if there are concerns about contamination, the chemicals used in the process, even earthquakes. Some small earthquakes caused by fracking occurred in the United Kingdom and the government had a moratorium to find the cause. They found if there was not too much pressure during the process, earthquakes did not occur. If the government wants to be on the front foot it should ensure people know what fracking is. It has the potential to produce amazing amounts of energy for the Northern Territory.
At the moment there is a debate in the United Kingdom which is relevant to us. If we produce shale gas, which is a relatively cheap form of gas, will there be electricity benefits to the Northern Territory? Probably not, because we are locked into, I presume, another 25 years – depending on what Gove uses from that supply – a contracted price for gas from ENI.
Whether we get direct benefits from the exploration and use of that gas, I am unsure. In communities which rely on diesel, there may be options for that gas to be used to reduce the cost of producing electricity. I am interested in what the government has to say about its potential for Territorians, not just for export.
In relation to what is happening at the moment, I visited the ilmenite mine several months ago. It is really no more than extractive mining. It only digs between 1 m and 2 m of topsoil, puts it through a centrifugal separator and brings out ilmenite. That is in its early stages, as we know. The first shipments will go to China, and it will be sent to other countries as well. My concern, and the minister might touch on this when summing up, is they told me they get their water from the McArthur River. I asked about restrictions on pumping the water and was told when it reaches a certain level they cannot pump it and the mine cannot operate. What effect will some of the new water licences in the Mataranka area have on the ilmenite mine, especially if the water drops too low? I do not know the relationship between the Department of Land Resource Management, which issues water licences, and the Department of Mines and Energy, which approves water licences for mines. I do not know if they work these things out together. However, it would be a shame if there were not some discussions about taking too much water from one area which would affect another industry. I do not know if that has happened.
An issue arose when I watched Sherwin Iron load their iron ore onto a ship to China. When I asked if this could be railed, I was told it was too expensive. Has the government done anything to encourage more of these materials to be moved by rail so there are fewer trucks on the road? That is one of the advantages of rail, and I bet if Tim Fischer was here he would give many reasons why rail is better than transporting materials like bulk iron ore by road.
The minister has given an upmarket statement on mining, and that is good. We have to ensure people in the Northern Territory receive long-lasting benefits. Aboriginal people not only want jobs, they need to show their children that by getting a good education they can not only be truck drivers, mow the lawns, plant trees and those things – nothing wrong with that – they may move into managing a mine, learn about geology, and learn about mining so they get more hands-on benefit from the mines in the area, not just from royalties and jobs at the lower end of the scale. That will prove whether mining in the Northern Territory is of benefit to people on the land they own.
I wonder if there is uranium near Alice Springs. I remember the debate in parliament about Angela Pamela and know the government has spoken about the importance of mining in the southern part of the Territory. Angela Pamela is still there, if there is uranium in the area. I do not oppose mining uranium as long as it is done properly. There was a lot of debate from members of the government, when in opposition, from the Alice Springs area, and those who were not, during the last sittings in Alice Springs.
Mining is important. We need to ensure it is done correctly, that the people of the Northern Territory, especially with mines on land they own, benefit in the long-term and that the key word in developing mining in the Northern Territory is ‘sustainable’. It should not be supported by the taxpayer and should not cause permanent damage to the environment. If it can avoid those things and help the people of the Northern Territory enjoy a better future it will be good for everyone. If it does not go down that path it will be a legacy we will pay for a long way into the future.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this statement before the House. It is good to hear of the many things the new CLP government is building upon and planning to deliver, many of which are projects started under the former Labor government which the new government now claims ownership of. The Marine Supply Base, which I seem to recall being lampooned under our government, and an outstanding achievement, within your statement is ‘our’ Marine Supply Base.
Both the minister and Chief Minister will not be surprised to learn my interest in contributing to this debate is based on the current crisis facing Gove and the mining operation there, the wider community, not just in the township but in the region, and the crisis the community faces because of the sheer incompetence of the CLP government.
I note acknowledgement of CLP support of the industry in developing world-class deposits in places like Gove, a development which had nothing to do with the CLP – not even an entity at the time – but everything to do with the federal government given the start-up was pre self-government.
Not only does the Territory still benefit from major projects established over 20 years ago as the minister’s statement says, in the case of Gove it says it was a project established more than 40 years ago. The minister is dead keen when he wants to develop jobs, develop regional centres, develop infrastructure, but what about supporting existing players in the industry? What about supporting a region opened in the late 1960s?
It is with some umbrage that I respond to this statement and note the one-liner addressing the urgent need to provide gas to Gove. Obviously, that degree of urgency sits very high on the agenda for people who live in that region.
Gove’s contribution to the Territory through mining is phenomenal, from the original owners of the Gove joint venture under its manager Nabalco, followed by Alcan, who came along in 2000, and in 2008, Rio Tinto. They built not just a mine and a refinery, but a port, a power generation facility, and an entire town. There are schools, a hospital, shopping centre, police station, post office, court house, town hall, Olympic-size swimming pool, roads, an airport, and hundreds of houses and units to accommodate the people who lived there and not only worked for the mining company, but supported their operations. In the early days when the town was built other facilities popped up like the Arnhem Club, the pub, the Walkabout Lodge, tennis courts, a golf course, squash clubs, churches, a surf club, and many other facilities that make it much like any other small country town.
No other player in the industry comes close to the contribution the original Gove joint venture has made to the Northern Territory. Yet, all of this seems to be at risk. At the time, it was the second biggest construction project in the history of the nation, second only to the Snowy Mountains Scheme in New South Wales. The cumulative contribution to the nation’s GDP through exports, taxes, jobs, both directly and indirectly, and royalties must surely, over 40 years, run into billions and billions of dollars. The growth of a regional hub, which has seen Nhulunbuy grow as a service centre – a hub for the public and private sector across the region of northeast Arnhem Land.
The successive mine owners have been good corporate citizens. They have been big employers and providers of training and apprenticeships for Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. They have been sponsors of local organisations and events, and major corporate sponsors of all manner of organisations, including those such as Landcare and the Territory’s own AFL team, Territory Thunder. The benefits are not just for the small mining town of Nhulunbuy and the region’s surrounding communities like Yirrkala and Gapuwiyak and the associated homelands, but are also there for the Territory and, indeed, the nation.
I have lived there for more than 20 years. I was employed by the company in a community relations role for more than a decade. I am pretty familiar with how they work and how successful they have been. I remember a time I was working there when the manager for community affairs said, ‘We have to stop entering into the Northern Territory’s export awards because we win every year. It is about time we pulled out of the field to allow other companies in the industry to step up.’
Today, the Gove operations continue to make an enormous contribution. I look at what Pacific Aluminium contributes, which is more than $500m to the Northern Territory’s gross regional product annually, and indirectly and directly employs thousands of people. On-site there are around 800 to 900 employees and probably around 300 contractors. You then have that flow-on effect of indirect employment. The company bought, last year, $170m of goods and services with 89 local and Territory businesses being beneficiaries of that. In the last five years they have delivered $76m in royalties directly to the Northern Territory government.
With the proposal for gas to Gove, which would involve the conversion of the steam power station from heavy fuel oil to a gas energy source, there is also the construction of a 600 km to 700 km pipeline to convey that gas along the Central Arnhem Road into Nhulunbuy. That in itself is a project worth some $1.2bn, not to mention – should it proceed, and we hope it does – hundreds of people being employed during the construction of that gas pipeline.
We recognise as well that Rio Tinto’s investment in this area and its huge desire and need to convert to gas effectively will double the size of the gas market, drive further investment in gas exploration, increase the long-term gas supply and the opportunities for other businesses and create jobs in the Territory.
On that level, it sounds like a win; sadly, it is not. The big difference for Pacific Aluminium is it has been running at a considerable loss for several years. There is a number of reasons for that, but it started to turn pear-shaped in 2008 when the global financial crisis struck. It is well-known the investment in the G3 expansion project did not deliver the benefits they hoped. There were issues around investment in some of the engineering components which did not deliver what was expected at the time they were commissioned. Of course, competition from cheaper producers makes it all incredibly difficult, as well as the changing market conditions and the high Australian dollar, which is down slightly at the moment.
They need to convert the steam power station, which is run on heavy fuel oil, to a cheaper energy source. Gas is critical. Keep in mind this power station fires up the whole of the Gove peninsular, the township, the surrounding communities such as Yirrkala, Gunyangara, and Barraratjpi. There is no other generator of power there, so we are entirely reliant upon that power station.
Gas to Gove is not a new plan. I will make it very clear, as I have been in the past. Rio Tinto and its subsidiary, Pacific Aluminium, have a big role to play in this; hindsight is a wonderful thing. They had the opportunity on a couple of occasions to convert to gas, having signed MOUs with suppliers previously, including ENI from the Blacktip field as well as a potential supplier in PNG. They did not take a long-term view, opted out of those gas deals, and invested the capital in projects like G3. In many ways, the writing was on the wall.
The other benefits of converting to gas, apart from the fact it is cheaper, are the environmental benefits and the reduction of emissions from the steam power station stacks. From an environmental perspective, a safer fuel to handle opposed to the massive shipments of heavy fuel oil which arrive in the pristine harbour of Melville Bay in Gove which come from Kuwait every six weeks or so. Coming from the Middle East, there is always exposure to the volatile political situation which has long been a threat to the continuity of provision of fuel and power.
The Chief Minister of the previous Labor government, Paul Henderson, was in negotiations with Rio Tinto, or Pacific Aluminium, the subsidiary created as they endeavoured to divest the package of unprofitable sites in Rio Tinto around the Pacific Aluminium region, which included Australia and New Zealand. It also included Tasmania and operations on the New South Wales coast. Certainly, the former Chief Minister had proceeded with dealings. A gas task force was formed and negotiations were occurring.
With the change of government last August, Pacific Aluminium commenced dealings with the new CLP government, and it was not long after the election that the seriousness of the situation and the dire need to convert to gas become more apparent. Rio Tinto upped the ante in speaking publicly for the first time about the fact that without the availability of gas the company would have to consider the worst case scenario: the option to suspend its refining operations, be it partial or otherwise.
This was one of the biggest issues the new CLP Chief Minister, now former Chief Minister, the member for Blain, had to deal with upon taking on the leadership role. That is what happens when you are the head of state of a government; you have many issues to deal with. The negotiations, the process around getting gas to Gove from the change of government through to February when the deal was struck, were well documented in both the Territory and national media because this has and continues to be an issue of national interest. The views of members on both sides on trying to resolve the gas to Gove issue have been well documented on the floor of this House.
On 11 February a deal was struck and announced for the on-selling of 300 PJ of gas from Blacktip. Gas had been contracted to the Northern Territory government. When Chief Minister Mills made this announcement it was welcomed by everybody. I recall members on the opposite side of the House singing the praises of Chief Minister Mills for securing this deal, and what a great deal it was. At home it was very welcome news. It provided, for the first time in almost a year, certainty for people who lived there. I am not just talking about mining company employees; I am talking about people who own businesses there and traditional owners. Mining company employees – as much as people love living there and the demographic of the place shows it is families with young children who opt to move there because it is a wonderful place to work and raise a family – many of those families would have options to move on to other places.
For local businesses there is nowhere to go. If they cannot sell their business they are stuck there. Traditional owners, by virtue of who they are, where they live and their connection to country which is inextricably theirs, are also not going anywhere. On news of the announcement in February that 300 PJ of gas would be made available, not given away at taxpayers’ expense as some people believe, a commercial deal was struck to on-sell gas to Rio Tinto to convert the power station and ensure its long-term future, and people made decisions.
People refinanced their business. Other people turned down jobs and decided to stay in Nhulunbuy. Rio Tinto, as owner of the mining operations, invested heavily on the strength of that news to progress its plans to get gas to Gove. Its figure is in the vicinity of $20m a month to progress the conversion of the steam power station, to progress negotiations, the EIS, and how a gas pipeline might look. Of course, the Commonwealth government was involved in committing to underwrite the construction of the gas pipeline. It was always the case that gas needed to be secured before there could be any commitment to underwrite the gas pipeline. Many people and companies made decisions to invest on the strength of securing gas. Everything was looking good then things started to change.
First, we had the coup led by the member for Braitling on 13 March when the Chief Minister was on a trade mission to Japan, working to secure further relationships and investment in the Territory with key overseas players. In Gove, we had no reason to think plans around gas would be any different until a bombshell was dropped on Friday 26 July, Darwin Show Day. When the fact it was a public holiday was raised with the Chief Minister when he slipped out to Gove last week, he said it was only a public holiday in Darwin. However, it was a public holiday in Nhulunbuy as well. When the news arrived most people missed it. Being a public holiday, people were doing other things on a fine July day. I almost missed the news with my phone on silent, enjoying some time with my family, only to find when I glanced at my phone about an hour-and-a-half after the announcement I had umpteen text messages and voicemails from people wanting to talk about what on earth was going on.
When that bombshell was dropped we discovered there was not 300 PJ of gas available, but 195, and the offer was a dual fuel option, gas and heavy fuel, which had been explored by Rio Tinto during the review it undertook between October and January 2013. Obviously they had looked at all the options and discounted that one. Nobody could understand why the offer had changed from 300 PJ to 195 PJ. As the Leader of the Opposition said in her contribution, the message the Chief Minister sent to the corporate world was to be very careful. Do not trust the Northern Territory government, they are small fry and not accustomed to dealing with the corporate world. They will tell you one thing, do another, and you cannot trust them. The sign about the Territory being open for business had been taken down.
The current relationship between the Northern Territory government and Rio Tinto is not positive. It is quite a hostile relationship, the hostility coming more from the Northern Territory government with some of the remarks, comments and media releases the Chief Minister continues to make. It has not been a positive relationship with the people who live in northeast Arnhem Land and are reliant on the long-term future and viability of the mining and processing operations there.
Essentially we are looking at the worst case scenario. The figures are stated in the government’s report, and should the worst case scenario eventuate and refinery operations are curtailed, the population of the township will drop from 4000 to 1500 people. In the report the social and economic impacts are described as significant. Interestingly and disappointingly, there has been no social and economic impact study on what it would mean. Our poor old Chamber of Commerce and local businesses have, once again last week, been asked to complete another survey on what the impacts would mean for them if the refinery was to curtail its operations …
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request an extension of time for the member for Nhulunbuy to complete her remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Ms WALKER: Imagine the population of a community that size dropping from 4000 to 1500. It is significant and will gut the community. The reduction in government services would be obvious. It is probably helpful for the Education minister as he would lose quite a few teachers. There would be a reduction in health services, but what does it mean for local businesses? Apart from the fact they will struggle to sell their businesses, their customer base will drop. Economic opportunities just about disappear, employment and training opportunities are drastically reduced, and most at risk is the future of traditional owners.
I remember the day the rally was held in Nhulunbuy in January, calling on Chief Minister Mills to release the gas – on-sell the gas and make a decision – an open letter was placed in the Northern Territory News by the Chairman of the NLC, Wali Wunungmurra,appealing to the Chief Minister to make this deal and recognise:
That was a fantastic letter prepared by the Chairman of the NLC and, thankfully, the news was good on that day.
The news is not good today, the news was not good last week, and the news is not looking great for tomorrow either. If there was any glimpse on the horizon we received a visit from the new federal Minister for Industry, Ian Macfarlane, who came to Nhulunbuy on Monday 30 September. He gave a couple of days’ notice he was arriving. I was pleased to receive an invitation to the meeting, but the extent of it was only one business person per business, which was a shame in a venue the size of our town hall which can seat up to 250 people. I reckon that is how many seats were put out but, sadly, there were only 60 or so people because there had been a few wraps put around that meeting. I wonder if that was because the Chief Minister came to the meeting, not that he announced it, and his name was not on the invitation. There were rumours he was coming so people could only surmise, because he had avoided the community for so long and had avoided and not responded to any community request to attend a meeting. It must have been at the Chief Minister’s request that the meeting have tight reigns around it and police present in the event of a lynch mob or protest.
The federal minister arrived with the Chief Minister in tow to a very orderly and anxious group of people who were keen to hear what was going on. It was a very interesting meeting. Minister Macfarlane basically led the meeting. We were surprised to hear he had flown all the way from Amberley RAAF Base that morning because he wanted to break the news to Nhulunbuy that 300 PJ of gas was available. He said this announcement was so significant he had asked the Chief Minister to change his itinerary to ensure he could be there so the Chief Minister chartered an aircraft. He wanted the community to hear that announcement first, which is why the Chief Minister got a briefing in the 10-minute drive from Gove Airport to the town hall.
We thought it was strange the Chief Minister did not know about this given it is his gas, or ‘Adam’s gas’ as minister Macfarlane called it. We were also a little struck that the federal minister, as he reminded us, had only been in government for two weeks and, in that time, had been able to achieve what the Chief Minister had not been able to in the time he reneged on the deal in July.
The news was welcomed with some caution because we did not know where the gas was coming from. We do not know when it will be there, and at what price. Of course, the news was very new that day and, whilst two of Rio Tinto’s people were present, they were in no position to comment on it. Rio Tinto has always said it will enter into negotiations, but the fuel needs to be at the right price. That is the $64 question, I guess: what is the right price on this gas the federal minister has found. He flew all the way to Gove to tell us something the Chief Minister was not able to.
People had a few questions to ask, but there were also comments. People took the opportunity to let the Chief Minister know how unhappy they were with his performance, and still could not understand why he had reneged on the original gas deal. The asked whether he knew how much he had hurt people and if he understand how hard it was to sell a business or a house in Gove. Comment was also made that perhaps one of the reasons there were empty seats was (a) a number of business people are just over it, and (b) many business people have had to let staff go, therefore, are running their own businesses and do not have time to attend meetings.
Mr Deputy Speaker, that describes where we are today. Life in Gove still hangs in the balance, but it is not just about the people who live in northeast Arnhem Land. The impact and ramifications of the curtailment of operations in Gove will spread across the Territory and nationally. It will hurt businesses in Darwin. I have met with the Chief Executive Officer of the Chamber of Commerce in Darwin to appeal to him and the Chamber to stick up for businesses in Gove and to recognise that should operations be curtailed, the impacts will pass on to businesses in Darwin.
Yes, the mining industry is important in the Northern Territory. I am thrilled the mining minister has managed to fly all over the world and all around the Territory. I believe he has only made one visit to Nhulunbuy. It is starting to become obvious to those of us who live there, not just in Nhulunbuy, but Yirrkala and Gunyangara, that not too many ministers make their way to Nhulunbuy ...
Mr Elferink: I have been there three times.
Ms WALKER: I acknowledge the Attorney-General has been there a few times and is doing good stuff in the Corrections area. We have seen the turnover in portfolios. Today I asked the Education minister to come out. All he can say is, ‘In good time’. It is not just me who asks this, I represent the people who live there who ask, ‘Where are the ministers, we do not hear from them?’
It is perhaps an overused phrase and rhetoric about whose court the ball is in. Rio admits the ball is in their court, but I say the ball sits with the Northern Territory government. They have a role to facilitate and do all they can to broker a deal. That does not include being openly hostile towards one of the biggest corporates in the world, nor the local community, but being open, transparent, accountable and prepared to talk and communicate with people. What a shame it would be, under the watch of the CLP government, to see one of the longest serving mining companies downscale its operations dramatically, and with it, the downscaling of a very important regional hub.
I once again ask the government to work cooperatively and proactively with the stakeholders. That includes the people who live and work there because they have a lot to lose. Thank you.
Debate adjourned.
TABLED PAPERS
Travel Reports from Members for Blain, Johnston, Arnhem and Casuarina
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I table seven travel reports from the members for Blain, Johnston, Arnhem and Casuarina pursuant to clauses 4.1 and 4.12 of Remuneration Tribunal Determination 1 of 2012.
MATTER OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
Teacher Numbers and Education Cuts
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, Madam Speaker has received the following letter from the member for Fannie Bay. It reads:
The letter is signed by the member for Fannie Bay.
Honourable members, is the discussion supported? The proposal is supported.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank my colleagues for their support. We all consider education in the Northern Territory to be a definite matter of public importance, and teachers, parents and students would agree. It does not get much more important than the future of our children. The CLP has made the decision to have fewer teachers in our classrooms. The CLP’s education and teacher cuts will result in two things: creative classrooms in urban areas and empty classrooms in the bush. In our cities and towns, with fewer teachers classes will be crowded. In the bush, where we have a serious problem with attendance, a teacher’s job often involves converting enrolment into attendance. Fewer teachers in the bush will mean empty classrooms. This is not a good result for our teachers or our parents, and it is definitely not a good result for our students.
Not only do these cuts set back the education of our students now, but they set back the future of the Northern Territory. In understanding the impact of the cuts the CLP is making, we need to understand what the CLP outlined it would do for education before the election. I want to start by reading quite a few statements from official CLP policy documents. I will read them in order and assess how they are tracking.
Let us start with a quote from the public letter from Terry Mills:
From the CLP’s education policy:
Again from the CLP’s education policy:
From the public service policy:
It is obvious these firm commitments from the CLP are some of their biggest failings. None of these election policy commitments have happened. In fact, while it is very easy to find promises they have broken, it is extremely difficult to find promises they have kept.
In short, before the last election Terry Mills described teachers as the backbone of education, promised them secure employment, more assistance, support, and more resources in the classroom. Now, Adam Giles as Chief Minister, is cutting teacher numbers and removing support programs from our schools. Despite having ripped up every promise they made to teachers, the Chief Minister accuses them of protesting his cuts simply because they are unionists and on a political agenda. This completely dismisses and minimises their concerns, and the concerns of students and parents, all of whom are worried about the nature of these cuts.
Teachers have been treated appallingly by this government. We have heard the Minister for Education, our third Education minister in 14 months, call them lazy. I know he regrets those comments, but he made them and teachers remember them.
Of all the education cuts, the ones to teacher numbers are the most damaging. The CLP have openly admitted they are cutting 127 teachers from our middle and senior schools. Our middle schools went backwards in NAPLAN this year, down in seven out of 10 areas based on last year, and the CLP response is to cut teacher numbers.
It is madness and fails the logic test. The minister’s justification is that because results are down we need to do things differently. Having fewer teachers in our schools is, quite frankly, insane. It would be like the Melbourne Demons football club starting next year with 16 players instead of 18 because they did not win many games this year. It does not make sense; it does not stack up.
Minister, I want you to understand that not a single person in the Northern Territory believes cutting teacher numbers will improve education. Not a single person believes the key to improving our education standards in the Northern Territory – bringing them in line with the rest of the nation – starts with fewer teachers. Not a single person believes their child will receive individual attention in the classroom from their teacher with fewer teachers. The CLP’s logic does not make sense. ‘Education results are poor so let us employ fewer teachers.’ Absurd logic.
It would be like cutting police on the beat because violence on Mitchell Street has not decreased. It would be like cutting doctors and nurses because the emergency room is under pressure. It is ridiculous logic, but it is the logic the CLP is implementing in our schools. We could go on. If you cannot get a taxi from the airport at midnight, how about having fewer taxis? If you have poor service at a restaurant, why not cut back on waiters? It does not make sense that the approach to fixing education in the Northern Territory starts with fewer teachers. They are all ridiculous examples, but nothing will have a worse impact on the future of the Northern Territory than the decision to cut teacher numbers.
Earlier today, the Chief Minister said there was no research to show smaller classrooms led to better education outcomes. I invite him to type ‘class sizes’ into Google. It will not take long, and he can sit back for hours and read all the research clearly showing the link between smaller class sizes and better outcomes. He can find research all the way from Darwin to the White House supporting that class sizes affect education. I am very happy to quote from Barack Obama, Investing in our Future: Returning Teachers to the Classroom August 2012: .
It sums it up. It is obvious to parents, teachers, principals and students that if you cut teacher numbers it will impact on education. You do not need to be President of the United States to realise it. Parents and teachers in the Northern Territory understand this. The cuts to teacher numbers will see crowded classrooms in our urban areas and less individual attention for students, but it is possible the impact in the bush will be even worse because it will lead to empty classrooms.
The biggest problem in the bush has always been getting students into the classroom. Teachers have a critical role in working with parents and the community to get students to classes. When you cut back on the number of teachers at a bush school, the biggest impact occurs. Unfortunately, we will see empty classrooms in our bush schools. Consider the desperate needs we have in the Territory, and what fuels a large part of our poor education results is getting kids to school regularly, especially in the bush, yet the CLP’s decision has been to put fewer teachers into the bush.
There are bush schools now with only one teacher. How can a teacher be in the classroom while at the same time trying to track down kids who do not turn up? It will not happen. They have to be there to work with the parents in the community. That is the relationship. Healthy schools have a functioning relationship with the local community. That is how you get kids into classrooms. When you cut back on teachers there will be a serious impact on the number of kids that rock up to the classroom.
It will have a huge impact. Some of the bush schools might have three, four, five, six teacher positions at that school, but on the ground they might only have one or two because you cannot always get teachers to bush schools. There will now be fewer teachers.
The CLP would have you believe the cuts to middle and senior schools are about providing more teachers in the early years. Why cut middle and senior school teachers to put extra teachers into primary schools? They have different training. A senior school teacher requires a different qualification than a teacher in a primary school. It is like saying we need to cut road engineers to put on primary school teachers. Because you are teaching Grade 12 does not mean you can teach primary school. Different qualifications are involved and that person might not want to teach primary school.
There is a reason people teach high school. There is a reason for being in a classroom full of bright young kids at that end of their schooling. You might not want to be in a classroom with Grade 1. That might not be your vocation.
Importantly, there is no revolution happening in our early years, despite the CLP rhetoric. From the documents the minister gave us, in my electorate Parap Primary School, despite its enrolment and attendance numbers increasing, has two less teachers after the first year of the CLP government. There are examples across the Northern Territory. My colleagues, when speaking to this, will talk to those examples. There is no revolution in early childhood or in our primary schools. It is a furphy. We are losing teachers from the system and will not have the sudden massive impact in our early school years. There will not be a sudden revolution in early childhood years to drive massive education changes in the Northern Territory.
Instead, we see a massive impact to our senior and middle schools. Darwin High is losing five teachers a year, every year, for up to four years, maybe five years. That is over 20 teachers. These massive cuts will have huge impacts on outcomes for our students. Despite the CLP rhetoric, there will not be a sudden early childhood revolution.
Talking to redeployment, many of the best teachers in our primary schools are losing their jobs at the end of this year. I go back to the CLP promise that contract teachers will be offered permanent positions. We have contract teachers in our primary schools. There was no fine print on the letter I was just looking at which said, ‘I guarantee your job if you are a frontline worker earning under $110 000’. I did not see the fine print, but apparently there was some saying, ‘Your job is guaranteed unless you are sacked’. I could not read it. Apparently, your job is guaranteed unless they decide not to renew your contract.
There are teachers in our schools right now who will not have their contracts renewed. They will not be available to teach in schools next year despite the fact they want to. It is very simple. If a teacher has a job in a school this year and is not offered one next year, they have lost their job. They had a job teaching kids and they no longer have that job.
The minister’s ludicrous suggestion that if a contract runs out you have not really lost your job is ridiculous and offensive. There are teachers who want to work next year but will not have their contracts renewed. Some of the best teachers in our schools are on contracts; they are young, bright and keen. We have examples of people receiving scholarships to become teachers and in their first year in a school are told they will not have a job next year. They are young, bright graduates teaching in classrooms. They have a job, and next year, because the CLP has made a decision to cut teacher numbers, they will not have a job.
We may lose our young teachers for good. They will find a job elsewhere in Australia, will teach kids in that community, and will become part of that community. They will no longer be in the Northern Territory contributing to our kids’ education.
Some of the best teachers are older. Some terrific teachers in our classrooms have been there for decades and continue to make a wonderful contribution to our education system. However, some teachers made a career choice or a life choice to move out of the classroom into support roles. Many teachers choose to move into a variety of support roles involving anything from curriculum development to student counselling, or specialist training such as Information Technology. They have moved into a vital support role. It is fantastic that teachers take up those opportunities, especially after years in the classroom.
Former teachers are now being forced back into the classroom. Their support positions are being scrapped and, as permanent employees, they are told if they want their job they have to go back to a school. However, there are no extra teaching positions in our schools because the CLP is cutting teacher numbers. When you force an ex-teacher who no longer wants to teach into the classroom, the contract teacher who wants to teach is forced out. We are putting ex-teachers who do not want to teach, who have made a career choice to do something else, back into the classroom, and young contract teachers who do not have permanency are being forced out.
Darwin High School is losing more than 20 teachers over the next few years. That school will also be required to take on redeployed teachers, which means they will lose contract teachers. Contract teachers are losing their jobs to redeployed teachers who may still be fantastic teachers, but have made a career choice, a life choice, to no longer be a classroom teacher. Our students deserve teachers who want to teach.
We know that 140 school support positions are at risk. These positions include ICT support, counselling, behaviour management, language assistance, and many other areas of vital school and classroom support. People are losing their jobs and positions are going. At some stage the girls’ academy, GEMS, is going. The department found funding for the second half of this year and has tried to save the program. However, as it stands, Cabinet has scrapped funding for that program. The minister still has time to save the GEMS program. It could continue next year, but it requires the minister to take action.
Looking at the bush, the CLP education cuts will be profound in our remote areas. The key to closing the gap on Indigenous disadvantage must start with closing the gap on education. Without improved education, health, employment, and community safety will continue to lag. Cutting education in the bush opens the gap. On this side of the House, we have heard countless reports of remote schools having teacher numbers reduced. My colleagues have come back from school council meetings having heard terrible stories about the impact on schools, and the school council has spent time talking about how to cope, what they can do, where they will go. ‘How do we address the loss of teacher positions, support positions and resources?’ We hear these stories from school councils which are fully briefed by their principal on the impact of these cuts to their school. My colleagues will be talking to that in this statement.
The CLP talks about positions and vacancies, but the only thing that matters is how many teachers are teaching at a school. As I said, you might say a certain bush school had six positions, but the reality often is they might have two, three or four teachers. A position is not a person. One teacher at a school struggles. You struggle to hold and retain teachers when you do not have many in a community. They form their own community outside the school which helps retain teachers in the community.
No student graduated from senior school in the bush prior to the Labor government. The policy of the previous CLP government was to not provide secondary education in bush schools. They are heading towards that policy again. The budget earlier this year flagged cuts to bush education. The budget for Indigenous enrolment in senior schools was cut by 215 students in just one year, and that is in the budget books.
We know the CLP has radical plans for remote education. We know they are looking at no senior school enrolment of less than 40 students continuing. The CLP’s plan is centralised education: open education using technology to provide online education to the bush. It sounds good, but if you do not have teachers in the classroom how do you cope? It will not happen.
The CLP have broken so many election commitments to cut the cost of living, cut crime, protect frontline workers, and none are more comprehensive or damaging than what they have done with education and the impact it will have on the future of the Territory and Territory kids. If the CLP have decided to reduce education outcomes in the Northern Territory, then the course they have taken is the right one.
Mr Deputy Speaker, the state of education in the Northern Territory under the CLP is a matter of public importance.
Mr CHANDLER (Education): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Fannie Bay for bringing on this matter of public importance. Educating our children is important. Before I start, I need to point out a couple of things. We now have the chance to correct the record on a number of points raised in this matter of public importance today. A media release was issued this afternoon saying the CLP guarantee to teachers has been broken. It says:
Wrong! I have a statement to deliver with some facts direct from the Department of Education, not Google. I would appreciate it if the member for Fannie Bay would use the information provided by the Department of Education before looking at Google. I assure you, the information is far more correct. Now, let us talk.
The third point you opened with today, member for Fannie Bay, was in regard to teacher contracts. As of term 1 2012, when the Labor Party was in power in the Northern Territory, we had 1687 teachers, 710 of whom were on temporary contracts. That is almost 30% of the workforce – more teachers uncertain of their future. Almost 30% of the teaching profession in the Northern Territory were on contracts. As of term 2 2013, under a Country Liberals government, we have 2042 permanent teachers and 380 temporary teachers – about 14% of the workforce. If you want to quote figures, why not look at the fact that when the Labor government was in power almost 30% of all teachers in the Northern Territory were on contracts. Today it is around 14%.
Do not lecture me about not taking teachers off contracts and making them permanent. That is exactly what we have done! Saying we are not fulfilling our election commitments is rubbish.
Considering Labor’s atrocious record on education, I find it extraordinary and a little embarrassing that they attempt to lecture us on our performance in just over 12 months in government.
Let me highlight a few of the key facts, not taken from Google but from the Department of Education. These facts set the scene and paint a clear picture about how Labor governed, particularly how they administered education.
Over the last five years under Labor, the total number of full-time equivalent employees increased by 790, or around 20%. Interestingly, student numbers over the same period increased by 173, a rise of 0.05%. This is extraordinary, almost unheard of. How is it the number of employees increased at such an astronomical rate when the growth in student numbers was nowhere near it? How did student numbers increase by only 173, while the number of departmental staff increased by 790?
If there had been an exceptional improvement in education outcomes in the Northern Territory one would praise the former government, but that is not correct. This was aimless growth, not targeted, not focused, and it did not deliver results for Territory kids. Typical of Labor and everything they lay their hands on, they equated more spending with improved outcomes, yet where are the improvements?
Let us look at the results, interrogate the data, and see what they achieved during their time in office. In 2012, the proportion of Year 3 students achieving results at or above national minimum standards in numeracy was 70%. Almost a third of our students could not reach the minimum benchmark set by ACARA. Five years before, Labor added 790 new positions to education, the proportion of Year 3 students achieving results at or above national minimum standards in numeracy was 77%. That is right; our results in the Northern Territory went backwards. Labor spent more money, put on 790 more staff over five years, and results in Year 3 numeracy, a key indicator, went backwards.
Let us look at another key indicator, Year 5 reading. In 2012, the proportion of Territory Year 5 students achieving the national minimum standard in reading was 61%. Well over a third of our students were not achieving the national minimum standard in reading, a truly appalling statistic. Again, what is even more appalling is from 2008 these results went backwards.
In 2008, the proportion of Year 5 students achieving the national minimum standard in reading was 62.5%. Despite an increase in education department staff of 790, results in Year 5 reading went backwards. We cannot continue down this path. We cannot continue spending in such an untargeted way. We want to know what works, what will improve results, and will target our spending accordingly. That is the smart way to do business and is how government should operate.
When we took government just over 12 months ago, there had been no significant change in student national testing results across reading and numeracy for five years. This is despite the Northern Territory recording by far the worst results of any Australian state or territory year after year. However, both the NT and Australian governments’ investment in education had increased significantly over the same period. Over the past five years to 2012, education staff had increased by around 20% from 3857 full-time equivalent staff in 2007-08 to 4647 staff in 2011-12. At the same time, the government education budget had increased by over 46%, from $467m to $686m. Increases in staff and funding were not matched by an increase in enrolments; the number of students in our schools had not changed significantly over this period.
In 2007-08 total student enrolments were 32 986, and in 2011-12 this had only increased to 33 159 – up 173. While the government education budget had increased by $219m or 46%, Education department staff had increased by 790, or 20%, student enrolments had only increased by 187, or 0.5%. Worse, this dramatic and unprecedented increase in spending had failed to achieve any real improvements.
If you agree, as many do, the definition of madness is to continue doing the same thing while expecting to get different results, clearly to go on as we have done for the last 10 years and pour more money into education without seeing improvements in results is madness. These efforts, well intentioned and popular as they may have been, have not yielded positive results for our children. In fact, a generation of Territory children has been lost to this failed attempt.
It is time to take stock of the direction education is heading in the Northern Territory and challenge the simple-minded and false conventions which equate more money to better outcomes. As a fiscally and socially responsible government, it is paramount we ensure future spending on education will directly contribute to providing the social and economic capital that will build the Territory’s future prosperity.
Some of our first actions to build and recalibrate the education system are as follows: to commission a review into Indigenous education to determine a more responsible and effective approach to addressing Indigenous student outcomes; increase support for the early years of learning and development that are so important as a foundation of each person’s future life chances – we have not heard much from the opposition on that one – establish the behaviour management task force to assist schools manage the escalation of poor behaviour disruptive to teaching and learning for too many students and teachers for too long.
The government has also commenced rebuilding the relationship with the non-government school sector recognising the importance of this sector in providing choice for parents, building stronger relationships with our northern neighbours as part of the 10-year plan to develop the Territory as an international educational hub, and making arrangements for a state-of-the-art distance education facility to ensure children across the Northern Territory, wherever they live, can access high quality education services delivered through the latest technologies available.
Let me go to the Indigenous education review, because this will be critical to how we do things differently – how we target spending to improve results. Interestingly, the last independent review into Indigenous education in the Northern Territory was commissioned by the former Country Liberals government back in 1998 and was completed in 1999. It was called Learning Lessons and was an entirely comprehensive review. Unfortunately, after the change of government in 2001, that review was shelved and none of the recommendations were taken seriously by the incoming Labor government.
We will not let this issue lay idle. It is why we have commissioned the latest review as a first order of business. In consultation with educators, partnerships, bodies and Indigenous communities, the review will assess what is working and what is not to improve student attendance, engagement and other outcomes; determining the best use of the significant resources that have been and continue to be invested; providing an understanding of how parents and families are engaged in the process and informed of education standards, attendance and achievements; looking at current and future demographic trends in the Indigenous student population; evaluating how the department can better support Indigenous education; looking at the partnership arrangements, the opportunities that exist, and how to empower local communities.
This is an independent, open and transparent review being conducted in consultation with educators, stakeholders and communities. Bruce Wilson, a respected independent consultant, has been appointed to lead the review. Bruce has more than 30 years’ experience in education, specialising in curriculum policy and development, and has specific knowledge of the Territory, having undertaken previous extensive work with the department on curriculum and schooling models.
The report and its recommendations and findings will be submitted to government for consideration in the first quarter of 2014. The review will drive a more strategic approach to Indigenous education service delivery, including negotiating funding with the Australian government aligned to a strategic and evidence-based plan to improved outcomes for Indigenous students. It is easy to put your hand out, but how do you spend that money and what improvements will there be in outcomes?
The Northern Territory has been investing in early childhood education and recent results indicate this investment may be starting to pay modest dividends. The Australian Early Development Index measures how well prepared children are for school by the age of five. There have been significant improvements in the Territory’s Australian Early Development Index results, particularly for Indigenous children. However, according to this measure, our levels of developmental vulnerability remain the highest across the nation.
Our NAPLAN results also show improvements for children in the early years. While these are encouraging early signs, there is more work to be done. There is more investment in this area and we will enhance the early learning services and support available to children and parents across the Northern Territory.
Early childhood classes will be boosted by 63 teachers in 2014, creating additional teacher positions in Transition, Year 1 and Year 2. These teachers will support students in their early stages of education and ensure they are provided with a strong foundation for their future learning and engaging with schooling.
This government has initiated a $150 000 annual fund distributed to long day care centres for the purchase of toys and equipment to assist them to deliver quality and educationally-based early learning programs for children in their care. All 72 long day care services in the Territory, which are supporting children in some 3200 places, have benefited from this program this year.
A behaviour management task force has been established to provide advice about managing inappropriate and antisocial behaviour in schools, including bullying, assault, verbal abuse, indecent behaviour, dangerous acts, weapons, property offences, and substance abuse. The task force includes school principals, as well as representatives from the Northern Territory Council of Government School Organisations, NT Health, the Association of NT School Education Leaders, the Australian Education Union Northern Territory, and clinical psychologist, Mr Andrew Fuller. Advice from this group will assist the Department of Education to respond to critical behaviour incidents, suspension actions, extreme behaviour support, and data collection and reporting, and will inform changes to the Education Act to implement new behaviour management strategies. It is imperative that students and teachers feel safe and supported at school.
The Northern Territory is an international education hub, and we can do so much more in that area. Another new initiative we have introduced is to open up Darwin as Australia’s front door to Asia. We are exploring opportunities to strengthen ties with the Asian region through building stronger education links with countries in our region, trade in international education, and teaching Asian languages in schools. We are re-establishing ties with educational authorities in Indonesia to recommence a reciprocal student/teacher exchange program which, at its peak, supported eight teachers and 16 students per annum.
We are exploring opportunities to enable Asian teachers to provide language support to Territory schools to enhance the availability of language education. The Department of Education is working with the Department of Business, the Chamber of Commerce and Tourism NT to identify opportunities for growth in international services and, by April 2014, a 10-year plan to establish an international education hub in the Northern Territory. The plan will position the Territory as a location providing education services of choice to our northern neighbours, as well as opportunities for the transmission of in-reach education programs across the region.
The existing Northern Territory Open Education Centre facilities are not designed to provide the level of technical capability needed to continue expanding this very important service into the future. Over 550 students access this service annually, 40% to 50% of whom are Indigenous. It is important we are able to provide a service that is targeted and meeting the needs of all students.
Public private partnership opportunities will be explored to build the infrastructure needed to develop a purpose-built facility at Bullocky Point which positions the Northern Territory as a world-class provider of contemporary distance education services. This will be equipped with cutting-edge distance learning technology and virtual classrooms. This service will provide high-quality and comprehensive learning programs to a diverse range of students no matter where they live. In time, the plans for the new distance education service will include in-reach into Asia.
Early initiatives of this government have addressed our immediate concerns about increasing the focus on early years, addressing Indigenous student outcomes, moving to contemporise distance education, and addressing safety and wellbeing issues in our schools.
All this is about ensuring we have a targeted approach to improving education outcomes for Northern Territory children. We will not do things the way Labor did because they did not work. We will not apologise for doing things differently. Let me again refer to those figures in my introduction. During the last five years under Labor, the education budget increased by $210m, or 46%. Education department staff increased by 790, or 20%. This was while student enrolments increased by only 173 students, or 0.5%. The key in all this is results did not improve. We are determined to improve outcomes by making positive changes such as reviewing how we deliver Indigenous education and bolstering our investment in the early years. This is based on evidence.
If the Labor Party, those in opposition, were fair dinkum they would recognise their results were not good enough. Their approach was wrong and there needs to be change. If they really valued education and our children, they would support change instead of trying to bring down education and destroying morale by spreading untruths and misinformation. If they truly had a vision and if they cared for education, they would embrace the challenges instead of going weak at the knees the first time there is evidence of resistance, like they always have. The education of our children is too important for Labor to play the loathsome games they have been recently. Again, I quote, from today’s media release by today’s shadow minister for Education and Training:
That is totally wrong. In term 1 2012, under a Labor government, there were 710 temporary teachers; 30% of your workforce was temporary. As of term 2 2013, we have 2042 permanent teachers and 380 temporary teachers, around 14% of the work force. Under Labor, 30% of teachers were on contracts, under a Country Liberal government, around 14%. We are delivering on our promises. Thank you.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the matter of public importance and no more important debate could we have than one on education …
Mr Giles: Supporting the new Leader of the Opposition.
Ms LAWRIE: A political crack first up, to your shame, current Chief Minister. This is a serious matter of public importance not cheap political cracks.
We have an argument from the government that increases in education resources during the Labor years yielded no results. That is factually incorrect. The minister cherry-picks through NAPLAN results but ignores all the NAPLAN results which showed improvement across, not just age groups, but also disciplines. He selectively, as Education minister, cherry-picked a few NAPLAN results rather than listing all the results which showed a clearer picture. There were real gains in education outcomes for students in the Northern Territory, real gains in areas where more work had to be done to bring them up to the level of improvement we would wish to see.
The minister should stand condemned for trying to mislead people by saying all contract teachers will have their jobs next year. That is blatantly untrue. Teachers at our primary schools, middle schools and senior schools have been advised they do not have a job next year as a result of the cuts being made to the Education budget by this Education minister under this current Chief Minister, not because the contracts have magically come up for renewal.
Do they put much attention or priority on education? You need go no further than the current Chief Minister’s Framing the Future document. There are 14 objectives listed. Education is not listed; it is missing. I cannot imagine a developing jurisdiction like the Northern Territory, with the vast potential the Territory has, with the degree of social disadvantage this jurisdiction has, not having education front and centre to any plan for developing its future potential. They care so little about the education of our children that it is not in any of the 14 objectives of Framing the Future.
They care so little that they are hell-bent on taking an axe to the Education department budget and forcing teachers out of bureaucratic jobs in the department – some have not been in the classrooms for 20-odd years, but because you are permanent, you are not a contractor, we will redeploy you into the classrooms. Contract teachers who have worked for a few years, often young teachers enthusiastic in the early years of their career, are being let go. They have been told by their principals they do not have a job next year. There is a cohort of them talking to us about how it is affecting them and their schools.
Then you have what I call the unattached, a category where teachers have been advised they are not attached to that school. Somewhere, at some stage, they will be told where they might be teaching next year. You might have, for example, an unattached specialist teacher – these are real examples, but I will not identify the teachers – at a middle school who is yielding enormous results with the cohort of students in participation, attendance and learning outcomes. However, because they are a specialist and the school is losing 13 teacher positions, they become unattached and lose their jobs at the middle school although they have permanency in the department. They are waiting to hear whether they can apply to a primary school. This is a ridiculous scenario playing out across all our middle and senior schools.
The government has led people to believe these results are okay because only five teachers per school will be lost this calendar year. With their new student-teacher formula, over four years you might lose 20 teachers, but that is okay because they have capped it at five a year. The reality on the ground is very different.
There are five permanent positions and the rest are contractors. A senior school in Darwin is losing 13 teachers, five of whom are permanent positions. They will become unattached and float into the broader system to see if they can land a job. There is a big question mark over that as well, because of the amount of people being moved out of the agency and the contract teachers who do not have a job. Rosebery Middle School in Palmerston will say goodbye to 13 teachers, Sanderson Middle School 12 teachers, and Dripstone will lose13 teachers. That is not the five teachers the CLP would pretend in the public domain. They are double the number plus.
That means when the rubber hits the road there are fewer subject choices and the teaching lines become crowded. Casuarina Senior College is a classic example where the government is saying one thing – pretending something – and the rubber hitting the road is far worse. Casuarina Senior College has already withstood cuts, as have all schools because of the change from enrolment to attendance. That occurred as a result of the mini-budget formula changes in 2012. It has affected the 2013 calendar year. The schools we are discussing have already lost teachers.
The senior and middle schools all lost teachers as a result of the funding formula change from enrolment to attendance. We also saw dramatic losses across the bush schools with the funding formula change in enrolment to attendance. How do you get better education outcomes with fewer teachers in the classroom spending contact hours with the students, be they good students academically excelling who flourish with extra attention and direct contact, or struggling students who genuinely need the additional attention and contact to flourish or get through and make it.
We have already seen losses in the 2013 calendar year averaging two or three teachers at least across our larger schools, and one or two teachers across smaller schools. They are making a real impact on how crowded the teaching lines have become. Casuarina is being advised they will need to teach the entire five lines next year, which means they will have no break in their teaching day to spend time with the students who need additional effort.
This government finds these debates a laughing matter to make some political shots, but the impact it will make in our children’s lives is very different. It will affect a generation. It will affect the generation entering middle school now, and it will affect the generation who go from middle school to senior school. Teachers are aghast because they know what that means in education outcomes for our children. It is a lost opportunity for this generation. This is not about saving teachers jobs, although at the very least it ought to be because the government guaranteed frontline teachers their jobs would be safe. You did not put an asterisk next to that promise saying, ‘We only mean permanent not contractors’.
At the core of this is the genuine need to ensure an improved quality of education for our students. In that you are failing and will create failure for a generation. It is the most appalling attack the education system in the Northern Territory has ever experienced.
When you look at the loss of student cohort in 2013 as a result of the formula change, then look at the loss that will occur in 2014 as a result of the student-teacher ratio change. I have the splits by electorates. For example, in the electorate of Arnhem, a bush electorate, 16.5 teachers will be lost. I do not know if the member for Arnhem is aware that from schools in her bush electorate 16.5 teachers are gone ...
Mr Tollner: You do not know that.
Ms LAWRIE: It is on the data the department of Education provided in estimates. It is the 2013 loss as a result of the formula change, and the 2014 loss as a result of the student ratio change. If you combine those two changes, the member for Arnhem loses 16.5 teachers from her bush schools.
The government has some explaining to do.
Sixteen teachers are gone from bush schools across Arafura. Have a conversation with the school at Maningrida or Gunbalunya, both losing three teachers. These are public schools in your electorates, in your heartland, losing teachers.
You might want to look at Sanderson. I know the member for Sanderson has been visited by teachers from Sanderson Middle School imploring him to stop these teacher cuts, who spoke to him about the impact on education for the cohort of students going through Sanderson Middle School. I know it was a very uncomfortable meeting for the member for Sanderson, but this is real.
Has the new minister been advised that eight teachers are lost from schools in her electorate? Does she know Nyirripi is already lost?
What about Drysdale? The member laughed at jokes being cracked during this education debate, but has she seen the split? Is she aware she will lose 7.5 teachers from her schools? Is she okay with that? Is she comfortable with that loss?
Have you been given the numbers for your electorate, member for Greatorex? There are 6.5 teachers gone from your schools. Member for Namatjira, you are losing 6.4, not as high as the member for Arafura, who loses 16 teachers from his schools. However, 6.4 teachers from your bush schools is far too many for schools to withstand. The rumour around Central Australia is they will be given up ultimately. Lasseter schools will go, possibly to Finke Mission. The government will wash its hands of its responsibility to ensure a quality education for children in your communities.
In Braitling, perhaps you are feeling comfortable, Chief Minister, that 5.5 teachers are going from your school. Perhaps that is okay. Katherine loses five. Four Corners is doing a show on the Katherine region. Can you, after watching that show, tell me you can lose five teachers from schools in Katherine? This is unbelievable.
Mr Tollner interjecting.
Ms LAWRIE: The member for Fong Lim laughs because he is getting more. You have gone up almost one whole teacher, member for Fong Lim, so perhaps you can afford to laugh. The big cuts and big pain are in the bush electorates, but they do not know. The urban seats in Darwin have small gains if you look at primary schools. You lose heavily in senior and middle schools, but the primary school gains push into the positive. It is to your eternal shame if you have not explained these cuts to your colleagues, which happen in real time at their schools. How do you justify taking a teacher out of Acacia Hill School, the special school? How do you justify taking teachers out of Henbury and Nemarluk? Will that see a better education outcome for our special needs students? You seem very comfortable taking $250 000 out of the special needs budget. You are comfortable with that and it is okay to put $300 000 into a golf club.
The argument from our perspective is not about how you manage a budget. Labor had $1.6bn in actual debt when we left government, with projections in 2015-16 to $5.5bn …
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member’s time has expired.
Ms LAWRIE: … and you will have $5.1bn. You have the wrong priority …
Madam SPEAKER: Opposition Leader, your time has expired.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, what a note for the opposition to leave on, talking about debt. It is something the Opposition Leader knows about. For 11 years, the former government banged on about spending as an outcome. Every time we listened to a debate on anything, it was about how much money was spent and never had anything to do with the outcome itself. It was never based on health or education outcomes. The outcome was the spending of money. As the Opposition Leader just said, debt does not matter; it is for the next generation to worry about. The main thing is to spend money.
I do not suggest I am a great expert on education, but I grew up in a family of teachers. My mother, father, brother and uncle are all teachers. My uncle retired from the Queensland education system as one of the highest qualified teachers in the state. He cut his teeth in remote schools. It was nothing for him to teach several different years in one classroom. In fact, at a little school just outside Thangool in central Queensland, he was teaching eight grades in one classroom with 30-something kids. My mother, in another small country town, Baralaba, taught the first three years of school – Years 1, 2, and 3 – in a class of 45 kids. All those kids got reasonably good marks. These were Indigenous kids as well, but it was a different place, different time, different era, and there was a greater level of commitment in those days of parents getting their kids to school. They valued education probably more than some people do these days. As a result, most kids got a reasonable education.
The Chief Minister this morning in Question Time made several statements in response to a question which drew gasps from those in opposition. He said something along the lines of, ‘More resources do not necessarily equate to better outcomes’. There is no research to show smaller classes make a difference in any years, apart from the early years, or perhaps in some schools with special needs students. The Chief Minister advised several areas where this was mentioned – the Productivity Commission, the Grattan Institute and the Queensland Commission of Audit. I did some research on the Queensland Commission of Audit and found some interesting lines which I will quote. This is the Queensland Commission of Audit Final Report – February 2013, Volume 3. Page 116 of that report says:
That statement sums up some of the thinking on this side of the Chamber regarding education.
There is also another quote I would like to mention in relation to overseas experiences. This is from the same report and says:
That says what we all know: kids in Asia value education. I often tell my children, who I wish were performing better at school, that I do not put their lack of performance down to teachers. I often tell my children that kids in Asia value education, turn up to classes, are like big sponges and want to learn. They value the time people take to give them a good education and they turn up.
That is the point the Chief Minister made: it does not matter how much money you spend on education if kids do not want to be there. That takes me to a conversation I had with a young lady in in a cosmetic store in China a few years ago. I complimented her on her wonderful English and she thanked me and said she spoke seven languages. She also had three degrees and was working in a cosmetic store. I told my children many kids in Asia want to be at school and want to learn.
If you asked kids across Australia one thing they would like to be doing right now, I doubt many would say be at school. That is the way we are in Australia, but it reinforces the point the Chief Minister and the Education minister made. Ultimately, we want to see kids getting to school, we want to see them actively engaged in school, and we want to see teachers actively engaged in educating them. The point the Education minister made is vital to this argument. In the time the Opposition Leader was Treasurer, the education budget in the Northern Territory increased by 46%, staff numbers in Territory schools increased by 20%, but our results went backwards. Is that not shameful? You would think with the worst education results anywhere in this country and its history, somebody would realise we should not be spending more money on staff because we are not getting results. Our results are going backwards and there has to be something else. It is the something else this government is focused on, particularly our Education minister. There is no doubt our education system in the Northern Territory is broken and faltering because our results do not equate with any other jurisdiction in the country. When you compare us to overseas jurisdictions, we are failing miserably so something has to give.
This debate is not necessarily about money, but more about the results our kids are getting in Territory schools and the education they receive. We want to see that changed. It is only the Leader of the Opposition who engages in voodoo economics, who thinks it is good to spend more, to rack up more debt, employ more people and leave the next generation to pay for it.
It is like the Power and Water Corporation. You pour hundreds of millions of dollars into a failing organisation, fail to reform it, fail to allow it to charge a reasonable price for its services and keep pouring money into it. You expect a future government to keep doing that when you can see efficiencies going out the window, waste everywhere, and, ultimately, you see that organisation facing destitution because the taxpayer can never supply enough money to keep it going.
We have the worst results in Australia and the system has to change. To his credit, our Education minister is looking at more ways of getting kids to school and to improve results in Territory schools.
The Chief Minister has made a large commitment to education. I remember him, during the election campaign, saying what a Country Liberals government would do in relation to people living on outstations. The Chief Minister at the time said we were happy to support people on outstations provided they are engaging in the economy: they have a job or are receiving training and their kids are attending school or getting an education. Whether that is School of the Air, something over the Internet, or children attending a boarding school or a public school it does not matter, the main thing is they are engaging in education. If people wanted their outstation houses renovated and maintained at government expense the message was clear: get your kids to school, take an interest in their education and get involved. Where kids want to be at school and their parents want them to be involved, it does not matter what size the class is. When I was in primary school I never knew a class below 30 students. The majority of classes were larger than that. I am getting a head nod from the member for Barkly, a chalkie from way back, who would understand education in the bush.
You cannot teach kids who do not want to learn, and you cannot get a horse to drink no matter how much water is around. The key to education is getting kids engaged, getting their families engaged, and making people value education. That is not an easy thing. It is difficult, particularly in remote communities, to convince children they need an education when they know very few people who have an education or a job. The goal of getting people jobs is getting them to value work, to understand there is more to life than welfare, and there is opportunity for their children should they wish to give them a decent education.
Madam Speaker, this matter of public importance is nothing but a political stunt. There is a whole lot of covering up of the previous government’s failure in this area. To suggest class sizes cannot change by a couple of people in relation to the ratios is wrong. Ultimately, we have to find a better way of doing things. That is what this government is about, our minister is about, and anybody who does not believe our education system needs to change significantly needs to have a good hard look at themselves.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I participate in this debate because the impact on teachers and students across the Northern Territory from the CLP cuts is devastating in the generational impact.
It is ironic I stand after the Treasurer, because the Treasurer jumped into – rather moderate tonight –that murky pit of politics, then jumped out again because he has a family experience of education. He chose to quote me in his debate but is talking about 50 years ago, and I am proud of my age. I am well and truly over 50. The Treasurer is basing CLP education policy on 50 years ago. It happened 50 years ago, and if it was good enough 50 years ago it is good enough now. Let us cut to the chase because the other irony is the Treasurer and the Chief Minister have handed the Education minister – the third one – the bag of spiders called efficiency dividends.
As a Labor government we did that because it is responsible governance. The Leader of the Opposition said it is about priorities, and education must be a priority. The bag of spiders has been dished out to the Minister for Education by the Treasurer and the Chief Minister, and he is suffering. I have had conversations with the Minister for Education about his exciting job, how great the work is and how responsible it is. He ain’t happy! He is under pressure because he has been dealt the straw which will break the camel’s back – our children’s future.
I will tell you a little about myself. I came to the Territory over 30 years ago and spent 30 years building schools in the Northern Territory. I worked with contractors to set up caravans in the bush, and then I worked tirelessly to gain the trust and respect of Aboriginal communities whilst working to get kids to school. At Epenarra School, I had 46 kids in a silver bullet to start off and the Treasurer wants to tell me I would deliver education outcomes. You are joking! What the Treasurer is not telling you in the Cabinet process, and it is not in the bag of spiders, is the truth. The truth is we are talking about kids with high support needs in English as a second language, socioeconomic support, and behavioural and emotional needs. Things have changed, gang, in 50 years. Every member in this House will admit to that honesty.
The Treasurer and the Chief Minister have applied the flat earth strategy and handed the deal to the Minster for Education. They will be known in history as the CLP who got back into government and back to the future we go with the economic review cuts of the 1990s.
The Leader of the Opposition spoke about priorities. Every member in Cabinet and Caucus on the Liberal side should be irate and fighting for the efficiency dividends to be reduced in education. Go after the Minister for Infrastructure. Go after the $9.5m in the Chief Minister’s department. Go after the $5m to be spent on a scoping study for Palmerston hospital, when the previous minister for Health offered the study for nothing. Go after the money allocated to consult on local government changes. There is plenty of cash around for that. There was $1m for your mates to study Territory finances, a report we have never seen. There was plenty of cash around for that. Go after the Chief Minister and the Treasurer and demand that this efficiency dividend being driven down the throat of the Education department be reduced, because it is our kids in the frame.
What does it relate to? It relates to the Territory; it does not relate to rural Queensland or a Grattan report in Queensland. It does not relate to southern jurisdictions. It is about us, our diversity and our needs.
Let us take the mainstream schools; we have all been there. As minister for Transport, I visited several in the Palmerston area – brilliant schools with incredible NAPLAN results and dedicated teachers and support staff doing an incredible job. What will the cuts imposed by the Chief Minister and the Treasurer do to a school in Drysdale? They will cut subject choice, reduce education diversity, increase class sizes and start to dumb down the whole exciting project of education by an economic rationalist approach. ‘Just cut it and make them work harder. It will be okay because we did it 50 years ago.’ What a joke! What a disgrace!
Let us travel down the track to the area where I put in 30 years of blood, sweat and tears to build schools. Two of those schools, from a meagre one teacher start, have five teachers, complemented by five support staff – local people in real jobs. What will this policy do? It is the same deal. It will cut teachers and school budgets, and principals under the pump will have to tell local employees, the guy who has been nurtured, encouraged, and mentored, to come out of a remote community to take up a job at the school looking after the garden. ‘Sorry, do not come next year, things have changed. Our Chief Minister and our Treasurer tell us it will be tighter, we will be leaner and meaner, so you do not have a job here.’ That person goes home to the community with what story.
What demoralised outcome is that when we have spent 30 years and longer trying to ensure we get local employees into the school? The small school in the bush loses teachers, has its budget cut and loses local jobs because the principal has to tell people he cannot afford them any longer. They are not valued, not worthy because these politicians – the Treasurer admitted he does not understand education, he is a fantastic politician. That is a disgrace. It is, as the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Fannie Bay say, about priorities.
Let us go to an interesting point the Minister for Education raised about early childhood. I have been lobbying for most of my education career, as a local member, a member of government and now as a member of the opposition, for increased resource allocation and support into the early childhood area. Sarcastically, the Minister for Education said in debate, ‘You guys have not mentioned that’. Minister, I will talk about it now because when the CLP started that conversation I took an interest in it. I gave credit where credit was due. However, it has now unfolded in the bag of spiders and the economic rationalist policy by default. It is, ‘We will put numbers into early childhood when we sack senior and middle school teachers. When we terminate contracts, when we fudge the numbers, people will be put into the early childhood area, the most important area of a child’s life and education.’ It is zero to eight years, not four, five, six, seven, eight. Important programs were brought on by the Labor government in the Northern Territory – those numbers the two gentlemen leading the team throw around as money not outcomes. Look at some of the early childhood programs, but this measure by default will force people into the early childhood area.
I happen to be old school and was trained as an infant primary teacher. I know the specialist nature of a job like that when working in the early childhood sector. If you are not trained, do not have a passion, do not see it as a vocation rather than a job, you will not deliver results.
Your policy, minister, is rhetoric and spin because it will go down the drain. It is a waste of resources because middle school students will start to suffer. If there is one thing the opposition can offer in this debate it is to revisit this disastrous economic rationalist policy which will affect us all.
The Leader of the Opposition has highlighted which electorates on that side of the House. We are dealing with electorates on this side of the House, and the Chief Minister and the Minister for Education would deny it saying we are making trouble. Who do you think is telling us this? It is teachers, support staff, parents, but mostly teachers anonymously because they are terrified of this government. I lived through that in the 1990s. I was a radical, I went on strike, I was locked out and I lost pay. We fought them, and teachers will fight you now for the rights of our children.
Let us say the economic rationalist approach is the right way to go. A person came to me recently at a garden function on the main street of Tennant Creek, an educator with the department, ‘Please do not tell anybody my name. This is completely anonymous, but support staff for schools in the Barkly has gone from 24 to 12.’ One of those staff is doing a great job in the language and culture programs. Even worse, I attended a Batchelor graduation and there was not a dry eye in the house, including mine, because I knew half the graduates, some from when I enrolled them in preschool. Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education took notice of what is happening in the Barkly. At the celebration and photo shoot with the families I shared all the stories about the students as little kids, and we shared the laughter. I then found out, on the main street on Saturday, the mentoring positions with the department of Education – doing a fantastic job – have gone.
This is what is rolling out through the system that the economic rationalist Chief Minister and the Treasurer do not tell you. Why? Because they do not know. Minister for Education, go south of the Berrimah Line, go into the bush and see how it works, and talk to teachers on the front line who do an incredible job.
We are starting to lose specialist positions. Another member chatted with me – no names, no pack drill, ‘We have mortgages to pay. We are frightened of these guys.’ That is the reality; I used to be there.
I was talking about ICT. I am all about arts in education; I am about the old school, but everything has moved on. It is not like 50 years ago where the Treasurer said, ‘She’ll be right, mate’. Things have changed, including the kids and the families.
I was told the average small school in the bush has about $75 000 in information communication technology teaching aids. That is SMART Boards and the important technology support to help young enthusiastic teachers do their job. What happened? They cut the ICT support teacher. There is no longer anyone to go around in their spare time, do the repairs, maintenance, and all the extra stuff in bush schools on Saturday. Anybody who knows about a bush school understands the collegiality and importance of morale, high self-esteem, and team work.
They cut the position in Barkly so ICT support will not be provided. Do you know what happens to ICT equipment in the bush when it gets dusty and starts to break down, that investment in education? It stops working. Do you know what happens when teachers are not skilled up and do not get professional development? They start to slow down, become jaded and leave.
Madam Speaker, this policy is destructive and the minister knows that. I feel some sympathy for the minister; he has been handed a bag of spiders. I encourage every member opposite not to go down in history as the CLP did in the 1990s. Guess what happened? They were thrown out of government. Start to challenge this Cabinet. The Chief Minister and the Treasurer are the architects of this destruction. Turn it around!
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, I speak to this matter of public importance about the future of our schools. Every member would agree education is an essential building block to a life of opportunity for every child, and all children across the Territory deserve and need a good education to have a good life.
Nobody is under any illusion about the challenges in the Territory education system. It is clear from the NAPLAN results that students in the Territory face the greatest challenges in education across the nation. This is driven by the fact we have the highest disadvantage in the Territory, especially in the bush.
The Territory needs to improve at a rate faster than other jurisdictions. In order to do this, it is essential the government invests in education. The stories we have heard today about what is happening are all doom and gloom. Only a few years ago the NAPLAN results showed the Territory had outstripped the national average in improvements in 11 of 12 NAPLAN categories. We were heading in the right direction because we were investing in teachers and schools across the Territory.
Under this government we see huge changes to education which are attracting wide condemnation from teachers, principals, parents and the broader community. It seems this government has lost focus on delivering better education outcomes and, instead, appears focused on efficiencies.
Most people I speak to believe government should never scrimp on education. People believe the investment you make in education is a good one, and people with a good education will become productive members of our society. People with an education will get a job and have a good future. Instead, the government is cutting education and teachers are being cut from the system. This, essentially, means fewer programs to support students in schools, fewer teachers, and less support for students in the classroom and, of course, bigger class sizes.
The Minister for Education was recently interviewed on ABC Mornings with Kate O’Toole and was asked if fewer teachers in senior schools would make for better education outcomes. He said:
What the minister fails to recognise with his move to align teacher ratios to the national average is that the Territory has the most disadvantaged students in the nation. The minister’s answer is that rather than investing in education they have decided to strip money from the budget and cut teachers. Frankly, it makes no sense to me.
It is timely we debate this issue because schools are currently grappling with some very tough decisions. They are looking at their current teaching staff – who is permanent, who is on contract – and are being told staff on contracts will not be coming back. They are making decisions about which permanent teachers they have to lose from their school.
Schools in my electorate tell me this is having a profound effect on morale. I have seen the looks on school council members’ faces, and see the anger and fury when they hear how many teachers schools have to lose and about the instability it is creating at schools that have to move teachers to accommodate staff moved from the Education department or senior and middle schools. It is creating a great deal of stress in schools.
In schools which educate students in my electorate we are losing a huge amount of teachers. Dripstone Middle School will lose 13 teachers next year. At Casuarina Senior College, the senior school for northern suburbs students which prepares them for university, vocational training and jobs, massive cuts are being made with 12 teachers set to go. In those two schools alone 25 teaching jobs are gone. That is a disgrace. The CLP government is removing 25 teachers from two schools with a growing population. Muirhead is growing, and that will continue for years to come.
Dripstone and Casuarina schools take students from Muirhead. Seeing 25 teachers disappear from these schools makes no sense. Of the contract teacher you are removing, some are graduate teachers. These are people who have been supported by the Department of Education to pursue a teaching career. Those teachers are eager to start their career in the classroom. Their future in the Territory is looking very bleak thanks to decisions of this government. I worry about the impacts on graduate teachers coming out of CDU and their job prospects at Territory schools next year. I also wonder how this will impact numbers of people deciding to take up a teaching degree at CDU in the near future given they have seen such uncertainty and instability.
We hear it is teacher versus teacher. In order to cut permanent teachers, schools are asking teachers to submit their rsum and fight it out amongst each other to get a job. Although they are not technically ‘being sacked’ they are being sent to jobs they never intended to do. These are teachers in the middle and senior years who will not have a job where they want next year as a result of these changes. You are, effectively, sending them into schools when they thought their jobs were safe in the school they were in.
As much as the CLP government tries to sell the changes to primary school ratios as a win, they do not seem to understand the consequences of their actions. This is creating instability at primary schools where many are about to experience significant changes to their staff as they try to place permanent teachers displaced from middle and senior years, and people the Department of Education is sending to the classroom.
In primary schools, contract teachers have been told they no longer have a job. I have been told the Department of Education is telling primary schools to keep their Year 5 and Year 6 classes vacant of teachers to make way for displaced teachers from the middle and senior years. This will mean huge change and disruption to the structure of primary schools. They have to make dramatic changes to staffing as you force teachers out of the department and out of middle and senior schools.
School councils are grappling with the situation and the impact it will have on their schools. It is not just urban schools; bush schools are also losing significant numbers of teachers. It makes me wonder which members on the other side are attending school council meetings to hear the impact this is having. We have heard Rosebery Middle School is losing a significant number of teachers. We have also heard, as the Leader of the Opposition pointed out, Sanderson Middle School is losing many teachers. Bush schools also face big teacher losses.
Significant challenges will be presented to schools with fewer staff in the Department of Education to support them as school support staff are moved back into teaching positions. There will be less support for schools, teachers, students, and families as a result. The losses will be in important areas such as ICT, behaviour management, and counselling. Schools will not have the support they once did.
The department is moving staff back into schools who may have decided a career in education outside the classroom was something they wanted to pursue. I am sure people impacted by the move back to schools will do everything they can to deliver the best results for their students. I am also sure they did not expect to be in this position, given the firm commitment the CLP government gave to teachers and people in Education about important frontline areas such as education.
Hearing last week in the media this government is focused on efficiency when it comes to education deeply concerns me. This is not a government focused on education outcomes, this is a government focused on cutting investment. Teaching takes a special kind of person. Each one of us would have fond memories of teachers who made a difference in our lives. Teachers can have a profound impact on the lives and future of children.
It is deeply disappointing to see the direction of the CLP government and their attitude towards education. The government has released its Framing the Future document, which outlines its visions and priorities for the next three years. It fails to mention education. It shows what value the CLP government places on education and teachers. Sadly, today’s children will be the most affected by poor decisions and priorities across the Territory.
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Fannie Bay for raising this matter of public importance which impacts on everyone in the Territory.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, no members opposite are interested in participating in this matter of public importance. Presumably they are satisfied to see cuts to schools in their electorates. Presumably it sits quite comfortably with their conscience. Presumably, as the member for Wanguri suggested, none have attended school council meetings, because if they had, as we on this side have, they would have received strong messages about how unhappy school councils, as representatives of school communities, kids, teachers and parents, are about the cuts coming or already started. Sixty-nine teachers have already gone from the system since the CLP came to government a little more than a year ago. We know this because the government supplied us with the document showing where those cuts are coming in 2014.
I thank the member for Fannie Bay for raising this important matter. I have listened with great interest to the contributions from not only people on this side, but members opposite. Some of them found it rather amusing, had a good chuckle, and accused the opposition of cooking this up. However, we are looking down the barrel of cuts which are in black and white in Excel spreadsheet tables provided to us by the government. We are certainly not making anything up.
I am concerned about the state of education in the Northern Territory in a little over a year of CLP government. I am concerned they have been so dysfunctional, with three Education ministers in less than a year. I am horrified about the cuts not just to teachers, but to other resources within schools. I am also concerned with, but not surprised at, the continual breaking of election promises by members opposite. I am concerned as a parent of two boys in Nhulunbuy High School and what it means for them and their education in the next few years. One is endeavouring to complete senior school and is challenged with some special needs. He has been extremely well supported throughout his schooling, and I am concerned for him and his capacity to complete his NTCET with the withdrawal of funding for special needs and the fact he is a special needs student who may find himself in a much bigger class next year.
I am concerned for my youngest child in Year 8 and the size of the classes he will be in next year, not only the size of the classes, but the restriction there will be on subjects offered. I am concerned as a former teacher. A teaching job brought me to the Northern Territory in 1987.
I am concerned as a school council member, having sat in meetings with Yambirrpa School Council and one at Nhulunbuy High School council recently, and hopefully phoning in to the next one. Those concerns cumulate into the fact I am the elected member and representative for people in the electorate of Nhulunbuy and north east Arnhem Land, and how these cuts will seriously hurt children and diminish education outcomes, and with it, the prospects of a bright, promising future and the choices they might normally have.
As a former teacher, I reject outright the proposition there is no correlation between class size and education outcome. I wonder if the Minister for Education has ever endeavoured to teach Macbeth to a class of 25 in Year 11 compared to a class of 10. Let me assure you, minister, there is a correlation between the number of students and the education outcomes you can expect. The more individual support you can give a student, particularly in the senior years when they are trying to grapple with specialised subjects such as maths, physics, chemistry, outdoor education and the theory component that goes with subjects like that, the better. As a teacher of English literature, trying to teach poetry, drama and literary text to a group of 25 versus a group of 15 – minister, they are worlds apart. You should do some work experience.
The Attorney-General has done some work experience in the courts. How about you do some and attach yourself to a teacher in one of our hard-working government run schools and follow them for a day to see how they go. You will find they are not only in front of a class teaching. When they are not teaching they are not sitting down with their feet up on a desk drinking copious cups of coffee, having a good chat and on Facebook; they are marking work, preparing programs, probably doing a relief lesson during the day. There are probably more relief lessons being handed out at the moment because we are beginning to see an increase in absenteeism amongst teachers, as happends in the workplace when stress levels increase. What do people do? They phone in unwell because they struggle to get into the workplace because of related stress. Staff on duty will be picking up extra relief lessons.
They will be filling out necessary paperwork to take a group on an excursion. That could be an excursion during the school day, or perhaps a school camp or a trip interstate. If you are lucky enough to attend Nhulunbuy High School, every second year you have the opportunity to go on an overseas trip to England and Europe. I am unsure if teachers will be willing to take on the extra curricula activity they currently do.
Let us add to that the counselling they provide: the one-on-one support they provide to students, not just academically, but helping young people with their day-to-day issues. This can be where you detect something is not quite right with a child, or there is an issue around why they cannot do their homework or they are struggling to meet course work requirements. It requires a teacher, sometimes a support person as well, to be part of that conversation and find out what is going on in a young person’s life.
Believe me, compared to when you were at school, minister, the complexity of being a school teacher and educator has changed. The role is enormous and, in your ignorance, you have completely misunderstood what it is teachers do on any day.
To suggest having fewer teachers in schools is okay because there is no correlation between the education outcomes and class size is balderdash.
Your answers during Question Time today were unsatisfactory. Your answer to my question around cuts to Nhulunbuy High School, and particularly Yirrkala School – we will go to disadvantaged schools in a moment – was unsatisfactory. I inferred from your answer that in cutting teachers the void will be filled by NTOEC. That is what we can expect. We cannot put teachers in front of a class, but we will hook kids up to correspondence courses. I am sure the parents at Yirrkala School and Nhulunbuy High School will be thrilled to hear that news. Even better, they would love to hear that news from you face-to-face.
There is no doubt some of the members opposite have avoided going to Nhulunbuy. Minister, you have many schools in the Northern Territory, but it is incumbent upon you to visit these schools. You should visit as many as you can, especially those in remote areas, to ensure you hear firsthand what peoples’ concerns are and, believe me, they are really concerned about the cuts you are inflicting.
There is not a single school in my electorate unscathed by the knife you are wielding through the Education budget; not a single school escapes. Not Nhulunbuy Primary School, as they are down two teachers as of next year. Nhulunbuy High School stands to lose 3.2 teachers next year. In addition, Shepherdson College – here is a beauty for you, minister, and how about you come out and I will give you a briefing. I will take you to these schools and show you the hurt you are creating. I will also show you what Labor did in 11 years. Do not tell us Labor did nothing. That is rhetoric because not one Indigenous student in the bush graduated from Year 12. Why was that? There was no secondary education in the bush, courtesy of the CLP. In 11 years we spent a lot of time playing catch up so it was possible, minister, at Shepherdson College and Yirrkala School, to go from preschool all the way to Year 12 and come out with an NTCET.
These schools are challenging. The kids come from challenging backgrounds. We have kids who are challenged for all types of reasons. These kids’ lives can be complex, and we know attendance is an issue. School councils in these communities recognise that. However, to base your staffing formula on attendance not enrolment is scurrilous, wrong, and shameful in communities where populations continue to grow. Galiwinku on Elcho Island, where Shepherdson College is the government school, is a case in hand. There is an enormous demographic of young people yet Shepherdson College, in 2012, had 54 teachers, in 2013, 47 teachers. That is seven teachers gone and another five positions to go in 2014. Minister, I do not know how you expect the people of Galiwinku to educate their children when numbers continue to grow yet you are ripping 12 teaching positions out of that school. It is shameful.
This school has worked incredibly hard over the last few years. I take my hat off to former principal, Bryan Hughes, who was Principal of the Year in the NT Teacher Awards several years ago and is now Director of School Performance for our region. I daresay he is struggling to manage these cuts because, at the end of the day, he is a teacher, he knows about education, best outcomes for kids, and an awful lot about education in the bush, unlike the minister. I am extremely worried about Shepherdson College.
Yirrkala Homeland School has already lost two teachers, with a further two to go. How will Yirrkala Homeland School manage this? At the homeland school we have one teacher in front of a class of children from Transition through to Year 6. Some schools might have middle school kids as well. There is no understanding of the challenges homeland teachers face in dealing with a cohort of English as a second language speakers ranging from four to 14 or even 15 who, somehow, have to deliver education.
What is more, as visiting teachers in those schools three days a week – I remember the member for Namatjira commenting some time ago in the media that it was unacceptable some homeland centres only had visiting teachers and schools needed full-time teachers. They asked her as much when she came to GanGan.
Quite apart from taking on board that message, you are ripping resources out of homeland schools. In addition, Yirrkala Homelands School is at risk of losing its IT officer. Good luck with that, minister. How are students supposed to hook up to the brilliant IT infrastructure installed in the last few years let alone, if you expect them to take on correspondence through NTOEC? Yet, somehow in this mix, Taminmin – and good on them – managed to retain the five teachers earmarked to be removed from the school in 2014.
We know when schools lobby – it helps when they are in close proximity to Darwin and, therefore, closer to the minister’s ear – decisions can be overturned. The further away from the Stuart Highway you are the less chance you have of getting the minister’s ear. If you are in an electorate with a Labor member, your chances are even fewer.
Minister, your reference to Labor playing loathsome games is disgraceful. These are not loathsome games; these are real cuts. We are not talking about games; we are talking about a mean-spirited government which seems to be doing everything it can to ensure people do not vote for it in 2016. You are mean-spirited, and you need to travel to Nhulunbuy. You can go to Scotland, you can scoot around the place, but my advice is do not come on a charter, do not follow the lead of the Chief Minister, get on a commercial plane and do not feel the need to have police at meetings because you will not need them. You must address the cuts not just in my electorate, but across all schools and the bush as well.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I took the advice of the member sponsoring this MPI, the member for Fannie Bay, when he said to look it up on the Internet. I have. I was trying to find how we rank in the OECD for class sizes. I looked up the OECD for Athens, because I wanted to make the point that class sizes in Athens were going through the roof as a result of their financial woes, which is exactly what the minister is trying to avoid. It is interesting to note in Athens they had lower class sizes in the recent past. However, I bet you they do not now.
The curious thing is Australia, as a nation, is about the average of the OECD. I draw members’ attention to OECD Education Indicators in Focus document. I will quote a couple of things from it. It says:
Which is, in fact, more than what we have now:
Remember that figure, 32 in Japan and Korea.
What the former Northern Territory government did is exactly what other countries did with the same results. It goes on to say:
That is exactly what the minister was banging on about. I scrolled forward to a further quote from that document which makes these observations …
Mr Vowles: Four minutes.
Mr ELFERINK: I have heaps of time and will not be on my feet for long.
It goes on to make these observations:
We heard those arguments from the member opposite. In fact, the member for Nhulunbuy ran exactly those arguments. It says:
They have larger class sizes in Japan and Korea, and spend more money and focus on teacher training and how that service is delivered in the classroom. Despite the fact they have an average of 10 students more per classroom in Japan and Korea, they achieve better academic results.
That is just the OECD. I am not an educator, but I reckon the guys who put the PISA report together, which includes Jenny Macklin’s husband if memory serves me correctly, carefully research these things. Let us be, as the member for Fannie Bay said, guided by the information we can find on class sizes from the Internet ...
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, the time for the matter of public importance has expired, given the two hours duration.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise that under Standing Order 12, the member for Nelson has been nominated by the Speaker and has agreed to act as Deputy Chair of Committees, replacing the member for Stuart.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Madam Speaker, since the MPI has finished, I will adjourn on this matter tonight because it affects my electorate greatly.
Education is the key to changing lives. It empowers people and gives them skills and confidence. It is the building block towards getting a job and contributing positively to our society, something the member for Port Darwin constantly goes on about.
Our teachers do a fantastic job giving our children the best start in life. A teacher is far more than an educator imparting information to a class. They perform many different roles in a day. They are in charge of our most precious assets, our children. These are the people who guide our students day in and day out, and the way those opposite have treated them is appalling. Daily they play the role of counsellor, mentor, organiser, sports coach, artist, and the list goes on. They arrive at school early to get organised, start yard duty and then head into the classroom to teach. At the recess break they are often dealing with left over morning work with students or another session of yard duty. They might get a quick toilet break or a chance to grab an instant coffee from the staffroom, no chance for a latte or cappuccino here. Lunchtime is filled with make-up lessons for students who missed out for various reasons, student representative council meetings, Tournament of Mind activities, sports practice or library duty. After school is filled with staff meetings, professional development, inter-school sports, and various other activities. Weekends and evenings can be spent marking, planning and preparing. We all know an unprepared teacher quickly sinks in a classroom of students.
Teachers spend hours preparing and planning lessons. The disrespect the Minster for Education has shown our teachers is appalling. To comment they have ‘quite a bit of down time’ is truly appalling. Minister, I am not sure what teachers you have spent time with, but I do not know any who have ‘quite a bit of down time’.
Every student in a classroom depends on their teacher. Teachers set the tone for the classroom; if they are angry or upset this is passed on. If they laugh and teach humorously, students learn in a happy environment. What you are doing to our teachers is already affecting our students. Teachers’ attitudes leave a long-lasting effect on students. They have the ability to raise self-esteem or to crush dreams. We all remember some of our favourite teachers; they leave a long-lasting impact on our lives.
Every parent wants the best learning environment for their children. Children need a variety of programs and support to learn and this is best achieved in small class sizes. The notion the Minister for Education has about smaller class sizes not mattering is wrong. This morning in Question Time he told us there is no research which shows smaller class sizes make a difference in any year levels except early years. That is wrong. The minister told us there is no clear research to show students perform better in smaller class sizes. How can less individual attention improve a child’s learning?
The CLP’s increase in class sizes means students will have less individual attention in class, teachers will be stressed, and we will not see better outcomes. The United States understands this - we just had the lecture from the member for Port Darwin – ‘so it should concern everyone that right now - all across America - tens of thousands of teachers are getting laid off … Think about what that means for our country. When there are fewer teachers in our schools, class sizes start climbing up. Our students start falling behind. And our economy takes a hit.’ Who are those words from? President Obama gets it in his report Investing in our Future: Returning Teachers to the Classroom August 2012. Teachers get, it but our Education minister does not.
In the President’s same report he discusses the negative effect of larger class sizes. America has had numerous studies, numerous examples:
That is from the President’s report. Invest more in education? Not in the Northern Territory under this CLP government.
This is only a small example of numerous reports and research which show large class sizes do not improve education outcomes. One British report I read showed students were closely observed by teams of researchers who monitored their ‘moment to moment movement and behaviours in blocks of 10 second intervals. The researchers found that adding five students to a class decreased the odds of the student being on task by nearly a quarter. A 25% drop in being on task with five more students in your class.’ That is some research the minister might like to consider.
In my electorate of Nightcliff we are losing up to seven teachers next year. Nightcliff Middle School is growing. Next year we are forecast to have four Year 7 classes yet teacher numbers are cut. Casuarina Senior College, the senior school for the northern suburbs and my electorate, is losing 12 teachers.
It is not just our middle and senior schools that are dealing with cuts, primary schools are also losing teachers. The CLP government is putting our children’s future at risk by cutting teachers. Minister, today you admitted teacher number cuts were not all about improving education but about trying to save money. Over the past few months, numerous residents have raised these issues with me. Parents, teachers, grandparents, are worried about the cuts.
Minister, I am not sure if you have even compared these cuts to your strategic plan 2013-15. One of the stated goals is, ‘To recruit and retain high-quality staff’. Yet, at the same time, our middle and high schools are losing teachers, many of whom are specialists in their field. In primary schools, contract teachers with proven practical skills and expertise are being informed their positions are being axed - no longer needed. That is not a policy of retaining teachers.
Further in the strategic plan it states, ‘Decisions are best made and resources have the most impact closest to the point of service delivery in schools’. A key action is to ‘Increase the school autonomy and decision-making’.
Minister, if you had attended any school council meetings recently you would know your strategic plan is not being implemented because you are forcing schools to get rid of teachers. The way in which school councils, principals, and teachers are being treated is appalling. Teachers are not interchangeable, regardless of their expertise. You are turning your back on your department’s strategic plan and Territory teachers.
Former Chief Minister, Terry Mills, guaranteed every teacher’s job was safe. You have broken this promise. Contract teachers who are right now teaching in our classrooms will not have a job next year; they are already leaving our schools. I saw farewells at the end of last term, Term 3. Students, parents, teachers, and principals all know what is happening. They are experiencing the CLP teaching cuts right now. Minister, you are not up to the job.
You mentioned in Question Time this morning:
You have focused on other things over the last few weeks while our education system is in meltdown. Staff members from our schools are being farewelled, yet you are overseas looking at planning models. It would be good if you put on the public record where you went. What could be more important than our children’s future - an investment in our future? You have broken your election promise.
As a mother whose son starts school next year, I worry what the system will be like. What will the class size be? What is happening to student services? All these questions need to be answered but, no, you were travelling around the world. You claim primary schools will be better off, but people are telling us that is not the case. The formula you are using is ill-conceived ...
Mr Chandler: Did you get that off Google?
Ms FYLES: No, I did not get the formula off Google. Teachers and principals who are telling me …
Mr Chandler: It is what you were provided in your briefing.
Ms FYLES: Minister, your government is cutting education as a short-term measure – you have admitted it – to save money without thinking about the long-term. You are cutting teachers from our bush schools claiming nothing changed under Labor. Why did we see our first Indigenous graduates from the bush under Labor? Your short-sightedness means we are not seeing the true results. What do your bush members think about this? They are very quiet. What teachers are going from their schools? We saw the first graduates from the bush, something I am proud of. You should be ashamed of your government’s actions, taking education back to the Stone Age.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I listen to the member for Nightcliff from time to time. If in any doubt about her subject, her first starting point is ‘suffer the little children’. That is a very easy place to go. It is an easy place to go because people are concerned about children. It is somewhat unrealistic to say to members on this side of the House we, somehow, do not care about kids …
Ms Walker: You do not.
Mr ELFERINK: I pick up on the interjection, ‘You do not’. This demonstrates the poverty of your world view. The member for Nightcliff mentioned her young son starting school next year. I understand a mother would be concerned; however, what about when he goes to high school and we are paying back a $5.5bn debt. We will not be able to support that high school in an effective fashion and the class sizes will be 40:1 because that is the challenge we face. We care enough about kids to make the hard decisions now.
I pick up on a point the member for Nightcliff made saying how proud she was of the first high school graduates from the bush. I remembered the member for Nhulunbuy at the time, Syd Stirling, answered a question in this House about how much it cost to educate one of those kids. I cannot remember the figure, but it was hundreds of thousands of dollars. To educate one in the bush to make a political statement, we spent hundreds of thousands of dollars. What could we have done with that money in other areas? With that money we could have given them a private school education at some of the best schools in Sydney, and many more kids in Darwin high schools could have been educated. The choice was made to invest that money in one place on a handful of students.
The problem was there was so much pressure on the department to produce results they started graduating kids. Some of those Year 12 graduates cannot read and write, and I can give you an example of it because your former Leader of Government Business, Dr Chris Burns, who was Education minister, admitted one of the major problems with kids coming out of bush schools with Year 12 certificates was they were functionally illiterate. He admitted and accepted that. It made quite a bit of noise publicly.
The issue about equating classroom sizes to outcomes is not as strong as the quality of the teaching. The member for Nightcliff was quite accurate when she said everybody fondly remembers great teachers. I do, and could name them. I also remember some complete and uttered duds. The quality of the teaching was what captured me as a student, not necessarily the size of the class.
The OECD report I quoted not 15 minutes ago, reinforces that finding. When students in Japan and Korea can be in classes with 10 students per class more than the Australian or OECD average and consistently produce results far beyond the rest of the OECD, it is indicative there is something else at play than class sizes. The OECD has clearly pointed out class sizes are a response that schools or governments have pursued with limited results as a result of the extra expenditure. They say between the 2000 and 2009, class sizes were attended to by a number of OECD countries with limited results.
I made that clear and noted the member for Nightcliff was in the Chamber at the time. Yet, with a prepared speech, she continued to ignore that truism and continued to roll out the political line of what the government is doing is wrong.
I understand the government’s decision has been challenging for a number of schools. I understand it is causing some grief in the public domain which is amplified and fuelled as much as it possibly can by utterances similar to what we have heard from the member for Nightcliff. However, that is barely rational and, of course, she immediately takes the children of the Northern Territory as a human shield to justify anything she says, saying, ‘think of the children’. We do think of the children. However, we do not need to think of the children of next week or those beginning school next year. We think about those children in lower primary today who will be in senior high school in 10 years’ time. We are thinking of those kids, the kids the member for Nightcliff referred to. That is the frustrating thing about the approach the member for Nightcliff takes. There is heaps of emotional rhetoric about saving children today, but not a single utterance of how we will rescue and educate children in 10 years’ time.
You do it, whether the member for Nightcliff likes it or not, through prudent fiscal management. Any form of borrowing is a source of money you have to pay back. If we increase borrowing to feed ourselves or our education system today, we are borrowing from the future and we will not be able to ensure class sizes are of reasonable size into the future.
The Minister for Education has made it clear the ratio changes are well within the boundaries of the Australian average. They are not extreme by any stretch of the imagination, and they do not ask anything more of teachers in the middle and senior secondary schools than happens in other jurisdictions in this country and, dare I say, in other parts of the OECD.
The policy of government is to retain good teachers and give them a career path. That policy will be pursued by having enough capacity in the piggy bank to ensure quality training and a capacity to recruit quality teachers. I would rather follow the findings of organisations like PISA and the OECD and be guided by their science, which we are so oft urged to do by members opposite, than the hysterical rhetoric we just heard from the member for Nightcliff.
To take on the mantle of the defender of children at all costs, and use them as an emotional shield in an argument will, doubtlessly, inflame the debate, but it will also make it unreasonable and a slanging match. We have seen that in this House tonight. Above all else, it takes away from the fact what we need for better education outcomes for our kids is a quality of education in the classroom driven by passionate, qualified and well-supported teachers. That, I know, is the object of the Minister for Education.
Ms FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Mr Deputy Speaker, in adjournment tonight I talk about some wonderful things happening in Drysdale, as always. There is no shortage of wonderful things in my electorate, despite what the Labor opposition will have you think.
I was extremely proud and privileged to attend the Northern Territory Baking Show a couple of weeks ago, held at the Charles Darwin University Palmerston Campus. It kindly sponsored and hosted the baking show over two days. On the first day they had the Apprentice Excellence in Baking competition, and the winner of that competition will go to the national titles. It has a very high standing in the baking industry and was a very sought-after prize to take out for our young baking apprentices. I could not be prouder to have heard Chris Field won that. Chris is an apprentice at Ben & Sam’s Caf & Bakehouse in Palmerston, which is a new Palmerston business established at the bottom of Highway House near the water towers. That was excellent, and I wish Chris the best of luck at the national titles.
The following day was open baking categories. I have to say an enormous congratulations and well done to Brumby’s Palmerston and Ben & Sam’s Caf & Bakehouse, which took out a number of the prestigious awards at the Baking Show. They showed the clout of Palmerston business the quality of their baked goods. It was very humbling to be in the presence of bakers who, whilst they may rival each other in business, their camaraderie and passion for what they do was truly inspirational.
I was lucky enough to speak briefly at the awards presentation. My family started one of the first bakeries in Darwin, in competition with the renowned Quong family who also had a bakery, and my family went on to own Darwin Bakery. It was another one of those small world Darwin connections that Phil Barnes, owner of Brumby’s Palmerston, apprenticed under my cousin at Darwin Bakery 22 years ago. When I mentioned it to my cousin, there was a funny story to tell about my cousin, Phil, and something to do with the seventh severed finger. Perhaps I will leave that story for a separate adjournment debate. I am sure it is worthy of 10 minutes storytelling, and I believe a Ferrari is involved as well.
Brumby’s Palmerston took out the ultimate prize, which was the Most Successful Trades Exhibitor. They also went home with a swag of other prizes, including first prize for the 680 g white sandwich loaf, first prize for the 400 g crusty French stick, first prize for the 450 g white three-strand plait crusty dough, second prize for the 680 g wholemeal loaf high-top, second prize for decorated cup-cake category, third prize for the 450 g fruit loaf high-top, and third prize for the 90 g white lunch roll.
If you are looking for a fluffy, crunchy loaf of bread, you should be going to Brumby’s Palmerston and supporting that tremendous local business. A total of 39 bakeries and food outlets participated in that competition, from as far as Nhulunbuy, Alice Springs and Jabiru. It was a very tough competition and the prizes for the class categories were well-won. Again, congratulations to Phil and his team.
Ben & Sam’s Caf & Bakehouse is a new Palmerston business and Rob Hartwig is the owner. He and his staff have done an exceptional job. Their business also won Most Successful Student Exhibitor, which was another major prize. It went to their apprentice Rachel Dixon. Congratulations to Rachel, who has a long and illustrious career in baking and, hopefully, in business ahead of her.
Ben and Sam’s took out an exciting number of prizes. They won first prize for decorated sponge with inscription, but what Territorians are most keen to know about is first prize for plain lunch pies and first prize for pasties. Palmerston officially has the best white loaf and the best pie and pastie in the Northern Territory, something we can be exceptionally proud of. If you are in the market for a bloody good pie and pastie go to Ben & Sam’s Caf & Bakehouse, they will be happy to see you.
I also would like to thank the Baking Association of Australia for bringing together the event. They brought experienced judges from interstate who were excellent. Unfortunately, I did not get to taste any of the amazing produce, but I put my dibs in for next year to be honorary judge or something so I could sink my teeth into some of the amazing produce. Well done to all involved, particularly Palmerston businesses, who shone amongst the 39 bakeries and food outlets. I could not be prouder of your achievements. I will order a few more pies and pasties now to support the business with the best pies and pasties.
Also this month we had an emotional, wonderful, exciting moment in Palmerston Football Club’s history. As patron of the club for a number of months, I have been involved in the secret scheming of the naming of the soccer stadium’s grandstand. Bill Miller is a pioneer of soccer in the Northern Territory and has made a long-standing and utterly selfless commitment to the Palmerston Football Club and football in the Northern Territory for more than 40 years. He has been CEO of Football Federation NT and is a life member, has coached a number of junior clubs, has refereed, was president of the Sanderson Junior Soccer Club, Marrara Soccer Club, and was president of the Palmerston Football Club from 2009 to 2013. He has been awarded, over the years, a number of commendations including Australian Sports Medal, the Football Federation Australian Achievement Award and Life Membership of Marrara Dragons Soccer Club.
It was particularly moving and emotional because it was so powerful to see the committee, the core supporters, and people who are there every Sunday setting up the grounds, working in the canteen, doing all the hard yards, rally together to say, ‘We identify this individual as someone important and special to us’. It was uplifting for everyday Palmerston residents who wanted to recognise the enormous contribution of this individual. With a little help, we were able make that happen. It was a complete surprise. At times we were a little worried the surprise would be given away. Poor Bill thought I had secured a major naming rights sponsor for the stadium. I could not help but wonder if he would be disappointed when we announced the stadium was named after him, because that meant the big cash was not coming.
Needless to say, he was blown away by President Steve Lawson’s announcement at the Cyclone Cup that the stand would be named Bill Miller Stand. It was humbling and amazing to see a grown man almost brought to tears for being recognised for his lifelong contribution. That was very special.
That night the club also recognised a number of life members: Howard Carter, Troy Callaghan, Terry Daye, Anna Daye, Marshall Chin, Katie Chin and, of course, Bill Miller all became life members. There was much celebration.
The official sign has now been erected on the stadium wall. I have not come across one person in football in the Northern Territory who has not heard of Bill, all saying he deserves recognition of his contribution.
Bill, as patron of the Palmerston Football Club, I have been thrilled to work closely with you over the last two years. We are proud to have recognised you and we look forward to your ongoing contribution to our club.
Mrs PRICE (Stuart): Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to adjourn by picking up from where I finished this morning. I was talking about the department I am minister for, the Department of Community Services.
Community Services is responsible for a range of service delivery areas such as the Remote Engagement Coordination of Language Services. Provision of language services is by the Aboriginal Interpreter Service across the Territory. There are 500 qualified interpreters in that department.
The Office of Women’s Advancement provides policy advice and options to government on women’s issues. Men’s Policy provides policy advice and options to government on men’s issues, which is very important. Service Delivery Coordination coordinates the Stronger Futures National Partnership Agreement and other federally-funded programs.
We intend to engage widely with remote communities, homelands, and township camps about ways the Giles government can make a real difference for people living in those places. I want to look at ways to engage Indigenous people in those areas in local jobs, local business opportunities, and better social outcomes, through sport, health, education, and positive women’s and men’s policy, to reduce family and domestic violence in those communities.
As well as the Department of Community Services, the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority falls within this portfolio. AAPA is a statutory authority established by Northern Territory law to administer the protection of sacred sites on all land and sea areas across the Northern Territory, with 33 staff across Darwin and Alice Springs.
I believe we need to get the balance right between preserving and announcing Aboriginal culture with the economic, social and cultural development of the NT. I will continue working with and developing the relationship AAPA has with its key stakeholders such as the NLC, CLC, developers, and traditional custodians to ensure mutually beneficial outcomes are negotiated so the economic and social development of the NT can continue while protecting my people’s sacred sites.
I want to thank the Chief Minister and my colleagues for their trust. I look forward to working with each one of them to deliver real change across the Territory, unlike Labor, who did nothing for 11 years. I would like to thank all my staff members who prepared me for the first day of my ministry, and I want to thank all my family members for encouraging me to enter politics. I look forward to working with your son as well. I will have the greatest team on level 5, and I congratulate all my staff members.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Mr Deputy Speaker, tonight I thank a big company for solving a small problem. The Ichthys project is massive and is only just ramping up. The latest figure is more than $5bn is forecast to be spent on the project in the NT alone. A range of recent reports from the Australian Bureau of Statistics highlight the scale of this project: engineering construction work is up 83% in the last year; total construction up 55%; private capital investment up 162%, and the list goes on, all largely due to the INPEX factor. In fact, pretty much every piece of economic data at present has the INPEX factor. Many local companies, big and small, are benefiting right now from the project.
I have followed progress of the INPEX project closely from the start. I was working for Clare Martin when she launched the audacious bid to lure INPEX to Darwin. I then became a member of parliament and part of Paul Henderson’s team as he concluded the hard work over several years to secure the project for the Territory. During this time I have been impressed with the commitment INPEX, and their partners, have shown in ensuring they work with the community at every stage through the approval processes and logistics. They are extremely open about the project and their awareness campaign and community consultations are some of the best we have seen. They have proven themselves extremely good corporate citizens from the support they have provided to institutions such as the Larrakia Training Centre and the North Australian Centre for Oil and Gas at CDU, through to support and sponsorship of Territory Thunder and many other sporting and community groups and events. They have launched their own Reconciliation Action Plan with measurable targets to ensure the project benefits Indigenous Territorians.
Of course, a project this size brings some logistical issues with it. Accommodation and traffic issues have been well documented. In Parap, we had our own issue. Some of the staff working for JKC, the construction contractors of INPEX, live in Parap near the shopping village and are collected each morning by bus. Several of their colleagues were driving to Parap and parking in the village to take the bus. This was causing a few parking problems, and traders and customers were finding it difficult to find a park at the village in the morning.
On behalf of traders, we worked with Mary Durack from INPEX and Ali Kelly from JKC. JKC has now issued instructions to staff to use the park and ride facilities at the airport and not park at Parap. People can still catch a bus to and from the INPEX project. This is a small issue on the scale of things, but one JKC took seriously and solved quickly. I would like to thank Ali and her team at JKC and the community feedback area.
As an opposition, we fully support the INPEX project. We will continue to support INPEX and work with them as the project unfolds. I commend them for the community involvement they have undertaken, and for solving a small problem we had in Parap.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the actions of a group of people in our community who have contributed a great deal over many years. The event they run on an annual basis is called India@Mindil.
I acknowledge the great contribution the Indian community has made to Darwin. Like many other ethnic groups in Darwin they work hard, they pay their taxes and contribute to our community. More specifically, they bring with them such a rich culture. Not only do they move into our communities and provide services, both professional and technical, but they bring with them this rich, vibrant culture along with some very tasty food.
Every Dry Season Territory residents and the world have an opportunity to peak through the window and into the heart and soul of one of the most ancient cultures on Earth, India. I learnt some years ago when I was in Varanasi that it is the oldest and longest continually inhabited city in the world. It is a great culture, with great food and great people.
On 22 June this year I was extremely fortunate, as Minister for Multicultural Affairs, to have the honour and pleasure of attending India@Mindil 2013. This was the 16th India@Mindil and, from the moment I set foot on Mindil Beach, I was impressed with the work and effort put in by so many volunteers.
A record crowd of between 10 000 and 15 000 enjoyed a great performance. I attended the first India@Mindil, and have been to just about every one since. I have watched it grow from a small event to something which has locals, families, and interstate and international visitors enjoying a fantastic performance. The variety and colour of the Indian costumes, alluring jewellery, and the aroma of spicy food have undeniably transformed this part of Australia by embracing the Spirit of India, the theme for India@Mindil 2013.
To quote my grandson, ‘This really rocks’. It did. The dance and entertainment went on and on. It started at about 5.30 pm and, at 9.30 pm, was still pumping out music. If anyone has seen the Bollywood movies, or the stage production of Bollywood, you would appreciate this was exactly the same. I could not believe the energy people were putting into the dances and there was one after the other.
It was a great honour to be there with other dignitaries: Her Honour the Administrator of the Northern Territory, Hon Sally Thomas was there were her partner, Duncan McNeill; the High Commissioner of India, His Excellency, Mr Biren Nanda; and the Consul General of India, Mr Subbarayudu.
Lighting of the traditional brass lamps by the Administrator, the President of the Indian Cultural Society Mrs Asha McLaren, His Excellency, Mr Biren Nanda, the High Commissioner of India and I signalled the start of the cultural program. It was an honour to do that. It is a big event and the experience is one you never forget.
The organisers of India@Mindil 2013 reinvented the festival, making it bigger and better than ever before. I would like to touch upon some of the salient changes as a matter of record, as there are a number of firsts. They changed the location of the stage along Mindil Beach on the western foreshore so as that the setting sun created an aura around the stage. Two large screens were set up on either side of the stage to magnify and project the stage performance to the audience.
However, there was a problem fitting so many people in. This event has become so popular they had trouble fitting people in. What a fantastic problem to have; to know next year you have to make room for many more people. The quality of the show is bound to attract many more people next year, as this event goes on Facebook, and into Lonely Planet and other sites where you can find what to experience in Darwin.
The food and variety stalls were set up on either side of the stage, allowing easy access for the audience and the public. This is a very well-thought-out and executed event. Congratulations must go to the people who co-ordinated it. Tiered seating was also provided to cater for a larger audience, and next year they will have to get more in.
For the first time in Australia the Koodiyattam Dancers from the Mani Madhava Chakyar Smaraka Gurukulam, Kerala took to the stage. The dancing was superb. This is an ancient form of Indian dance drama which is ritualistic. The dancers were highly stylised with elaborate makeup, masks and headgear, again just like you see in Bollywood.
The specially invited guest artists from India conducted dance workshops and classes enabling a local, Miss Kiran McLaren, to perform the prized role of Lord Sri Rama while enacting a story from the Indian epic Ramayana.
A variety of dances from the subcontinent were also choreographed and performed to perfection by local artists. The quality of dancing and choreography was outstanding.
I wish to acknowledge the contribution to the Northern Territory of the Indian community who, with their many talents and skills, form an integral part of our society.
Congratulations go to the committee for their hours of selfless community service in staging such an amazing event: Mrs Asha McLaren, President of the Indian Cultural Society of the Northern Territory Inc; Mrs Savita Valadian, Vice President; Mr Ramamoorthi Jayaraj, public officer and committee member; Mr Aswin Bhudhavaram, Treasurer; Mr Ramanand Naik, Assistant Treasurer; Mr Sumit Sharma, Secretary; Mr Raj Nagaraj, Assistant Secretary; Mr Atma Maharaj, planning advisor; Mr John McLaren, event coordinator; and Mrs Kabita Ghosh and Mr Ratan Ghosh, cultural coordinators.
India@Mindil has grown since its inception to the point it may be extended and conducted over the duration of a day instead of just an evening. The amount of stalls selling fantastic jewellery, clothing, and all types of Indian products is amazing. The lights are on at night - they love bling and all the shiny stuff - and the whole event is one ongoing production of shops, food stalls, the stage, the dancing, and it just goes on and on.
Planning is in place to dedicate a second entertainment area and a place where people can sit and eat.
Discussions held that night and subsequently mean next year we will probably have to shift the stage into the car park area because thousands of people want to see what a fabulous production India@Mindil is.
I again congratulate all those involved in the planning, production and running of the night. Mr Deputy Speaker, they did a fantastic job and should be congratulated. Well done to the Indian Cultural Society, and each and every one of you involved in India@Mindil 2013.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to speak about my recent trip to Bali. I met with people instrumental in working with Royal Darwin Hospital to train doctors, medical staff and nurses for Sanglah Hospital, Bali.
The idea of working with Sanglah Hospital came after I had discussions with Royal Darwin Hospital Trauma Centre and Dr Len Notaras. As you are well aware, Royal Darwin Hospital played an instrumental role in both Bali bombings. We discovered a significant number of people injured in those two bomb attacks were treated at Royal Darwin Hospital. Something not well-known to the public is during the first bombing in Bali quite a few people received treatment there but when they came here had to receive treatment again, at great cost and delay to their recovery. Some people, according to people at Sanglah Hospital, died because of lack of proper communication between our respective medical staff, doctors and nurses. If people were aware of treating methods and cultural differences, and the way things are done differently in Indonesia, these people may still be alive.
Previously, I believed the next crisis would not be a terrorist attack but could be a typhoon, a cyclone, an earthquake, or a phenomenon which might create some problems. They would then request assistance from the Australian government to overcome the difficulties in a poor country not as well-equipped as Australia.
In the beginning the department had some reservations about the level of support they could provide to Sanglah. However, after my visit with Mr Colin Macdonald QC, and also people of the department meeting with Dr Satarga and Dr Supriyantoro, who is Director-General of the health service in Indonesia, we soon realised any attempt to create a sister relationship between the two hospitals and train their people in Darwin would be beneficial to both parties.
We have now trained 78 nurses and doctors at Royal Darwin Hospital and, in other results, have seen a significant improvement in methods of treatment and facilities at Sanglah Hospital. You may ask, why Sanglah Hospital? Bali is closer to us than Perth or Adelaide. About one million Australians visit Bali every year and quite a few, for many reasons, end up at Sanglah Hospital Emergency Department. I was pleased to visit the hospital, pleased to be briefed on the achievements Sanglah Hospital has made since the beginning of the sister hospital relationship started, and pleased to see the improvements.
I discovered Sanglah Hospital now has the first and only clinical educator in Indonesia. I also saw the hospital school, the first ever to be established in Indonesia. This was established at Sanglah Hospital because people who trained at Royal Darwin Hospital visited our school and saw how it operated, and they took those ideas to Sanglah. I visited the renal dialysis unit, which is now operating to our standards, with our processes and, most importantly, the emergency department.
The first time I visited Sanglah Hospital I was taken for a tour of the facilities. I walked into the emergency department which, at the time, was overcrowded. In the emergency department, I saw a Balinese women being resuscitated with no concern for her privacy. When I visited the hospital this time I was pleasantly surprised. They have implemented a triage system similar to what we have in Australia. They have changed the layout of the emergency department with a waiting room, cubicles, and with a special area for treating children.
I was impressed with the changes, and am very proud I insisted the relationship between Royal Darwin Hospital and Sanglah Hospital continue. I am thankful for the help of the Australian government at the time, especially the then Minister for Foreign Affairs Kevin Rudd. Without his assistance, we would not be able to provide the $400 000 to $500 000 for the program to commence and continue for three years.
It is a worthwhile program benefitting not only Balinese people, but also the thousands of Australians who visit Bali every year. In case of emergency, there will be closer cooperation between our two hospitals. People will be treated the same way they would in Australia, so if they have to be medevaced to Darwin we do not have to commence treatment again.
Also, Bali Hospital has decided to accept the Australian standard of accreditation, which is very important, and to continue this practice in other hospitals around Bali. We have also entered into a second stage, with a request from the authorities in Bali to assist in the training of other medical staff and personnel from other hospitals. This includes areas which are now experiencing an increased presence of Australian tourists, like east Bali and northern Bali.
I was proud to see what they have done and thankful to Mr Colin McDonald QC, who was instrumental in introducing us to the people at Sanglah, and to Professor Dave Brown, who worked at Royal Darwin Hospital for many years and was instrumental in training people at Sanglah Hospital. Well done! This can be translated to similar arrangements with other hospitals in our region, namely Kupang Hospital and, perhaps, Dili Hospital. It will be interesting and beneficial for all of us if we can work together and assist our neighbours and, in the case of an emergency, be able to treat Australians in the Territory after they receive initial treatment in a neighbouring country.
Mr Deputy Speaker, tonight I listened to the debate about education. As a father with a 13-year old attending Dripstone Middle School, I am concerned, like every other parent in the Territory, about the changes in class size and the reduction in the number of teachers. Tonight I heard for the first time the minister admit the cuts to teacher numbers are not because he wants to improve outcomes in education, but simply as a cost saving measure. I also heard other people tell us money does not mean anything in education; big classes do not mean you receive a different standard of education than in the smaller classes.
I am the product of a country which spent more on defence than education. I was in a class with 40 children. Many of us aspired to go to university, but many of us did not because we did not receive the education we deserved to prepare us for university. Education is paramount. If we want a better future for our children education is very important. If we are to see improvements in our country, if we are to be a clever country, if we are to progress as a clever country in the region we have to start with the best education for our children.
I understand the example of Asian education the Treasurer used - things are different in other countries. My wife and son are from China, and I am familiar with the type of education they receive in China. It has become clear to me, in China in particular, children go to school not to learn how to think but to learn what is written in the books and, when they have exams, to repeat what is written in the books. To give you an example, children the age of my son will go to school at 8 am and finish about 5 pm. They go home and then go to a coaching school because the pressure is enormous and they are pushed to achieve because the competition is enormous.
Yes, governments in Asia spend money but not as much as we spend in the Territory. If we are to see real outcomes we have to provide the best education for our children, and that is by an appropriate ratio of teachers to students in every class.
The most prestigious schools, not only in Australia but also Asia, have small classes and spend a lot of money educating children and employing the right number of teachers. That tells us something. We should take an example from the private schools and learn from it. If everything is about saving money, can the minister advise if he has cut funding to non-government schools the same way he has cut funding to government schools. I would like to know that and the justification for it. Thank you.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
TABLED PAPER
Administrative Arrangements Order
Administrative Arrangements Order
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I table a copy of the Administrative Arrangements Order published in the Northern Territory Gazette No S47 dated 10 September 2013.
I advise the Assembly that on 10 September 2013 Her Honour the Administrator made the following appointment of ministers of the Northern Territory:
Mrs Bess Price, Minister for Community Services, Women’s Policy, Parks and Wildlife and Statehood
Mr John Elferink, Minister for Children and Families.
I also table a copy of the Administrative Arrangements Order published in the Northern Territory Gazette No S48 dated 16 September 2013. I advise the Assembly that on 16 September 2013 Her Honour the Administrator made the following additional appointment of a minister for the Northern Territory:
Mr Peter Styles, Minister for Transport.
MOTION
Changes to Committee Membership
Changes to Committee Membership
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the Public Accounts Committee discharge Mrs Price and appoint Mr Kurrupuwu, the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee discharge Mrs Price and appoint Ms Lee, and the Committee on the Northern Territory’s Energy Future discharge Mrs Price and appoint Mr Kurrupuwu. Madam Speaker, this is necessary as a result of Mrs Price being elevated to the ministry.
Motion agreed to.
MESSAGE FROM ADMINISTRATOR
Message No 11
Message No 11
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received Message No 11 from Her Honour the Administrator notifying assent to bills passed in the August sittings. The message is dated 13 September 2013.
SUCCESSION TO THE CROWN (REQUEST) (NATIONAL UNIFORM LEGISLATION) BILL
(Serial 39)
Continued from 28 August 2013.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, this House has considered much legislation over the course of its life. While all matters considered by members on behalf of Territorians are important, some bills are, by their nature, more functional and operationally focused than others. Some bills are symbolic and iconic, some historic, some are necessary to allow the Territory to play its part as an active participant within the Federation. This bill is very much the latter.
Passage of this bill will mean the Territory will take its place alongside every other state and territory throughout Australia in requesting the Commonwealth parliament enacts legislation to change the laws of succession to the Crown which mirror changes to the law of royal succession in the UK. These changes will ensure an important and overdue step will have finally been taken to remove gender discrimination and religious bias from the succession process applied to the sovereign of Australia and the sovereign of the United Kingdom.
As agreed by the Commonwealth at the 16th CHOGM in October 2011, when the world’s attention was focused on Perth, Australia undertook to take a uniform approach in amending the rules of succession across the jurisdiction. All Commonwealth members at the meeting historically agreed likewise. This legislation is a result of that decision and fulfils the Territory’s part of that mechanism. Changing the succession rules to ensure a younger male son does not displace an older daughter in the line of succession, and removing the prohibition of an heir to the throne marrying a Catholic, would seem to all fair-minded people to be both necessary and welcome.
Regardless of one’s views about whether Australia should have its own head of state in the constitutional monarchy versus republic debate, I am confident all Territorians, indeed Australians, can agree it is important to have a more modern, less archaic model while the current system remains in place.
Following the CHOGM meeting, then Chief Minister Paul Henderson gave in-principle support for these changes on behalf of the Territory and we continue that support today.
While it is true the Northern Territory does not constitutionally need to pass this legislation as our consent is not required by the Commonwealth due to our constitutional position as a Territory, it is, nonetheless, important we do so for a number of reasons.
First, consistent uniform legislation across Australia is desirable, and this legislation reflects arrangements between other states and the Commonwealth. Second, and perhaps more important, it continues to send a signal to COAG that the Territory seeks to, and willingly, act as a fully-fledged member of the Federation. Our desire for statehood requires us to do no less. For the record I say again, this principle should apply on all legislation brought before the Commonwealth parliament which affects the Northern Territory.
Our current constitutional weakness should never be exploited by the Commonwealth, and I welcome the opportunity, therefore, to support this bill on that basis alone. I further note, and support, the actions taken by the Chief Minister with the former Prime Minister to extend executive authority through a formal arrangement by the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Regulations 1978 4(5)(f) to enable the Northern Territory Administrator to give assent to this bill when passed by this Assembly, taking the advice of the relevant minister.
This course of action is consistent with our approach as a jurisdiction to operate, as far as is possible, as a constitutional equal with other jurisdictions on every occasion we are able to do so.
The provisions of the bill are straightforward. Clause 6, while not required with the birth of a son for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge rather than a daughter, provides that the gender of any baby born from 28 October 2011 does not displace any other person wherever they were born.
This clause is important and has retrospective effect from 28 October 2016, the common date of agreement for all 16 Commonwealth realms and the United Kingdom Succession to the Crown Act.
Clause 3 confirms enactment of this legislation, and subsequent legislation by the Commonwealth, has no effect on the exiting arrangements between our current sovereign and the Northern Territory.
Clause 7 deals with the Royal Marriages Act of 1772, repealing the prohibition of a monarch marrying a Catholic. It is fair to say we are unlikely, as legislators, to see too many bills pass this House, and subsequent Commonwealth legislation, which relate to legislation of some 240 years’ duration.
Mr Deputy Speaker, in today’s society of equity and fairness, it is all but impossible to agree that these changes are, to put it mildly, long overdue, therefore, the opposition supports this bill.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I listened to the Opposition Leader’s comments on this matter in relation to statehood, and how the Commonwealth did not have to ask for our advice but did so out of being courteous to the Territory. Whilst I understand that could be an argument to push forward statehood, I place on the record I have not always been overexcited about statehood. I consider the many issues confronting the Northern Territory a higher priority than putting a huge amount of energy into becoming a state. However, I do not disagree with being a state at some stage.
If we are concerned about the Commonwealth having to ask what we think about this, if we are to be a state we should be an equal partner in the Commonwealth. I do not support having fewer senators than any part of Australia because if that is the way we become a state, then we become a 25% state or a 50% state. You either are a state or you are not. Tasmania once had a small number of people in the state but always had equal representation in the Senate. I do not believe we can be half pregnant, if you could call it that. We are either in or out when it comes to being a state.
I appreciate and understand the Opposition Leader’s comments. When I read the bill I had the same feeling, but I have my opinions on statehood which may vary from others in this House. I am sure we will debate the statehood matter again and again, as we have done in prior Assemblies.
It is unusual to debate something like this in parliament. It will probably be the only time we deal with a matter in this House in relation to laws which govern the Queen of Great Britain and the Queen of Australia. This is good for women because they are not bumped out of succession by a male born afterwards, and it is good for Roman Catholics.
I have to laugh a little because, being a Catholic, you have to get used to disparaging remarks due to the church sometimes having faults which need remedying, which has happened in the past. Other times it is because - the member for Fong Lim likes to take the mickey - pardon the pun - out of people like me. In this case we are dealing with removing what are derogatorily called papists; a term I hope belongs to another era. Certain religious groups in the world today could organise quite a demonstration if someone was to refer to their religious beliefs in such a manner. That is in an historical context, and one has to accept that is the way the language of the day referred to Roman Catholics. Today we see the removal of those clauses, something that is long overdue.
It is good to see women now have equal rights in relation to whether they can become the King or Queen of Great Britain, or Australia while we are still under a monarchy. It is also good to see someone can marry a Roman Catholic. The bigger question is can a Roman Catholic, or a person of another faith, become the king or queen?
Mr Elferink: No, and I will tell you why shortly.
Mr WOOD: I thank the member for Port Darwin for interjecting. I am interested in a more fulsome response.
If there was one failing in this legislation - because the King or Queen of Great Britain is also head of the Anglican Church, it would be a little difficult, especially if you had a Jewish king, an Islamic king or a Roman Catholic king. Perhaps it is time that connection also changed because you are discriminating against a person being king or queen based on religion. Perhaps in time, not that I am over-concerned about these matters, that will change as well.
The other thing which changes is that marriages are not void, as they were from 1772 onwards, if they did not have the blessing of the monarch. I do not know how that changes now. I would hate to dig into the technical side of that because I presume one was married and the only way to be unmarried was to be divorced. However, the way I read it the marriage was void so, technically, it did not happen in the first place. I did not know about it until the minister brought this legislation to parliament.
Nobody could complain that there is anything wrong with these changes; they are certainly welcome. It has only taken several hundred years for them to occur. You have to be patient when making improvements in the way we administer our country, and I believe this will be welcomed by any fair-minded person.
It is a wonder we have not had a discussion about the republic and so on. At the moment, the Queen is Queen of Australia and the issue of a republic has not surfaced much of late. It will be something as the Queen ages - it will come back for discussion at another time, but I will not go into that at present.
I welcome the legislation brought forward. I thank the Commonwealth for the kindness of heart in enabling us to discuss this legislation. It should not be the case. Regardless of my thoughts about what type of state we should be, at least we are able to put our point of view forward on this matter.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Mr Deputy Speaker, I contribute to this debate more to answer questions from the member for Nelson than anything else. I start with the question, which he partially answered himself, as to whether or not a Catholic could become a reigning monarch in England.
It is worth investigating the history of how a Catholic could not become a reigning monarch in England. We have to wind the clock back to the reign of Henry VIII, who had a number of wives and, in the process of marrying one of those ladies - I cannot recall which one – there was a requirement for a divorce. I am doing this off the top of my head so stand to be corrected.
There were always rumblings between the crowned heads of Europe and the papacy based in Rome, and that tension manifest itself in a number of ways.
I suspect if you dig closely into the history of the divorce he sought - no, permission to marry a cousin – what occurred was a papal imposition on the church in England to say certain things could not occur, which did not please the king. The consequence was the king established himself as the head of the church in England, thus creating the Anglican Church.
It is no accident of history that if one visits an Anglican Church, many of the ceremonies and objects inside the church, in fact many of the prayers, are similar to Catholic prayers. The Lord’s Prayer, which we say in this House, is the Anglican version of the Lord’s Prayer. The Catholic version of the Lord’s Prayer does not have the last two lines of the Anglican version …
Mr Wood: It does in Mass.
Mr ELFERINK: It does in Mass but is tacked on much later, as you well know. That separation is basically an argument of cause and effect. You have to remember the Catholic Church in the time of Henry VIII was an enormous political power. To be able to divest oneself of that political influence was of enormous advantage to the Crown. At that time, the Crown had a number of good reasons to separate itself from the papacy based in Rome and, as a consequence, King Henry VIII set himself up as head of the church. He also set himself up as Defender of the Faith. That title resonates through every sitting monarch since the rule of Henry VIII up to and including Queen Elizabeth II, our reigning queen.
Whilst there remains an Anglican Church in England, that title will, in all likelihood, stick. It would be incongruous with the intent of that title, Defender of the Faith - the faith being the Anglican faith - for a non-Anglican monarch to take on that title. You could not become defender of the Anglican faith and then whip down to the local synagogue, mosque or Catholic Church to practice your own faith. As a consequence, it is impossible for anyone other than an Anglican to become the ruling monarch of England and her dominions in the Commonwealth, including us.
Consequently, the short answer to your question based on history is, with cause and effect in the right order, no, a Catholic cannot rise to become Defender of the Faith and the monarch because the two are inextricably linked – unless, of course, there was reunification between the Anglican Church and the Catholic Church. I believe comments have been made in some parts of both churches that may be considered. In recent times there have been a number of transfers, for lack of better expression, of Anglican priests to the Catholic faith and vice versa. That has occurred on a very small level in the Catholic Church.
The short answer is until there is reunification of the Anglican and Catholic Churches it is unlikely a Catholic will ever sit on the throne of England.
Having made that observation, you also made some comments in relation to statehood. I place on the record as, until recently, Minister for Statehood my reservations about the things you said. Whilst you say we either take statehood all or nothing, I argue the opposite. I would be prepared to take statehood piecemeal because even if we take the title of state and were admitted to the standard of the state through section 121 of the Australian Constitution, which was a parliamentary decision to introduce a new state in the Commonwealth, section 121 of the Australian Constitution enables that entry as a new state be done on such terms and conditions as the Commonwealth parliament sees fit.
Of course, that would mean limiting the number of senators and those types of things. However, if we were to be introduced as a state, irrespective of the fact we were limited to the arrangements in place now, we would get the legal and constitutional protection of the Australian Constitution all states enjoy, despite our lesser condition in the number of senators, etcetera. That is important because it gives this House, the one we are part of, a much greater status than it currently has.
In accordance with the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act 1978, we can be overturned by a federal parliament moving a motion within 28 days of us passing a law. A classic example of that law, whether you are for or against euthanasia, is the people who passed that legislation were, basically, dismissed by the federal parliament as lesser citizens.
If we were to take on the mantle of statehood, even in a limited form, the High Court would automatically start giving protections to us for subsequent acts, which other states enjoy, after statehood had been declared. Yes, it would be a piecemeal approach. After statehood was declared, you would have an incremental growth in that direction. However, you would get protections in particular areas from day one. Those protections would include the protections states currently enjoy from federal interference under the Constitution. I would prefer that rather than saying all or nothing.
There is another complicating factor many people do not consider when talking about statehood which would really cause us problems in the federal domain. The Australian Constitution says the ratio between the Senate and the House of Representatives, as near as possible, be one senator to two members of the House of Representatives. That is important because if we were to demand an extra 10 senators, taking us up to the full quota of 12 senators, and if that were to be granted, an extra 20 seats would have to be found in the House of Representatives.
They would not necessarily come from the Northern Territory, and it is unlikely they would. However, you would have an extra 20 seats scattered around the country and I imagine many people in the federal parliament would baulk at such a suggestion. Moreover, and something I am mindful of, is that the House of Representatives structure on nominating where representatives come from is done on a population basis.
Currently, if memory serves me correctly, north of the Tropic of Capricorn, which is about half the land mass of Australia, there are only a dozen or so …
Mr Giles: Eight.
Mr ELFERINK: Eight seats in the House of Representatives. If we followed that population model we would load up more seats below the Tropic of Capricorn; Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide, and those places would get extra seats in the House of Representatives. You would not necessarily get any more seats north of the Tropic of Capricorn, perhaps one if you were lucky. The demand for 12 senators would have a large effect on retarding the advancement of statehood for the Northern Territory.
The member for Nelson proposes full statehood, and I understand why he runs that argument. I would rather the pragmatic result of the protection of a state as offered by the interpretation of the Australian Constitution through the High Court as a starting point and then work our way up to 12 senators rather than say, ‘We will be little old weak us until such time as we get everything’. There will be high levels of resistance to us having 12 senators for the reasons described. That is an argument for another time but I ask members to be mindful of it.
Having dealt with those issues, I thank members opposite for their support of this legislation and I will see the debate continue.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Nelson, and the Leader of Government Business for their support of this bill. The speech each member made, along with my second reading speech, outlines why the legislation has been brought in; we are aligning ourselves with the British parliament. As a Territory we do not have to pass this legislation, but my agreement with the federal government, and the previous Chief Minister, Paul Henderson’s, agreement with the former Prime Minister that we would proceed down this path confirms the position we are taking today.
Allowing women to automatically assume the lead role, and also Catholics having the opportunity, not just the Church of England, presents a change in the times, demographics, and a change in social positioning of how we see ourselves around the world, particularly in the Northern Territory, so I commend the bill the House.
I also want to comment on the conversation around statehood. I took on board what the member for Nelson said about statehood, and I listened intently to the opinion of the Leader of Government Business and where things should go. I am mindful that a strong position of the Country Liberals for many years has been to support statehood for the Northern Territory. There will be an opportune time to debate section 121 of the Constitution and the ability for the Northern Territory to become a state. It could be done with much ease rather than constitutional conventions and at much less expense than previously proposed.
Representation is an important concept for a number of people, member for Nelson. What the Leader of Government Business explained around representation models through our proportional population base and the type of representation we have above the Tropic of Capricorn needs to be taken into account. However, pursuing any motion around section 121 changes and support from the federal government and the Prime Minister to position the Northern Territory to be a state should be discussed in the public arena to test the confidence that people want to move to a state through an ease of transition approach. That is a debate for another day.
Without going further regarding this bill, our debate has already covered much of those aspects and we have broad support from parliament. I commend the bill to the House.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr GILES (Chief Minister)(by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Mining in the Territory
Mining in the Territory
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Mines and Energy): Mr Deputy Speaker, mining and exploration creates jobs, helps build our regions, grows wealth for Territorians, and contributes to improving our essential infrastructure such as transport corridors. Mining and exploration delivers long-term benefits to the Northern Territory’s economy. We are lucky the Northern Territory has a wealth of mineral and energy opportunities.
Historically, much of the development in the Northern Territory has been encouraged by the search for and sale of our natural resources. Indeed, past Country Liberal governments recognised the importance of this industry, and today Territorians are still benefiting from major projects established over 20 years ago.
The development of the Central Australian gas fields and the pipeline to Darwin which fires the generators at the Ron Goodin and the Channel Island power stations, which in turn delivers electricity to many Territorians, was an achievement of past CLP governments. Support which ensured the first oil and gas discoveries in the Timor Sea was provided by past CLP governments.
Facilitation of the decision by ConocoPhillips and its partners to deliver the Bayu-Undan gas field and its pipeline to Darwin was also done by past CLP governments. The necessary support for the operation and development of world-class mineral deposits in Gove, Groote Eylandt, the gulf and Tanami regions, all operating for over 20 years, was provided by past CLP governments.
The current Country Liberals government is continuing the tradition of making use of our natural resources to benefit Territorians now and well into the future. We want to use the wealth created from ecologically sustainable mining to develop jobs, regional centres and infrastructure. We are building on the past successes of Country Liberals governments in order to deliver for the next generation of Territorians.
The mining industry is the Territory’s largest industry sector and every indication points to this continuing for many years to come. The global demand for energy and minerals is set to increase as the appetite of developed and emerging markets for materials for infrastructure, construction and manufacturing continues to grow. Currently, the petroleum and mining sectors represent more than 25% of the Northern Territory’s gross state product.
Today’s Country Liberals government continues the strong tradition of recognising the importance of mining for the Northern Territory’s future and has made mining and energy a major sector of our multi-level economy. In the Northern Territory we welcome mining development, we welcome manufacturing, and we welcome oil and gas development and downstream processing.
The future success and growth of the mining and energy and exploration industry in the Northern Territory is largely dependent on this government’s support of these industry sectors. Therefore, it is incumbent on this government to remove obstacles which impede the success and growth of mining, energy and exploration. It is incumbent on this government to put in place initiatives that make good economic and regulatory sense for big business to do business in the Northern Territory. Quite simply, if this industry is growing and succeeding the benefits that flow to the Territory will continue and the Territory will flourish.
Under the Country Liberals government’s Framing the Future, the strategic framework for government, we have developed a road map for the creation of a prosperous economy for the Northern Territory. Of course, mining, energy, and exploration play a crucial role in the Territory’s economic future. The changes we have made in our 12 months in government to mining regulations, to cutting red tape, and to increasing the amount of support this government provides to the resources and exploration industry in the Northern Territory are succinctly outlined in Framing the Future.
This government made commitments to industry and we are putting rubber on the road; we are delivering on those promises.
These changes will ensure an economy that creates wealth and jobs. It will build an economy that is open, competitive and innovative. It will grow an economy built on exports and the needs of our trading partners. It captures ideas, energy, and opportunities from across the Territory in order to deliver an economy that lands new local, national, and international investment.
This government is determined to take a forward view on the role of mining and energy in our economic future so we are acting now. In order to properly plan for our mining future and create a genuine and profitable partnership with industry, we need a stronger agenda within which to progress. One proposal currently under consideration by the Department of Mines and Energy is the implementation of a priority zone system for minerals and energy development in the Northern Territory.
Currently, two zones are mooted. In the north, zone 1 notionally encompasses the area from Nhulunbuy through to the McArthur region and west into the Beetaloo Basin. This includes prospective areas of mineralisation along the gulf coast, and inland in the Roper and McArthur regions. It also encompasses the Beetaloo and McArthur Basins, which are highly prospective for oil and gas and are close to existing pipeline infrastructure.
The second zone, notionally centred around Alice Springs, would include those areas of interest to the north and east of the town where there are a number of mineral exploration activities under way, as well as the Amadeus Basin south of Alice Springs, which has very high oil and gas potential. As a high level of activity already exists in these areas, prior to the final implementation of this initiative the department is consulting specifically and directly with industry in order to reach agreement on mutual obligations.
In order to accelerate exploration activity within these priority zones, the Country Liberals government will support the development of infrastructure, improve and speed up approvals for land access, and provide whole-of-government assistance for qualifying. This government will also provide new geoscience and collaborative programs in conjunction with industry. As a government, we will look at the cumulative effect of a number, or series of, mining developments in a region rather than treating projects individually. Through a coordinated approach, the overall benefits for regional development can be increased beyond the sum of the benefits from individual projects.
We are seeking industry views on how we can better work together to ensure mutual benefit before any commitment is made. For example, the department has sought specific views from industry on the current management of tenement renewals to ensure land remains in the hands of those who can demonstrate accelerated development. This ‘use it or lose it’ approach is designed simply and specifically to kick-start mining and oil and gas projects.
While we are lucky to have some of the world’s biggest global mining companies running world-class operations in the Territory, history tells us it is the smaller players we can expect to uncover the Territory’s next major new discoveries. The Territory remains fundamentally underexplored, and only sustained greenfields exploration can unlock the vast mineral potential we have. All great mining provinces start with greenfields exploration, the foundation of the mining sector.
The Country Liberals government is determined to take a forward view on the position of mining and energy in our economic profile and is acting now. Since coming to government, the Country Liberals have already put in place a range of important initiatives. Recently, I had the opportunity to launch CORE, Creating Opportunities for Resource Exploration initiative. Under CORE, this government has committed almost $4m this financial year to new geoscience and exploration stimulus programs designed to accelerate the Territory’s next generation of minerals and petroleum discoveries. CORE replaces the previous government’s unfunded Bringing Forward Discovery Program. CORE includes new programs by the department’s geological survey team to assess the gas and minerals potential of the Territory’s sedimentary basins, and surveys that will cover over 10% of the Territory with high resolution gravity data to assist exploration.
As part of this initiative, the geological survey team is currently undertaking a major gravity survey in the McArthur Basin, including areas from Borroloola to Daly Waters and north to the Roper River. A number of exploration companies will be substantially investing in this survey to increase the density of data in their areas of interest. This is another example of the Northern Territory government and industry working together for mutually beneficial outcomes.
The geological survey team also recently completed a regional gravity survey over an area between the Tanami and Tennant Creek, which will help explorers see beneath the vast and nearly unexplored sand plain that extends between two of our most important goldfields.
The government will also continue to co-fund selected exploration drilling and geophysical programs in areas that have seen limited past activity, and improve service to the exploration industry by making open file company exploration reports available online.
In September, during NT Resources Week, the department’s geological survey team released the first ever volume on the Geology and mineral resources of the Northern Territory. This 1100-page volume, an essential reference for mineral and petroleum explorers in the Northern Territory, is the first ever comprehensive description and detailed analysis of the geology, mineralogy and petroleum resources of the Northern Territory. The book will provide mineral and petroleum explorers with a single point of reference to access the latest in geological knowledge and understanding of the Territory’s resources.
Promotion of the exploration potential of the Northern Territory also continues through the flagship Annual Geoscience Exploration Seminar and marketing at high profile exploration seminars in the uranium, broader minerals, oil and gas sectors. The 2014 AGES will be the 15th year of this prestigious and important geoscience event. This is another initiative from a Country Liberal Party government of bygone times.
Our continuing efforts in Asian investment and engagement will build on previous good work in this area and will mostly focus on enabling increased investment in the exploration sector. Earlier this year the Territory government joined with the South Australian government to host a ground-breaking event in Darwin, the Australia China Minerals Investment Summit which brought more than 80 high-level Chinese investors together with over 50 explorers seeking investment. Following the success of this event in Darwin, in November I will lead another minerals investment delegation to China.
Last year the minerals investment delegation to China was a resounding success resulting in investments of more than $20m coming into the Territory. By joining this delegation, Territory exploration companies can access top-level decision-makers in China in an affordable way, through dozens of investment meetings and opportunities to promote their project. The delegation will also visit Japan and South Korea for seminars and business meetings to directly introduce companies with emerging minerals projects in the Territory to significant Japanese and Korean companies and trading houses. The Country Liberal’s government is also in the process of revising the role of the Northern Territory Mining Board.
In order for stronger and better communication to exist between the industry and government at a strategic level, it is imperative the Northern Territory Mining Board operates as a high level advisory body. The department has received a report reviewing the current structure, and I look forward to implementing a reinvigorated body that will, as a first priority, consider and advise on closure costings, security arrangements and funding of legacy issues across the Territory.
In the longer term, I see the board becoming a key source of advice to the department and me on a range of issues relating to mining, including regulatory approaches and closure standards amongst others. The regulatory arm of the department has developed a good working relationship with the Minerals Council on regulatory issues, with the most recent focus of work to streamline the mining approvals process.
Since coming to government, we have been working diligently to find a sensible and pragmatic solution to reduce red and green tape and to speed up processes. One key area identified early was the need to reduce the burden on industry of the regulatory process, especially over the form and frequency of approval documents. Central to that philosophy was easing requirements which are repetitive, costly, and time consuming.
Mining management plans is one area that has been a point of focus. In line with overwhelming feedback from industry, the department has now moved to four-year mining management plans for operating mines, supplemented by streamlined annual reports. These documents are also available online and are communicated directly with those mines affected. The Territory’s mining companies are ecstatic with the new regime of multi-year MMPs, a result which exceeded their expectations.
The next step is to apply these improvements to the exploration and extractive sectors. While these sectors tend to be more dynamic than the larger mining operations, all options will be considered in order to improve the regulatory outcomes for both the industry and the department.
The Department of Mines and Energy is also continuing to operate under revised processes which enable provisional or staged approvals to be granted faster. This is being applied to all operations where possible.
One of the intended outcomes of this process is it will free up time for mining officers to be in the field. The department aims to have a strong relationship with all its stakeholders, and there is no doubt an increased field presence will achieve this.
The department is also currently reviewing the Petroleum Act and related acts to ensure best practice regulation for gas and petroleum activities in the Northern Territory. Amendments will be implemented to the Petroleum Regulations, the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Regulations, as well as the Energy Pipelines Act and Regulations to allow for increased recovery of fees, levies and rents to offset departmental regulatory costs. Amendments will also be made to the Mining Management Act to enhance its effectiveness and secure necessary revenue to begin tackling the Northern Territory’s significant legacy mining liabilities. The department is participating in the Commonwealth review of the 2007 amendments to the Aboriginal Land Rights Act to improve access to land.
Under the Country Liberals government’s Framing the Future, the strategic framework for government, we are striving to achieve a balanced environment; an environment which is sustainable, balances approval of developments with environmental controls, and an environment that is well managed.
To that end, this government is unashamedly pursuing a stronger approach to dealing with legacy issues across the Territory. It is in the collective interests of the mining sector to see legacy sites addressed as their continuing presence serves to reinforce community opposition to mining, especially when new developments are being proposed. The introduction of the new levy is a positive step forward in this regard and will deliver remediation to some of the affected areas.
Turning to energy, it is estimated there are approximately 240 trillion cubic feet - TCF - of possible reserves of unconventional gas in the Territory. The industry rule of thumb is one trillion cubic feet is enough gas to power a city of one million people for 20 years. This includes the Beetaloo sub-basin, which has a possible 164 TCF; the McArthur Basin with a possible 40 TCF; the Bonaparte Basin with a possible 10 TCF, and the Amadeus Basin with a possible 25 TCF.
Another industry rule of thumb is 10% of resources become recoverable reserves. However, even with one-tenth of 240 TCF, the Territory could still be an energy powerhouse to the world for decades to come. All areas which hold possible reserves of unconventional gas currently have seismic surveys under way or wells already drilled in order to establish the full extent of gas reserves.
The Territory has a great future in supplying expanding global LNG markets, supplying gas to resource projects across the Northern Territory, supplying gas to hungry interstate energy markets and gas processing industries.
Notwithstanding the impact of the global financial crisis on the world’s major economies and their energy demands, the outlook for LNG and natural gas as a fuel is bright. We are now seeing a return to strong growth in the powerhouse economies in our north to Asia. With this growth comes increased energy demand, and natural gas, with its greenhouse and environmentally-friendly qualities, will grow more strongly than competing fuel sources.
As economic activity and energy demand grow, demand for gas will grow at a much faster pace. The potential for new gas and LNG projects in the Northern Territory is bright. Not only is there a site and approval for up to ten million tonnes per annum on Wickham Point, but land has been allocated for four extra LNG trains at Blaydin Point.
Our supply, service and resource construction industries are growing in size and capability along with the Ichthys LNG project and other resource projects. Our Marine Supply Base is well advanced towards completion, providing a dedicated purpose-designed service to offshore exploration and development activity.
A key issue for all industry players is energy availability and cost. In recognition of this, the Northern Territory government has established an Energy Directorate in the Department of Mines and Energy. The directorate will bring together a range of energy-related activities from across government. A particular focus is the potential for energy infrastructure to be linked to regional areas to provide supply options for existing and new developments.
The Energy Directorate is responsible for the full life cycle of all energy, including petroleum, oil and gas, pipeline, geothermal, and renewables in the Territory. The directorate will enhance the existing upstream energy regulation and policy responsibilities of the department to include all matters of future requirements, associated business, and supply for downstream matters. This will undoubtedly take some time to achieve, but it is encouraging to hear companies such as the APA Group talking about the possibility of linking the Territory gas network with the east coast grid.
In the gas sector, there is a need to secure the Territory’s energy future while addressing the urgent need to provide gas to Gove and to take advantage of considerable export potential across the world.
I acknowledge the status and progress of some of our major resource projects. The Territory currently has the largest number of potential mine development projects in play than at any time in the past three decades. There are 16 projects in construction or approvals processes, representing a capital investment of over $3.3bn, 2800 jobs for the construction phase, and 2400 jobs for ongoing operations. Of these 16 projects, nine have an estimated mine life of 20 years or more, and three are only stage 1 of much larger projects.
In the first quarter of 2013, Australian Ilmenite Resources was granted approvals for their SILL80 ilmenite project in the Roper region. This project is still in construction and commissioning phases. The first shipment of ilmenite from the port of Darwin is expected later this year, and will mark the commencement of a new mineral export industry for the Northern Territory.
The $360m phase 3 expansion of McArthur River mine was also approved in the first quarter of 2013. Construction and commissioning is expected to take between 12 to 18 months and will result in doubling the production of zinc concentrate from the mine. This expansion will also extend the life of the mine by 11 years, from 2027 to 2038.
The Roper Bar iron ore mine by Western Desert Resources was granted approval in August 2013 and construction is progressing rapidly. Western Desert expects its first shipment of direct shipping ore will occur later this year. The project will be exporting three million tonnes of iron ore each year through the Bing Bong port facility through agreements with McArthur River mine.
All three of these projects have an estimated mine life of greater than 20 years.
The Sherwin Iron project has commenced mining a 200 000 bulk sample which has been prepared for export from the Darwin port.
In mid-September, I undertook a road trip through many of these operations, visiting MRM, Western Desert’s construction at Bing Bong, the haul road and the mine site, as well as Sherwin and Australian Ilmenite mines. I called into the Mataranka lime plant and then went on to ERA’s Ranger Mine, where the exploration decline at Ranger 3 Deeps is progressing well.
At Ranger, I was honoured to be present for the official opening by the Chief Minister of the new $320m brine concentrator, which will reduce by 80% the volume of tailings being transferred into the tailings dam. This, of itself, is a significant step by ERA to meet its environmental responsibilities, but also adds in no small way to the longevity and viability of its overall operations into the future. However, it is the achievements of our junior and mid-tier explorers that continue to underpin the growth of this industry.
The Country Liberals government understands some exploration companies are facing tough times. There are difficulties in raising finance which translates into reduced exploration, particularly greenfields exploration.
Governments also face challenges. At the moment, this government is subject to many of the same economic forces that are causing difficulties in the mining sector. This government faces the potential prospect of significant revenue decline over the next couple of decades as the major royalty streams decline or cease.
Notwithstanding these issues the next few years, in an overall sense, look very good for the Territory. Last month I had the pleasure of attending an economic briefing by renowned Westpac economist, Huw McKay. Mr McKay gave a fascinating insight into the current state of the Australian and Northern Territory economies.
What was apparent was something we all know. That is, the mining boom in Australia has reached its peak and is now trending down. In that context, it is reasonable for one to ask why the Northern Territory’s mining sector is still steaming ahead – look at the new projects. Mr McKay expressed the view the Northern Territory mining sector is somewhat behind the rest of the country, at least in its position in the boom and bust cycle.
He espoused the view the Northern Territory still has between two to three years of growing economy around the mining sector. In light of that, Mr McKay was also complimentary of the current government’s approach to our economy, indicating the contraction of government stimulus at this point in the cycle was both correct and appropriate. We all know two to three years is short term, and we must prepare for tighter times ahead. That is why this government is committed, right now, to setting the scene for the continuation of a strong and vibrant mining sector. Not that I believe the opposition would understand but creating, right now, an environment conducive to growth and significant sustainable increases in investment is critical to keeping our economy strong and vibrant for years to come; using private investment in the mining sector to smooth out the economic bumps in the road, as it were.
Given the time challenges we face, both mining and energy sectors present quite urgent problems in that lengthy development time frames may well exceed the time available to implement a solution. That is why a range of initiatives are being pursued, driven by the Department of Mines and Energy, in order to make the Northern Territory an attractive and financially safe jurisdiction in which to invest in mining, energy and the exploration industry.
We have simplified the process of submitting mining management plans and have made environmental mining reports more efficient. We have introduced a multi-year cycle of mining management plans, and have sped up the approvals process. We are now transitioning to a compliance program that has an increasingly field-based focus.
The re-establishment of the NT Mining Board will create a direct link, supporting communication and two-way information sharing between government and the minerals sector.
In our first year of government we have made significant progress in cutting red tape, easing the burden experienced by exploration and mining companies doing business in the NT. We have told the world we are open for business. We have facilitated the development of major new mines and have put in place strategies to deal with legacy mines. The department has cut paperwork and is concentrating on putting field officers in the field not behind desks.
It is an exciting time in the Territory and we will all rise to the challenge. There is much work to do. We must be innovative and step up to the mark to ensure our economic future is in our hands.
The Northern Territory government continues to support the growth of the exploration industry through geoscience initiatives by the NT Geological Survey, which is aimed at providing the necessary information to encourage companies to invest in new areas of the NT. We strive to ensure the NT is the first choice for investors. The Framing the Future document captures this sentiment well. Our policy and regulatory environment encourages investment. An investment in mines and exploration is investment in our regions. This government is working to ensure that investment in mining and petroleum sectors benefits the host region.
The NT is the dynamic centre of the Northern Territory, rich in natural resources with very close proximity to key markets in Asia. It has already been the choice for some of the largest investment projects undertaken by foreign companies in Australia, including those based in Japan, France, Italy, China and the United States. The NT government is a small but dynamic government that openly welcomes foreign investment with a very pro-business development attitude.
In closing, the Territory’s best days are ahead. The Country Liberals government has the plan, vision, and the political will to make good things happen. We will go forward, carve out a new destiny for the Northern Territory and for business, expand the horizons of possibility, generate revenue, develop growth, give reward, provide hope and ensure opportunity.
With so many benefits flowing to the Northern Territory from the resources industry it makes sense to make the Northern Territory a jurisdiction in which players in this industry can flourish.
Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Debate suspended.
MOTION
Note Statement – Mining and Exploration Opportunities in the Territory
Note Statement – Mining and Exploration Opportunities in the Territory
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Madam Speaker, I speak on the ministerial statement brought to this House by the Minister for Mines and Energy. I was interested to hear what the minister had to say until I received the ministerial statement, which I will describe the same way the member for Greatorex described some of our statements, as puff pastry.
There is nothing new in this ministerial statement. There are no new policy directions or anything new about what this government is doing to attract the mining industry to the Territory. This is a revised history of mining development in the Northern Territory and a litany of initiatives brought to the Territory by the previous Labor government.
From the first page, the minister spoke about developments in the mining industry in the Territory and major projects established over 20 years ago. There is no mention that the reason no new major mines have been developed in the Territory is because about 12 years ago the CLP actively discouraged exploration by sitting on exploration licences because they did not want to deal with native title regulations.
It was then minister for mines, Paul Henderson, who, upon taking the portfolio, found on the previous minister’s desk about 700 exploration licences that had not been processed because they had to negotiate with traditional owners. The CLP, at the time, did not want to do that.
We heard that the previous CLP government facilitated the first oil and gas discoveries in the Timor Sea. Pardon me, but that was the Commonwealth government rather than the Northern Territory. He also talked about facilitating the decision by ConocoPhillips and its partners to bring gas to Darwin. Well, pardon me, my signature was on all the decisions made to establish the Bayu-Undan gas field and pipeline to Darwin and, of course, the establishment of the first ever liquefied processing plant in the Northern Territory.
This little duck had to walk down streets alone because of the opposition by people in Darwin to the establishment of a liquefied natural gas processing plant in Darwin. People were peddling rumours about possible explosions in our harbour the same level as a nuclear explosion where liquefied gas would evaporate and create a huge fireball that would destroy Darwin. We withstood these allegations and battled, one by one, and proved them wrong. Today, Darwin has become a centre for processing natural gas.
We did not see anything in this ministerial statement about INPEX: the establishment of the INPEX liquefied natural gas processing plant.
On page four, the minister made reference to Framing the Future, the Country Liberals strategic framework. He also said mining and energy and exploration play a crucial role in the Territory’s economic future, and that is true. He also said the government has made significant changes in the past 12 months to mining regulation, cutting red tape, and increasing the amount of government support to attract mining to the Northern Territory.
Let us look at it. You are probably familiar with the international Fraser Institute. In 2012, the Northern Territory ranked 11 out of 93 countries, states and provinces in the world in which to do business, and the first state in Australia. In the 2013 Fraser Institute report, the Northern Territory is 22 in the world. Not only is it 22 in the world, but it is third in Australia, below Western Australia and South Australia. That speaks for itself. That shows that in the 12 months of the Country Liberals government the Northern Territory has slipped 11 places to 22nd position.
The minister mentioned the priority zone system for minerals and energy development in the Northern Territory. I am puzzled because I heard the minister make a statement similar to that at a mining council lunch, but he said he had taken it to Cabinet and could not give any details; he could not tell us what is was about. Even in this ministerial statement, which is supposed to advise the House and the people of the Northern Territory of initiatives of the CLP government, there is not much detail. They are talking about two zones, one in the north and one in the Centre, and that is about it. He also made a motherhood statement:
- … to accelerate exploration … the Country Liberals government will support the development of infrastructure, improve and speed up approvals for land access, and provide whole-of-government assistance for qualifying.
We are doing that already and have been for the past 11 years. We worked as a whole-of-government to accelerate exploration and mining development. That is the reason an enormous amount of money was spent on exploration in the Northern Territory. The Australian Mining magazine of August 2013 said the Northern Territory had $228m spent on exploration in 2011. That was a record for the Territory and one of the highest expenditures in Australia when exploration was reducing.
The minister, on page seven, mentioned the ‘use it or lose it ‘approach. We had that in place. We had drafted the legislation in such a way you could not sit on a tenement forever because we wanted people to come and explore. Either they find something to proceed to mining, or give it to someone else to work the tenements in the Territory for everybody to benefit, especially Territorians.
We expanded that to oil and petroleum and received many accolades from the industry. It was sick and tired of losing tenements because big companies would acquire them and sit there for a long period of time.
The minister also said he launched CORE, Creating Opportunities for Resource Exploration, which is nothing more than part of the Bringing Forward Discovery we put in place in 2007. Remember when I was Executive Director of the mining council and we talked about spending money and subsidising exploration companies dollar-for-dollar up to $100 000 to explore brownfield or greenfield sites in the Territory and share that information with the general community and the department - nothing new.
The minister talked about $4m extended until 2014. Hold on a minute! I have a print out from AGES, 2012. Of course, everybody knows AGES is the seminar held every year in Alice Springs to talk about initiatives in the Northern Territory. In the March 2012 AGES, there was a statement by Ian Scrimgeour, then director of the exploration and geology area of the department, which clearly stated the Northern Territory initiative was extended to 2014.
The minister tells us what he announced, which we announced a year ago. In the same publication from AGES, Ian Scrimgeour noted the further $11.4m was to be spent over the following three years.
Here is a ministerial statement by the Country Liberals Minister for Mines and Energy which reiterates the initiatives of the previous Labor government - exactly the same thing, exactly the same money, and exactly the same period of time.
I congratulate the department for the publication of the first volume of Geology and mineral resources of the Northern Territory. It is 1100 pages and provides information to anyone who wants to know what is under the ground in the Northern Territory. It is a fantastic initiative, but a 1100-page volume is not drafted in 12 months of a new government. The work was undertaken many years before. As a matter of fact, it started before my time as minister for Mines, under previous ministers. I am pleased to see it completed, but it would be a good idea for the minister to acknowledge that work started a long time ago. I have no problem with him launching it, he is the minister. I had the pleasure of launching some initiatives started by CLP ministers.
Page 11 of his statement says:
- Earlier this year the Territory government joined with the South Australian government to host a ground-breaking event in Darwin, the Australia China Minerals Investment Summit …
He claims it to be the first, but it is not. The first one between the Northern Territory and South Australia took place in Adelaide in July 2012. I was there with my colleague and compatriot, the minister for Mineral resources in South Australia, Tom Koutsantonis. That happened because during a trip to China we got together and started thinking about how we could attract exploration, especially to Central Australia and northern South Australia. We tried to facilitate exploration in the region by cutting red tape and, if necessary, adjusting the legislation of the two states so people did not have to duplicate their work with applications, environmental assessments and everything that needs to be done before exploration. A person who undertook some work in the Northern Territory could be acknowledged and recognised in South Australia, and the same arrangement would apply in the Northern Territory.
I still believe it is a great idea. We should continue this idea and we should go on and on about it because that is the way to do business. Rather than competing against other states in areas where we have a common interest, let us join forces and attract mining and mining exploration to our regions.
The minister said he led an investment delegation to China. Hold on, I have been to China 14 times, the first time as minister for Tourism and, after that, as minister for Resources. I refer to the department’s publication which mentions the successful exploration investment attraction by the Northern Territory government which started in 2007. This is a 2013 publication put out by the Department of Mines and Energy, so it is not ours; it belongs to this government. It talks about how the drilling and geophysical collaboration attracted exploration in the Territory, how we managed to acquire geoscience data and deliver it to the industry, and how to promote these exploration initiatives on a national and international level.
I quote from the 2013 paper Helping NT explorers Attract International Investment by the Department of Mines and Energy which says:
- Marketing NT projects to China, Japan and South Korea
- From 2006, …
- … regular engagement with China
- From 2008, regular engagement with Japan
- Strategic research in 2010 …
that was the Labor government:
- … reaffirmed that China, Japan and South Korea should be the NT’s target markets.
The same paper from the Department of Mines and Energy states that the vast majority of investment has come from China.
I have no problem with the minister talking about the investment attraction and the work we have done with China, but it would be a good idea to say his work is a continuation of initiatives started by previous governments and previous ministers. I encourage the minister to promote the Territory and they will come.
On page 12, the minister says the department has developed a good working relationship with the Minerals Council. Really? There was a scathing media release from the Minerals Council of Australia when the minister placed a levy and a new tax on the mining industry in Budget 2013-14. The media release is so bad - I have never seen such a bad media release from the Minerals Council against a Territory government. It ends with the following quote:
- The Northern Territory government has campaigned that mining is one of the Territory’s three economic hubs. It seems this was just spin.
Not only that, let us look at what AMEC has to say about the Northern Territory government. A media release from AMEC was headed, ‘Northern Territory government increases tax burden on mining exploration’, and follows with, ‘More taxes could limit investment in the Northern Territory’. AMEC said it was caught unawares; it was caught by surprise by the levy and taxes in the 2013-14 budget which does much to discourage exploration in the Northern Territory.
In Mining Weekly, on 20 June 2013, AMEC CEO Simon Bennison complains about the levy on the industry by the NT government. As minister Westra van Holthe says, it will raise $6m. AMEC CEO, Simon Bennison, spilt the beans saying only one-third of the $6m raised by the tax will be directed to legacy sites. Out of the $6m, only $2m will go to legacy mines and the rest will be spent to hire more bureaucrats.
Madam Speaker, the industry has a friendly relationship with the government in the Northern Territory? I think not.
Yes, mining is important to the Territory. It employs about 4000 people and 20% of our gross state product comes from mining. We have to attract more mining to the Territory. I agree with the Westpac economist who says the Territory is two to three years behind other states with regard to mining exploration and mining. We are behind and have to ensure we continue development of mining processes in the Territory. Yes, many people say mining is not good for the Territory, but it is good for the Territory, especially for people in remote areas. You only have to look at Tanami to see how many local people are employed there. Up to 14% of local employees at the Newman mine are Indigenous.
You only have to go to Groote Eylandt. We went to Groote Eylandt recently and saw a significant number of Indigenous people working in the mine, not to rehabilitate the sites by collecting seeds and planting, but working on the big trucks, driving the big trucks, and doing jobs they were not doing before.
Go to Borroloola, talk to Xstrata and find out how many people go through the simulators and drive the big trucks at the mine site. We have only seen that in the past five or six years. Mines provide information from local people. The Tiwi Islands mineral sand project was a small project running for a few years employing about 14 people. If that project was not there, 14 Tiwi people would be without employment and on welfare. Why, when they have the skills and ability to do the job? If they can do the job the mining industry can pay real money.
Mining comes and goes. We see what is happening in Western Australia. We have seen a decline in exploration and a decline in mining. People say the mining boom is ending. The mining boom will not end while China continues to develop.
There are 1.3 billion people in China. Out of 1.3 billion people, one-third lives in big cities and has what we take for granted. They have a house, electricity, a fridge, microwave, television and car. The others live in the rural area and do not have what city people have. They will want electricity, a television, a fridge, a car and the everyday conveniences we want - a house - but nothing can be done unless you have the resources to construct it, to manufacture them, to produce them and give them to people.
When China has growth between 6% and 8% per year, it means people will have disposable income and will want to spend their money to buy products to better their lives. We should be smart; we should be there to sell what we have. We should not say, ‘If they want it they can come’. No, we have to say, ‘You can do business with the Territory but these are the conditions’. The conditions we place as a government - there is no reference about that in this statement – on new mining companies, ‘If you want to mine in the Territory that is fine, but you have to give us a local employment plan. How many people you will employ in Alice Springs, Katherine or Borroloola?’
We see two big mines opening now, Western Desert Resources and Sherwin Iron, both in the Roper area near Ngukurr. People in Ngukurr have an interest in gaining employment in these mines. We should tell the companies if they want to develop here, if they want a mining licence, they have to employ 100 Indigenous people. In a small place like Ngukurr, 100 Indigenous wages will make a hell of a difference.
We are talking about changing the legislation, and it is always welcome to make things easier. I have a problem with the MMAs. Will they be provided online as they were previously so everyone can look at them to see what they are for, or will they be secretive?
With the multi-year assessment of the mine management plan, what will happen with the environmental levy? Will it be reviewed annually? How will it be done? Will it be reviewed every four years? If it is done every four years, it means the company is stuck with a big environmental levy, despite the fact they have rehabilitated the site in that four-year period. The minister has not answered some of the questions in this statement.
I have been accused of being a strong supporter of the mining industry. I am, not because I have shares in mining companies – I have none – but because the mining industry can contribute greatly to the Territory, not only to our lifestyle, but also to the economy and employment.
Yes, there are examples in the mining industry where the wrong thing has been done, but there is not one mention here of Mt Todd, the mistakes of the past and how we can ensure these things do not happen again. When things go wrong they can affect significant areas of the Territory and the lives of Territorians. We already have 2000 legacy mines left from the 1920s and 1930s: the Commonwealth days. There is nothing in the minister’s statement about that. This is a good story of the world according to the minister for Mines in the CLP government.
There are other things that make me laugh. On page 17, the minister refers to ‘our Marine Supply Base’. Our Marine Supply Base? Was it not your Renewal Management Board that recommended we scrap it because it was too expensive and we could not afford it? I am sorry, I do not care what the bureaucrats say, sometimes, as a government, you have to show some initiative. I am pleased this government made the wise decision to keep the Marine Supply Base to provide support to the offshore oil and gas industry. Again, let us be fair, do not call it ‘our Marine Supply Base’ unless you call it ‘our Territory’s Marine Supply Base’; which I could live with.
I have no problem with the government providing major project status to some of these resources. It is a very good idea and we should continue that.
There are a number of issues in this statement which rub me the wrong way with the complete wiping out of the past and suggesting that in 12 months this government has done enormous things for the Territory and the mining industry.
On page 21 there is reference to the $320m brine concentration at ERA. I remind the minister that the Labor government was the first government to take a mining company to court, where the mining company was found guilty of breaching environmental regulations. ERA was one of them. The brine concentrator is there today because the company realised the government of the day was prepared to take them to court every time they breached environmental legislation. I am pleased ERA decided to spend the money for a brine concentrator, because $320m is a drop in the ocean when you consider the damage this mine has the potential to do to the environment, especially in a sensitive area like Kakadu.
Mining exploration is declining throughout Australia. We have seen the results in Western Australia, and the results published by Northern Territory Treasury in the Territory Economic Review of April 2013 showing petroleum exploration is going up but, unfortunately, mineral exploration in the Northern Territory is going down. Money seems to be drying up. A number of companies have approached me about the possibility of getting people to invest in projects in China. My information from China is that money is drying up. Companies are not prepared to invest in long-term projects; they want short-term projects that will make money quickly. We have to be clever and support industry and, most importantly, promote the Northern Territory.
I welcome the minister’s statement House. Sometimes puff pastry is good to see what is happening, but please give us more information and do not ignore the past. Sometimes you have to remember the past in order to avoid mistakes in the future. At the same time, you have to remember the past because the new structure did not just appear in August 2012, it was done before that. It had its page before your time and, at the end of the day, irrespective of which political side we are on, I want to believe we all work for the betterment of the Northern Territory.
Ms ANDERSON (Namatjira): Madam Speaker, I support my colleague’s statement to the House on the mining industry and Framing the Future. It is a fantastic way to put forward what the Northern Territory is expecting for the future and it encourages all of us in the Northern Territory to see and be part of that journey. I quote from page four of the minister’s statement:
Under the Country Liberal government’s Framing the Future, the strategic framework for government, we have developed a roadmap for the creation of a prosperous economy for the Northern Territory.
What a way to put it. It is fantastic to talk about the future of the Northern Territory and the mining industry and to welcome everyone on board for a prosperous future. There is opportunity in this area which we can see with all the mining happening in the Northern Territory, opportunities we have given as the government since coming to power, and the benefits we all have as Territorians. It is fantastic to see this government opening all avenues and ensuring we send the message to other countries saying we are open for business. We are willing to work and build partnerships with them. Please come and enjoy the Northern Territory and help create a different place to what we had over the last 11 years under Labor – crippled, with no future direction.
We have a new government laying the foundations for a future any Territorian would consider exciting. It is a road map which encourages those of us in our mid-50s and over to think about what our children and grandchildren will be enjoying. If this is the kind of road map the Country Liberal Party can build, there is real encouragement and enthusiasm for Territorians to be focused in this area. The mining industry does a lot in the Northern Territory. The shadow minister spoke about mining opportunities opening up near Ngukurr.
One thing I would like to suggest to my colleague, the Minister for Mines and Energy, is Indigenous opportunity. There is a lot of opportunity in the mining industry for Indigenous employment. We continually talk in this House about the lack of Indigenous employment in the mining industry. We have three large mining operations that have been running for decades in Gove, Groote and the Tanami, and we have not seen that potential utilised. I suggest to my colleague that we start ensuring Indigenous people in the Northern Territory are part of the wealth journey and part of growing the Northern Territory in true partnership with the mines on Aboriginal land.
This government has given all Territorians that opportunity, but we are open for suggestions. It is fantastic to suggest to my colleagues in this House, and the minister, ways to improve Indigenous employment in this area. We have to look at the opportunities. Through Centrelink, we can look at the age groups in the regions and see what potential these people have with literacy and numeracy. Are they capable of job opportunities in the mining industry? Do they have licences? All the checks and balances of growing the Northern Territory and bringing forward Indigenous Territorians should be assessed.
I am a great believer in breaking down the barriers of language. I take this opportunity to congratulate the Territory company Sprout, and especially Anya. What a magnificent person to come up with talking posters in Aboriginal language inside clinics, schools, shops and workshops where Aboriginal people utilise the facilities in their own communities. We can be getting the mining industry’s message and the government’s message through One Talk. This is not just about getting the message of One Talk out, it is about preservation of language because certain people use their language and you can have it in English as well.
I had the pleasure of having Sprout giving me a presentation, and I have seen the opportunities they have created with Menzies around sickness, lung infections and STIs. These messages are put in all the right places in remote Aboriginal communities and we can utilise One Talk, which was born and bred in the Northern Territory; it is not from Victoria, China, New South Wales, or Western Australia. It is fantastic that when we utilise this we are utilising our own product. It is like a child who was born and bred in the Northern Territory. I take the opportunity again to congratulate Sprout and Anya. I will read some of the remarks from the material they have put out:
- Talking posters are an innovative tool that are helping our team raise the profile of respiratory disease. Having an option for local languages makes the posters a fun way to deliver health messages and, importantly, addresses issues such as language barriers.
This is a way of getting the mining industry’s message out. If Menzies is already using it for health issues, we can use it in the mining industry to say, ‘There is a mine 50 km or 40 km away from your community. We are looking for 50 to 60 young, strong blokes, or women, if you want to work there. You can go underground, be a truck driver, a backhoe driver or a grader driver.’ All those opportunities can be put into their own language, and it is interpreted only because the person recognises the photo. It might be their local member, it might be the member for Arnhem or Arafura, the minister, the member for Stuart or me. Your photo is there, but your voice is also there. A person sees it, presses the button and there is Bess Price in Warlpiri saying, ‘We need 60 or 70 blokes, or women, from this region to work on this mine’. How fantastic is that? It is all done in language and it is a product born and bred in the Northern Territory. It preserves the language and it gives Aboriginal people an opportunity to listen to it and say, ‘I am interested in that job. I have a grader driver’s ticket, a truck driver’s ticket. I will see the bloke who works there.’ They then put their name down.
Those are the incentives we should use. We have to look at the great opportunities. With policy we develop so many opportunities, but we also have to look at the products and mechanisms to make things easier for people who have communication barriers. It is a fantastic way for government to interact, not just with the mining industry, but with a born and bred Territory product. We are working together to ensure all Territorians understand there is a mine there that might need 60 blokes. ‘Do you have a truck driver’s licence, a grader driver’s licence, a backhoe or bobcat licence? Would you like to work underground? Would you like to work above ground? Would you like to be a receptionist? Would you like to be the caterer? Would you like to be the cook? Would you like to be the cleaner?’ There are so many different opportunities and we have to take them all. This is a suggestion for my colleague, and I believe he will be listening: we have to make life easier for people.
We have to look at employment opportunities for Indigenous people. The socioeconomic indicators tell us in this parliament. They are 36% of the Territory population and we are not doing well in that area. We can utilise the materials Sprout and Anya are producing. There are talking boards you can use in education, health, and the mining industry. You can use them for anything. It is a little board which goes up at the shop, clinic or school and you press the button and have Tiwi, Luritja, Arrernte, Warlpiri, Pitjantjatjara, Alyawarra, even Greek, Italian or French.
There are great opportunities and we have to look at all of them because we have to get Indigenous people engaged in employment opportunities. We have set the road map and foundations to encourage industries such as the mining industry and welcome them to the Northern Territory, to be operational in the Northern Territory, to have a working friendship, and the Territory is open for business.
I thank the minister for his statement.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing a statement on mining to the House. It is obvious this statement has avoided the political advisors upstairs and not been politically manipulated; it is a basic chronology of events. The member for Casuarina, the previous minister, was able to highlight the correct chronology which shows the previous government having a clear strategic plan and processes to develop what is an extremely important industry in the Northern Territory.
It comes down to giving credit where credit is due. We know those on the opposite side have great difficulty in the simple value exercise of giving credit where credit is due. However, let us concentrate on the statement and avoid the one politicised comment from the minister about the opposition having no idea.
The member for Casuarina, the previous minister, over many years walked me, as a new member of this House, the member for Barkly, through the development of the Western Desert Resources project, step by step by step. He showed me the building blocks of what is now shaping up to be a major mining project for the Northern Territory in the Barkly region which will deliver those aspirational goals the member for Namatjira spoke about.
It is good to have it chronologically. It is good to hear the history from the previous minister, and interesting to watch the new minister with carriage of this important work. Quoting from the minister’s statement at page 3:
- The future success and growth of the mining and energy and exploration industry in the Northern Territory is largely dependent on this government’s support of these industry sectors.
What an enlightening paragraph that is. Let us see if he gives more detail:
- Therefore, it is incumbent on this government to remove obstacles which impede the success and growth of mining, energy and exploration. It is incumbent on this government to put in place initiatives that make good economic and regulatory sense for big business to do business in the Northern Territory.
That seems to be the flavour of this statement – reducing obstacles, the favourite CLP clich of cutting red tape. However, minister, let me draw you back to the challenges and reality of getting exploration projects, mining projects, energy resource projects out of the ground. If you want a really good example of that, research the Ichthys project, the INPEX project, and how the previous Territory Labor government put those foundation stones in place and set that course to build with big business – global giants in the energy sector – to deliver that project for the Northern Territory. Ask yourself, minister, what the fundamental building blocks are based on in a global context. It is a politically stable country, a great resource sector, very good relations with the Indigenous traditional owners, and being able to consult widely and work with the community to deliver a project on a global scale such as INPEX.
That is the whole story. You do not need to concentrate on removing obstacles as much as you need to understand the job of building the project and supplying the supporting enabling infrastructure. That is part and parcel of the deal. If a government cuts the infrastructure budget they are already putting themselves at a disadvantage in encouraging the mining sector, the mining giants, the energy giants of the globe, and they really have to play catch-up to restore that confidence.
When I talk about enabling supporting infrastructure, you should go to the example of Middle Arm, Jenkins Road, the Arnhem Highway, and the East Arm port. You will see pragmatic examples of how those building blocks, that supporting infrastructure, were put in place step by step over successive budgets to secure the INPEX project. When you talk about those individually, you are also talking about good planning and forward thinking.
I continue to bring into debate in this House that the previous government supplied the headworks infrastructure to Middle Arm in roads, power and water to support what is the biggest oil and gas project we have seen in northern Australia, but also had the good planning outcome of providing access to residential development. Yet, I continually have put to me, ‘No, we are going across to Glyde Point. We will have residential on Gunn Point and our big industry on Glyde.’ Whatever!
This statement gives me some hope when it mentions capacity to develop four new LNG trains at Middle Arm. I will reinforce every chance I have the opportunities with the headworks infrastructure for land release in the city of Weddell. There are so many benefits and efficiencies that could be presented to a Cabinet with a very strong argument to biting the bullet and going there.
It is an especially important statement for me as member for Barkly, because the Barkly features in this statement. The Barkly would take at least 70% to 80% of the opportunities presented in the statement. When we talk about that as an area in the Territory, the government has to focus on the supporting and enabling infrastructure into that region to encourage and support the explorers that will eventually deliver the projects. Once again, the road map I see is the Territory budget, and we have seen that same mentality: a pull back, a hold back, no major infrastructure in the pipeline to support the Barkly region, only rhetoric.
Contractors in Tennant Creek and the Barkly are raising alarm bells and talking strongly about how work has finished and there is no new work on the horizon. There are two ways to think about that: the business community, and setting up the enabling and supporting infrastructure for projects that will deliver Barkly, once again, as the breadbasket of minerals throughout the Northern Territory.
We cannot get away from ports and rail in supporting infrastructure in the macro sense, and the minister neglects to talk about either in this mining statement. I thought there might be some talk about the Tiwi port, and working with Genesee & Wyoming in the necessary passing loops on the rail to support these new projects coming online in the Roper gulf area of the Barkly. Alas, there is nothing. Perhaps that is for another time, but we should see that investment working hand-in-hand with big business to deliver that infrastructure in successive budgets. If it is neglected, you are stifling mining and business rather than promoting it, as the minister is so keen on.
Quoting from page 5 of the minister’s statement:
- In order to properly plan our mining future and create a genuine and profitable partnership for industry, we need a stronger agenda within which to progress.
One proposal currently under consideration by the Department of Mines and Energy is the implementation of a priority zone system for minerals and energy development in the Northern Territory.
I applaud that, minister; that is a great strategy. You have two zones identified but the first zone is the Barkly, there is no doubt about it. For those who are not familiar with that area of the Northern Territory, there is potential for gold and copper, manganese, phosphate, for tailings of previous major mines, iron ore, silver lead and zinc, ilmenite as a new project, and oil and gas. These commodities, these minerals and energy resources, are there for development but will need supporting infrastructure to encourage the exploration phase, support the explorers, and support the developing project out of the ground.
An example is that main road transport infrastructure projects are needed on the Carpentaria Highway, the Savannah Way, the Roper Highway and the Bing Bong Road. That area is reflected in Budget 2013-14 with simple maintenance and what normally occurs on an annual basis in road transport infrastructure. However, there are some capital works, being the Little Fletcher Creek on the Savannah Way. I had planned a big culvert river crossing. That aside, quite a number of projects were stripped out of the Barkly but there is money for the Little Fletcher Creek crossing. I applaud that, and thank you very much. We will take whatever we can. When we talk about this statement, mining, and the macroeconomics this government is crowing to support, we need major infrastructure projects.
The recent test sample from Sherwin Iron, the 200 000 tonnes on the Roper Highway, highlighted the challenges of that road infrastructure – the safety and delivery of the product. There is one example. Some of the major road transport links need to be looked at.
I encourage the minister to start working with the minister for regional development to get your heads around how budget appropriations will be put forward and examined by Cabinet in partnership with the miners and explorers, as we have seen with the Western Desert project.
Minister, I acknowledge the priority zone system, but do not forget the Georgina Basin in southeast Barkly. You will find some very good results there in exploration for oil and alternative gas.
We move on through the statement. There are a number of paragraphs I will not quote, but I have highlighted them for my knowledge and for anyone in the Barkly who is interested when I translate this information through the electorate. It talks about the geological survey team and the work in relation to the major gravity surveys in the McArthur Basin around Borroloola, Daly Waters and the Roper River. I congratulate the minister and the department on that important work which will provide the extra support and geological mapping to assist explorers in their endeavour to find new resources but, more importantly, to get a gauge on the size and value of those resources.
There is some talk about amendments to the Mining Management Act to enhance effectiveness and secure necessary revenue in tackling the Northern Territory’s significant legacy mining liabilities. Let us face it, that was the CLP’s mining tax. The well-versed and experienced member for Casuarina, the former minister, highlighted to the new minister how that possibly was a retrograde step in policy coming from the CLP and could have been done much better.
In regard to the minister’s rsum as a liberal, he should have the two dot points that are Mt Todd and Redbank mine. As the member for Casuarina rightly pointed out, we have to learn by our mistakes.
I acknowledge that the members for Brennan and Katherine visited Redbank mine and spoke to stakeholders and constituents of the Barkly about the legacy issues of Redbank. Unfortunately, I was not able to be there; a Toyota can only travel so far in 24 hours and I do not have access to an aeroplane. However, I keep pace with what is going on. I continually advise constituents, and I put to the minister that one of the best ways to address the Redbank issue – the tailings, the leakage and the acid sulphate contamination in Redbank Creek and the threat to Settlement Creek – is to get the mine up and running again.
That is the best way because if we have operators on site and know there is exploration going on – they are very confident of another hit in a rich copper deposit. Not only will it create jobs and opportunities, it will also have a working operation with infrastructure capacity onsite to start dealing with the tailings and rehabilitation work. It will provide efficiencies in dipping into the bucket of the CLP mining tax to support rehabilitation of the project. I would be arguing for that in Cabinet, and be pushing hard to get support wherever possible so the mine could be up and running again and the contamination and rehabilitation issues could be addressed.
Having said that – back to supporting infrastructure – Calvert Road and the Tablelands Highway were being looked at closely in the last plan to re-open Redbank mine. They are major road transport infrastructure networks and will need a lot of work. A government needs to be planning for that because if the Calvert Road and the Tablelands Highway link to the Stuart Highway, or the Barkly Highway is upgraded, you will not only see Redbank take a close look at it, you will also see other projects in the area interested in the road transport link, possibly even some projects in north western Queensland.
One of my concerns in this statement relates to one very short paragraph. On page 15 it says:
- The department is participating in the Commonwealth review of the 2007 amendments to the Aboriginal Land Rights Act to improve access to land.
That is all it says. There are pages and pages of this, but only one tiny paragraph on land rights and native title. It gives us a hint, but no facts and no content. It lets the imagination run wild. I wonder how regional members of the CLP in the seats of Namatjira, Stuart, Arnhem and Arafura are discussing this paragraph. I wonder what questions they are asking about this plan. Does this involve Tony Abbott’s new Indigenous Advisory Council? Does this involve Warren Mundine’s new theory? Will it put Warren Mundine against Noel Pearson, the champion of native title and Aboriginal land rights? Where do these regional Liberal members sit? What questions are they asking? I would like to know, because my constituents would like to know.
The previous Labor government can cite many examples of good consultation. The INPEX project would have to be one of the biggest, most contemporary in working together with Indigenous traditional owners around delivering big business and opportunities. I wonder where the minister is going with this. That tiny paragraph in the statement poses far more questions than it answers.
Moving through the statement, there is a paragraph saying the new potential for gas and LNG across the Northern Territory is bright and I …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request an extension of time for the member to complete his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr McCARTHY: Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Fannie Bay.
Minister, I had great faith in Paul Henderson, the previous Chief Minister, and the member for Karama, as Treasurer and Deputy Leader, in their lobbying for the next big LNG project. As Woodside is sitting out there making decisions, literally, possibly, floating around in the Timor Sea, the ball is in your court. Let us see how good you are. Let us not have the rhetoric, the vindictive political slaps and the jibe, let us see how good you are because you have put your money where your mouth is. Labor delivered the biggest; set them up next door as a neighbour. Let us see them come to the Territory because, as you say, the environment is right. Let us see what you can do. There is some homework from the opposition.
The statement talks about Australia Ilmenite Resources. That is a new product on the market out of the Territory, as the minister says. It is in a development phase and, once again, represents a regional area of the Barkly electorate that will provide jobs, opportunities, prosperity, and in the enabling infrastructure, presents great challenges. Let us see it reflected in the road map of a good government, and that is budgets and budget appropriations, good planning, good announcements, community consultation and working with traditional owners. Australia Ilmenite is another great project, but it will need investment into the Roper Highway and a decision on whether it is rail transported to East Arm port and those necessary passing loops. We all know how their supply and demand model works. More customers coming online will supply more profits for the companies, who will be keener to talk to government about investments such as passing loops on the north/south rail to deliver increased returns.
Minister, it is great you remind us the project is in its development phase, but what is your government doing about supporting it and ensuring it gets its product out to market and can make money to employ people?
It is good to see the $360m phase 3 expansion of McArthur River Mine in the statement. It is a great project and I encourage everyone to look at it. I also remember the member for Casuarina, the previous minister, walking me through the challenges with McArthur River Mine, which the previous Labor government stayed on top of. It is great to be a local member and see all the work Xstrata has done to correct those issues. They did the study, the planning, and then delivered the infrastructure. When you drive past the tailings stands now you can see the significant increase in height, the wall thickness, and the engineering technology to ensure the tailings dam is doing its job to maximum efficiency for the future of the mine. That is a good announcement.
The member for Namatjira spoke about employment and training for Indigenous people. It was good to hear that; it is so important. The Education department has some real projects running at McArthur River. The minister for Mines and Energy and the Minister for Education should be aware of the incredible partnership funded by the McArthur River mine trust. Students from Borroloola school are doing work placements at the mine, doing training and education on-site at the school, and are dressed in full personal protection equipment with a bus to take them between the two sites in the real world of industry for real world experience. It certainly delivers in behaviour management and support, and also reflects growing your workforce from the ground up.
Forget the Centrelink office, member for Namatjira. You should be putting your energy into these projects. It is reflected with OM Holdings manganese at Bootu Creek which decided, after many years of challenging employment and training programs trying to achieve what they have offered Tennant Creek – they want 30% of their workforce to come from Tennant Creek.
Two years ago, they changed their whole dynamic and marched into the Tennant Creek High School and have now set up formal programs to grow their workforce through the high school. The first apprentice, a female Aboriginal student from Tennant Creek High School, has been employed by OM Holdings manganese at Bootu Creek as a construction apprenticeship. It is a celebration of our town and our region and we want to see more of it.
Minister, the statement completely ignores that aspect of mining in the Northern Territory and the opportunities it presents for regional and remote communities. There are two small examples of that and how you need to get on board.
The Minister for Education can take the Hansard back to Cabinet and fight his way through those immoral cuts to Education based on these obscure reports being dragged out to fuel a politician who has no idea about education and probably has not been anywhere near educational methodology, management, or administration since attending school. That is the risk with politicians; they get big ideas and have to justify their policies. In this area it is cut, cut, cut.
Take those examples and talk about the damage that can be done at Borroloola School or Tennant Creek High School if those cuts are reflected in staff being pulled out of those areas and students are denied the opportunity for support and mentoring into big industry.
I am not all about turning Aboriginal kids into miners or construction workers, but if you get them into real world industry, into big dirty and dangerous occupations, it takes the sting out of behaviour management. It gets them on track, focused, and in a conversation in the crib room with important tradespeople, skilled people who then broaden their world view.
That is why the previous Chief Minister of the Northern Territory, Hon Paul Henderson, took up my mantra of, ‘I want Barkly kids working with the best boilermakers in the world on the INPEX project’. These examples are ways to get there. The cuts to Education are risking that, and every member on the other side should be talking about it. We were hearing jibes today about who is the opposition education spokesperson. You heard this morning that everybody is, and we are speaking on behalf of parents, students and teachers. Get used to it because it is not going away.
Going through the statement, there are some interesting paragraphs on the Roper Bar iron ore project, the Western Desert Resources area and the opportunities that present with the project life. What a great project Sherwin Iron is shaping up to be. However, it presents great challenges with the 200 000 tonne test sample for smelting and the enormous challenges it places on the Roper and Stuart Highways when running those quads. I chose to drive among those quads a few times to test things out, and it will be serious if Sherwin choose that as the model to export their product. The Minister for Mines and Energy needs to be talking about supporting and enabling infrastructure to provide community safety and to deliver Sherwin Iron’s product for the Territory to share the prosperity and deliver jobs for our kids and future generations.
To conclude, the statement reflects a great opportunity for the Northern Territory. I thank the minister for bringing it to the House and hope he takes note of the NT opposition, which presents as well-referenced and well-researched with experience as a previous government. Of course, in the positive light of serving all Territorians, minister, I look forward to you expanding on all the areas the member for Casuarina and I have touched on.
Ms LEE (Arnhem): Madam Speaker, in response to the statement on mining made by the Minister for Mines and Energy, I wish to make the following statement.
Under the Country Liberals government’s Framing the Future, a strategic framework for government leading to the creation of a prosperous economy for the Northern Territory, Aboriginal land under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 and Aboriginal interest in pastoral landholding under the Native Title Act 1993 needs urgent attention. The opposition is talking about the little things this government can do. Why was the opposition – Labor – when in power not lobbying their federal counterparts about making amendments to those acts? They sit here still biting their nails. It will never be changed. Nothing will happen until we lobby our federal counterparts to make the changes because that is where it happens, not here in the Northern Territory. It will go in one ear and out the other the more we talk because what changes will we make?
Education is the key to getting into jobs but not everybody wants a career in mining. One of my brothers-in-law is a boilermaker. He left school in Year 10. By the time he was 18 he was a boilermaker. He did not go from school into the mining industry. He decided after some time. He signed up and did it on his own two feet. He did not need anybody to lead or direct him. These kids need the opportunity to find their career on their own. They do not need to be told by their teacher where they should be going with their future. It is their decision to make. It is like us. No one told us where to go. We had to explore everything out there in the world and find our own way, where we wanted to be, what we liked, and what we were passionate about. We need to give the same opportunities to the kids.
You are talking about the little things and not looking at the bigger picture. If you are so passionate about Aboriginal employment and economic development – are you really fighting for Aboriginal people? I cannot see that. You are not lobbying down south to make any difference. You go along with what your federal counterparts throw at you.
Mr McCarthy: I have a letter for Tony Abbott. Do you have his personal number?
Ms LEE: Yes, I do. I can give it to you later.
Mr McCarthy: I will give him a call.
Ms LEE: Put simply, there is too much red tape around mining and exploring on these lands. Land councils require too much process. These matters need fundamental issues to be dealt with by the new Commonwealth government under the new Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, and the new Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs minister, our NT senator, Nigel Scullion.
We need more direct involvement by traditional Aboriginal landowners – a seat at the table regarding all exploration and mining activities on their land. Also, more involvement by the NT government with landowners, both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal; that is in regard to pastoralists.
These changes will enable people in the Northern Territory to be engaged with the processes of mining, thus making them a central part of our government’s goal in planning our economic future.
This is the direction we should be heading in. Even the former NLC CEOs can tell you this. They have been lobbying and fighting for that for years. However, we are still here biting our nails, fighting over the little stuff when we should be looking at where the big changes will occur. Are we the ticketholders of Aboriginal people and their fate? This House obviously drives that for people out there. The reason you are in opposition is because you were trying to drive their fate a little too far.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, we welcome the statement on mining. There is no doubt that in government, as we heard from our shadow minister, Labor had a very proud and strong record of supporting exploration, supporting new projects to get off the ground and, at the same time, having an eye on the market and where we were placed in it, not just short-term wins, but mid- to long-term stability and an ongoing contribution to the wellbeing of the Territory.
My colleagues have spoken about the importance of mining to regional economic development and how there can be real and strong partnerships between the schools and the mining companies. You heard the member for Barkly give examples in his electorate. We have also seen the good work done by ERA in Jabiru, Rio Tinto, Pacific Aluminium and Alcan over the years in their employment and training programs. There are real benefits and very strong links between the schools and the training programs, and the employment and mentor programs.
To have a debate in the House today where the government saw education as a means of cost-cutting rather than looking at the genuine support and outcomes they need for students across the Territory, irrespective of where they live, shows how bereft they are of understanding the responsibility they have.
The work of our government focused on achieving the best outcomes for Territorians regardless of where they lived. That meant we had to build new infrastructure. We worked collaboratively with all key stakeholders to grow regional economies to deliver significant new jobs across the bush and to ensure the services supporting those regional hubs were ones you could expect to see wherever you live in our nation.
All this was during a decade of very strong growth in regional infrastructure and services and very strong growth in jobs. I know that does not suit the shallow rhetoric of the existing government. They do not want to let facts stand in the way of their fancy but, the reality is, through a series of independent reports we saw these facts and figures come to light.
It is also true that a feature of our economy is volatility within the royalty figures in the Territory budget, which are influenced by international trade and commodity prices given the bulk of our resources are sold in USD. We have seen an industry try to have an eye on long-term contracts to maximise the value of our commodities to the Territory and buffer our economy as best we can from those market fluctuations which, ultimately, the Territory government has no control over. Under a Territory Labor government watch, our gross state product largely was built on the back of these big resource projects and we were placed the third highest in the nation.
Interestingly, in this ministerial statement the CLP, as is its form, claims credit for many of the mining and resource projects coming to fruition in the Territory which, in reality, were under way on our watch. The CLP is laying claim to that work because it has nothing to lay claim to other than taking a wrecking ball to services across the Territory and the reputation of the Territory on an issue of sovereign risk, which I will speak about a little later. I have no doubt our member for Nhulunbuy will touch on that as well.
Mining is our largest Territory industry in GSP. It accounted for about 19.8% of our GSP in 2011-12 compared to 9.7% nationally. You can see how critical it is to the Territory. Economic commentators increasingly put the Northern Territory into the basket of resources states they refer to. That took a decade of hard work to achieve. You heard the shadow minister for Mines refer to the analysis of where we stood in mining jurisdictions globally, and how far we have dropped since the CLP came to power.
While a major contributor to our economy, mining creates 3.4% of resident Territory jobs. We see construction, including mining-related construction work, accounting for 10% of resident jobs. Construction is our third-largest employer.
Back in 2011-12, our mineral production was valued at $2.3bn increasing to $2.4bn in 2012-13 with new projects coming on board. Some of our major mines have increased production. We have manganese at Groote Eylandt with production forecast to rise by 3.4% to $1.2bn in 2013-14; lead production increasing at McArthur River following its phase 3 expansion; bauxite production is forecast to increase from $245m to $269m in 2012-13, up nearly 10%; gold production is continuing at the Granites and our Top End gold mines, and we have heard members talk about the potential of Vista Gold and the work occurring in the re-establishment of gold mining at Mt Todd.
In relation to emerging projects, it is fitting we are debating the mining statement today as Sherwin Iron ships off to China – the$180m Sherwin Roper River mine project producing iron ore anticipated at about five million tonnes per annum. In the same region is Western Desert Resources – the Roper Bar project – expected to produce about ten million tonnes per annum. There are further rare earth garnet sands and new phosphate reserves that are real and present in the potential to be realised as exploration through to production.
The value of our Territory energy and minerals production has been forecast to increase by over 15% to $7.6bn in 2013-14. We have substantial energy resources and are poised to see even more energy resources proven with active exploration of gas fields both on and offshore, including those unconventional gas sources.
The current budget forecasts the value of our energy production to increase from $3.6bn in 2011-12 to $4.2bn in 2012-13. If you look at the exploration prospects happening in the regions such as McArthur Basin and Beetaloo Basin, we are placed extremely well in resources opportunities.
Talking to ENI about their Penguin Deep reserve sitting alongside Blacktip, there is a prospective short-to medium-term potential gas replacement for NT power supplies or feeding into the all-important supply of gas to Nhulunbuy. We have seen the development of Bayu-Undan, and seen both Kitan and Montara projects fire up.
Whilst in this statement the CLP is trying to claim credit for the early work, apart from the very original support for the Mereenie gas production, it was the Labor government that worked tirelessly across a decade to deliver these all-important resources projects. That being said, I mention the two big ones which put the Top End and Darwin on the map well and truly: LNG through ConocoPhillips, and the INPEX Total Ichthys project. That project, of course, is the second-largest major project in the nation and the largest ever foreign investment by both Japan and France.
We were tuned into, through that decade, the industry and its needs, both onshore and offshore. We did so by creating an environment of stability in leadership across ministers and across agencies. What a stark contrast in just a year! We have had a rotation of Chief Ministers, with the damage done to the Territory’s reputation by the betrayal of the former Chief Minister while he was on a trade mission to Japan. We are still feeling the repercussions of that and will for quite some time. Much work has to be done on those relationships as a result of the impetuous, foolish, and ridiculous behaviour of the member for Braitling who could not wait another day for the member for Blain to return.
We have seen restructuring, new structures, rebadging and renaming of so many government agencies that, quite frankly, people are scratching their heads in wonder and questioning what you have to do to see some stability and certainty return to the Northern Territory.
I am pleased to see it is slowly dawning on some ministers that the big infrastructure project, the Marine Supply Base, is a critical game changer in our positioning in the oil and gas industry. How ironic to finally hear the CLP lauding the Marine Supply Base when its very own cadres, its paid-jobs-for-the-mates Renewal Management Board we have yet to see any final report from – that mysterious final report no one can see even though the taxpayer paid $1m for it – in its interim report questioned the viability of the Marine Supply Base. They could not have got it more wrong if they tried.
Yes, we thank the CLP for riding on the back of our work. We see that in a burst of construction activity in 2013-14 through to 2014-15 which will fuel our GSP. In 2016-17, we will see the beginning of that all-important phase of production of gas out of the Ichthys project. We will see it shift from a construction-fuelled boost to GSP to the export of gas products.
The challenge, as my colleague, the Deputy Opposition Leader has said, is where is the big project? We have heard much talk from the current Chief Minister, but we have not heard or seen much action. Where are the major projects he is landing for the Territory? You have heard in debate from this side the prospect of Woodside. They have announced FLNG and, curiously, we have not heard much since from the current Chief Minister.
The challenge, as always in pursuing these highly prospective fields and opportunities, is to get the balance right and ensure you provide the local infrastructure required. Also, that you sign up to the local industry participation plans to deliver on local jobs and ensure you get the community benefit trust signed off, as we have seen and as referred to, particularly in McArthur River and what happened there.
However, what you hear from the relevant minister is silence on the crucial area of local benefits to the community, which is a shame. He has some high-level rhetoric and no detail behind it. Literally, where is the local industry participation plan? Where are the reports on local industry participation coming out of these big production and construction projects? There is silence, but this government shrouds itself in secrecy.
They do not attempt to show any level of open accountability and transparency as they committed to in their five-point election plan. The moment they got in that was torn up, gone, a broken promise.
Going to the announcement that Power and Water have signed up to 15 PJ of gas coming out of the Magellan Dingo field, you have to ask how much that cost the taxpayer with this so-called – if you believe the Treasurer – cash-strapped, financially dire Power and Water Corporation? How much did that gas deal of 15 PJ for 10 years with the potential of 30 PJ cost the taxpayer? Silence. You are not advised. That is unbelievable. On one hand you say we have to split Power and Water into different government owned corporations because it is in such dire financial circumstances and, at the same time, a 15 PJ for 10 years gas deal is done and there is no accountability to the taxpayer on how many millions of dollars that cost. Are you for real?
This is an extraordinary situation of a government shrouded in secrecy and the taxpayer having every right to know because, at the end of the day, they are footing the bill through the increased tariffs the CLP hit consumers with. They are also footing the bill with the community service obligation payments to Power and Water. Yet, we have no right to know how much it cost the taxpayer to purchase those 15 PJ of gas.
As I said, where there are opportunities there also needs to be balance as the public has a right to know. The public right is to know what these deals and investments are costing the taxpayer –but silence from the government.
They also need to know what will occur to our natural resources, for example, water. They also need to know who will foot the bill for the investment required to meet the local infrastructure, particularly, in that all-important Roper region.
What is happening with water use on the Roper River associated with mining activity? How many gigalitres are being drawn down for that activity and how much is proposed to be used going forward? There is significant concern over the Mataranka water allocation which has put increased stress on the Roper River, which adds to a genuine concern as to what the water allocations will be for mines setting up in that region.
Look at the Yugul Mangi Development Aboriginal Corporation. The traditional owners have welcomed the employment and training opportunities provided by the mine, but they want to ensure the physical and cultural environment are not damaged by mining activity. They are working with Western Desert Resources to ensure their traditional environment is protected.
Lorella Springs Station has voiced concerns about the impact of the mine on its wilderness-based tourism venture which depends on the environment remaining intact. The Yugul Mangi Development Aboriginal Corporation has also expressed concern about the impact of the Australian Ilmenite Resources mine which is extracting large volumes of water from the Roper River.
At Groote Eylandt and Maningrida local people are concerned about the impact of oil and gas exploration on sea beds and cultural sites, as well as pristine marine environments. Closer to home, Darwin people and people living in the rural area are concerned about potential gas for exploration in the area of the Howard East aquifer.
We are fully supportive of development, but you need to get the balance right and be very sure of your social, cultural and environmental requirements. People need to have the Roper area on alert because of the water allocation licences granted to Tina MacFarlane by the CLP. That was a dodgy deal for a mate that has come at the same time water extraction is occurring to support mines along the Roper. There are huge impacts on that river and real concerns. Much more explanation is needed from the government about what it is doing with the water management plan for the area.
We have seen hundreds of landowners concerned about exploration access, the potential impact of exploration activity, and any eventual use of fracking in their regions on rural ground water supplies. That is why this government’s parliamentary inquiry into energy supplies was supported by the opposition. It is a chance for a cautious and thorough look at practices, potential yields, impacts, and understanding what a genuine process could do.
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request the member be given an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LAWRIE: In this debate, we also know our local fishermen are concerned about exploration. They are concerned about rumours of dredging that could occur across the river systems of the Territory. It is about consultation and sharing information with key stakeholders, ensuring we have valuable information and knowledge and the right decisions are made to ensure economic development and that all-important balance to the social, environmental and cultural needs of the Territory.
When the government says – and we hear them say it often – they are committed to reducing red tape and green tape, we need to ensure appropriate controls and safeguards to protect the interest of all Territorians are in place to ensure the wise use of our resources.
I am also concerned there are hints in this ministerial statement of finding ways to take shortcuts with land access approvals, particularly those required under the ALRA.
We have heard the member for Arnhem call for a change to the way native title exists. Increasingly, I am concerned the government is, perhaps, rushing headlong into an agenda of breaking up land councils. If that is your view, if you have decided to lobby the federal government to break up the land councils of the Northern Territory, then do so with an informative paper. Do so having fully informed Northern Territory residents of what supports the view you hold to break up land councils and exactly how that will occur in a process sense. How many land councils do you have in mind? Which traditional owner groups do they represent? What process will be in place for the certainty the resources sector would need in pursuing its projects? If you listen to the corporates and where they sit in their work with the land councils they see a system that, whilst you can always improve, is yielding real results for the companies exploring and taking to production mines in the Northern Territory.
If you propose, as we heard from the member for Arnhem today and have seen glimpses and hints from the Chief Minister – it will be interesting to see his response – to change the processes of the land councils, to change the existing processes for local traditional owners who are working well with the resources companies, then do so in a way where you are fully informing the public who elected you. Fully inform the traditional owners across the regions and the residents of our urban centres, rather than have a shroud of secrecy and backroom deals and discussions between mates. That would not be in the interests of the resources companies seeking to explore and bring massive investment to the Northern Territory and mines to production. If you are genuine in wanting to make a change, you will need to present a case for change and the detail around what is being proposed.
There is an opportunity for the Chief Minister to contribute to this debate and provide us with his views around the position of land councils.
There is mention of a change to mining tenement renewal processes and that the government is consulting with industry on those changes. What about the other affected parties: landowners, native title holders and pastoralists? What consultation is occurring there? We need to ensure the government, elected by the people, genuinely talks to the people, consults with local Territorians and meets its commitment to be open and accountable. You need to ensure our taxpayers are not further burdened with the cost of unforeseen legacy and mine clean-up issues. Sadly, of course, the current evidence is what they say and what they do are two entirely different things when it comes to the CLP. We need this government to have an eye to that, as well as short term wins, to keep the Territory’s interest front and centre in all its dealings on the allocation of exploration and mining on oil and gas tenements.
I am concerned about the behaviour of the current Chief Minister in dealing with multinationals. This is particularly evidenced by the way he reneged on the gas to Gove offer then reneged again, changing the parameters of the offer from 195 to 175 PJ. This has shown that major multinationals cannot trust this government. Their word cannot be trusted, they shift the parameters, and that bodes badly for the Northern Territory in the issue of sovereign risk. I have had to put this on the parliamentary agenda in debate and discussion in previous debates, and I raise it again. Stop changing the playing field for our multinationals; you increase sovereign risk. They cannot believe the rate of change that occurs in ministerial portfolio reshuffles, they scratch their heads in wonder at the rate of change in shuffling CEOs and agencies. Of course, they cannot get over the fact you betrayed your own Chief Minister when he was on a trade mission to Japan.
This chaos and dysfunction has done the Territory no good. The sovereign risk has increased, and some investors are starting to become extremely nervous about the prospects of the Northern Territory, despite such a strong, vibrant and dynamic economy left to you when Labor lost in August last year.
There was a bizarre Question Time display today by the Chief Minister when he spoke about the federal election result. Wake up and listen to the people who voted. If a poll had been held in the Territory that day you would be in opposition; you would have lost five seats. Goodbye Sanderson, Arnhem, Arafura, Namatjira and Stuart. You are in all sorts of strife, yet you bury your head in the sand and pretend otherwise.
This statement is a pretence. You pretend the production identified in this statement is your work; it is not. All this work was done prior to you gaining government, and you have missed opportunities that have come along since then. Sharpen up what you should be doing. Stop stripping resources out of vital frontline services such as education, and start, for a moment, to listen to people who are experts in the field, which you would do if you bothered to consult with people before you take rash actions.
Thank you for bringing the mining statement forward. We genuinely have a keen interest in seeing the resources sector grow in the Northern Territory.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I cannot let some of the comments from the Leader of the Opposition go. Territorians look for rational debate. One could be forgiven for thinking the lights went out in August last year and the ‘closed for business’ sign was hung out if you listen to the Leader of the Opposition and members opposite. Of course, that could not be further from the truth.
I acknowledge good things were done by the former Labor government in development of resources in the Northern Territory. I, amongst others, have, in opposition and government, congratulated Clare Martin and Paul Henderson for their work in securing the INPEX deal. I can imagine the frustration of Territorians when they then claim ConocoPhillips as one of theirs. ConocoPhillips was in the final stages of being nailed down by the Burke government, and prior to that the Stone government, for its development of the Bayu-Undan field and pipeline to Darwin and ConocoPhillips’ installation across the harbour when government was lost.
I said prior to the last Territory election there is a predisposition of the government of the day – I counsel my Cabinet colleagues on this – to look at the big projects and think that automatically gains fulsome support from the voting public. Prior to the 2001 election which the CLP lost, there was a lot of focus of the then Burke government, and prior to that Stone government, on the ConocoPhillips deal and the Bayu-Undan gas development, and so there should have been because it was an important project for the Northern Territory, but the government of the day still managed to lose the election.
Curiously, the parallel with INPEX is notable. The government of the day, and the Henderson government in particular, made much of the INPEX deal and still managed to lose government at the 2012 election. The message for legislators and members of this House could not be clearer: whilst we understand the importance of these projects, particularly for the global environment of the Northern Territory economy as a whole, it does not automatically follow that the mum and dad voters agree with us for a number of reasons. There are lifestyle implications for a major project of this nature, and lifestyle has been an issue for the Northern Territory for decades. I have lived here since the late 1960s, and enjoying the lifestyle of the Northern Territory has been very important. At an emotional level – the basis of many people’s votes – the lifestyle changes brought about by these major projects we know are necessary engender a negative emotional response amongst many voters.
Whilst we understand the jobs that roll out of it, people in voter land may not necessarily agree with us. What we do as a government to address issues people have can be deduced from that.
If I ever leave politics I am considering writing a book called ‘Political Maxims that Matter’. Chapter 1 of that book would be ‘All Politics is Local’. Members who work their seats diligently in the Northern Territory and other jurisdictions in Australia have, traditionally, been rewarded by the voting public. Members who care about local issues, the same issues their electorate cares about, are generally rewarded for listening and being engaged.
What I take away from the lessons learned by both the Burke and Henderson governments is that whilst we might be focused on the major projects, I, for one, will never lose sight of the local things that matter to voters on an everyday basis. If you like, it is issues that remain in the troposphere when much of these major projects, for many who live in the troposphere, appears to occur in the stratosphere.
This mining statement, whilst very important, must be seen in the greater political environment of the Northern Territory. We, as a government, must be mindful of the implications major mining projects have for the communities we serve.
Having made that observation, I have, since the late 1960s, seen fundamental changes in the Northern Territory. Much of it has been done on the back of major mining projects such as Rum Jungle, development of the bauxite mine at Nhulunbuy, and the mines which exist on Groote Eylandt. Those mines developed for many years and during the late 1960s and early 1970s were important and developed with the support of local people because they provided jobs. However, as people have become increasingly removed from mining in direct employment, the importance of mining in many punters’ minds has diminished.
The mining industry is something we, as legislators, have to see in context. Having said that, the mining industry remains vitally important and the ‘open for business’ sign remains. I acknowledge the efforts made by the former Labor government, but I refute the assertion they were responsible for Bayu-Undan. That is arrant nonsense. They signed the paperwork after the change of government in 2001, and they did not miraculously do all of the negotiations, preliminary work, environmental impact studies and God knows what else prior to 2001. That all started in the Shane Stone period.
Whatever you think of Shane Stone, as Chief Minister he did not lack audacity in the way he pursued the interests of the Territory. I suspect a person with the electoral support of less than an alderman on the Beijing Town Council getting to see the Premier of China to promote Northern Territory interests demonstrates a level of self-confidence which has not been seen in the Northern Territory since.
Perhaps Clare Martin’s pursuit of the INPEX project demonstrated …
Ms Lawrie: Make him a business ambassador.
Mr ELFERINK: I am throwing a few compliments your way. You can relax a bit, Delia.
With Clare Martin’s pursuit of INPEX we saw something similar, and I fully expect the current Chief Minister will pursue similar projects.
We talk about mining, but we should also talk about energy. We do not tend to separate out the two, but it is about time we did because mining is one thing, and energy is another thing entirely. It would be nice to see an environment where we could value-add our mining product which goes out as raw material – iron ore, bauxite or whatever else – onshore. A good example of that is the refinery at Nhulunbuy which produces aluminium in its ingot state …
Ms Walker: Alumina.
Mr ELFERINK: I thought it was aluminium. Alumina. It ships out an improved product and we should look at value-adding. I encourage Rio Tinto to look closely at what is on offer at the moment. From Rio Tinto’s perspective the question will be: will it stack up economically? If the bottom line turns black in the projections for Rio Tinto, I suspect they will sign up. If it does not, unfortunately it will not be a good result for the people of Nhulunbuy, and I hope that does not happen. I am sure all members of this House would feel that way. Having made that observation, Rio Tinto lost some $13.5bn last financial year, of which $11bn was in aluminium production. For some time it has been looking at how to deal with aluminium.
Today we have Sherwin Iron. A media release has gone out saying Sherwin Iron – I have to declare an interest because I believe my personal superannuation fund has shares in Sherwin Iron, which I am happy to see on behalf of the fund and the people of the Northern Territory. However, it would be great if we could develop an onshore energy market which would see us not exporting iron ore but steel. That would be a much better result. I also hope development of the energy market in the Northern Territory would see us developing other forms of manufacturing. Of course, one cannot help but note the presence of Andrew Liveris in Darwin in recent times. Whilst you do not read too much into that …
Ms Lawrie: Of course!
Mr ELFERINK: I will not put words into the mouth of Dow Chemical, but it is nice to see the chairman of that company visit the Northern Territory. If it was not Dow Chemical, then I encourage the Chief Minister – he is working hard on this – to find other ways of bringing value-add products onshore using the relatively cheap energy we have access to and will increasingly have access to over time. This raises the issue of conventional and non-conventional gas, but the volumes the minister referred to in his ministerial statement are extraordinary. If we can bring that to the surface quickly, we are in the same position several Middle Eastern countries were in the post-World War II period. As the world’s reserves reach a peak and it becomes more expensive to extract oil from more remote and deeper places in the world, the gas option is looking better all the time. I would never assert that gas is clean and green, but it is cleaner and greener than other petrochemicals so it places us in a good position to argue in support of developing the gas potential of the Northern Territory for environmental and other reasons.
It is almost inevitable gas will come onshore under good management of a good government, which the Giles government is. I expect that to happen sooner rather than later, and that will give the Territory options. We will see changes in the Northern Territory unparalleled in Australia’s history.
It is not inconceivable that within my lifetime a city like Darwin could have a population of one million people. For that, we need future governments to plan, and this government is planning. The insightfulness of the Mills government in getting the Planning Commission up and running, whilst quietly introduced, will see future Territorians very grateful. The Planning Commission will design Darwin for not only tomorrow but 10, 50 and 100 years’ time.
There has been a lack of overall planning, particularly by the former Labor government. The previous CLP government created land use objectives documents, which were very good plans, particularly for Alice Springs and Darwin. However, they were discontinued by the former Labor government which allowed it to decay into an approval system. This is fine, except there is no sense of planning; you get an approval process for various projects which may not complement each other.
The adherence to and faith the former government had in Weddell does not reflect an important fact about the cost of fuel prices into the future. To have another Palmerston, on the other side of Palmerston, the same distance Palmerston is from Darwin, invites the building of very large roads, Tiger Brennan Drive being an example. They cost hundreds of millions of dollars to construct, and people will have to buy fuel at ever-increasing prices to travel those distances. The current Leader of the Opposition, the former Planning minister several years ago, signalled densification but never followed through with it.
I remember attending a Real Estate Institute lunch four or five years ago when the then Planning minister announced a densification policy to all and sundry, but never followed through on it. The former Henderson government, prior to the election, offered up some words on the subject, but the policy was never rolled out. It is now a matter which this government must turn its attention to. The challenges this government faces in ensuring sufficient accommodation means it has to turn its mind to that issue sooner rather than later.
These are all consequences of an important active and growing mining industry. It highlights, for me, as a member of government, the absence of another element in our economy: a substantial manufacturing industry. Bringing gas onshore as cheap energy will, I hope, become a way to attract companies to the Northern Territory to take advantage of our raw product and turn it into another material onshore before we export it or use it for domestic consumption. That would be the final component to taking all our eggs out of one economic basket and spreading the wealth, therefore enabling the Territory to finally throw off the shackles of the boom/bust cycle it has had for as long as I can recall. If we were able to create a large manufacturing industry, I would be comforted for the future of Territorians as a whole.
Nevertheless I thank the minister for his useful statement which sets a path and makes clear some important issues in the direction of this government. I am grateful the minister brought it before the House.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I would also like to thank the minister for bringing forth this statement on mining. It is very appropriate today, as the minister well knows, with the first loading of a sample shipment of iron ore for Sherwin Iron from the Roper region. That was a fairly impressive farewell, and when referring to the traditional owners the minister said, ‘Some of your land is being shipped over to China for the development of steel’. I had not looked at it that way; part of their country being dug up, with their approval, and taken to China. I asked one of the traditional owners if it would be nice – perhaps the minister could take this up – if the Chinese foundry could send a sample of the iron produced from that iron ore back. It would be symbolic of what has happened today.
Of course, that is one phase of mining. There is always a lot of talk about the benefits of mining to Indigenous people. To prove if that is the case, we need to look 20 or 30 years down the track. Much is said in the mining industry about benefits for Aboriginal people. There is no doubt in some cases there are. If ever a mine put an effort into helping Indigenous people it was ERA at Jabiru. They employ between 80 and 90 Indigenous people. Part of the royalties from the mine has built the boarding school at Jabiru, and there has been a very close relationship between the mining company and traditional owners.
I thank Rob Atkinson, CEO of ERA, for the last four or five years. Rob showed the way it should be done when it comes to mining. He treated Aboriginal people as equal partners and had a real concern about ensuring when ERA finished its work it would do as little damage to the environment as possible. Nothing could show that more than the brine tank distillation plant recently installed there. What other mine has decided it will clean up its tailings dams by producing water that is so pure it cannot be released into the environment until it is put back into a wetland where it can pick up the minerals and salts required and then released into the environment?
Show me another mine in the Northern Territory which has made that much effort, even when running at a loss, which ERA has done for a number of years. Also, its relationship with its workers, with the town of Jabiru, and its willingness – I personally thank Rob. I am a small drop in the bucket when it comes to these issues; I am no big player in the mining industry. Rob Atkinson would come to my office every year to give me an update of where ERA was, where things were good, where things were bad, how many Indigenous people were employed, the issue with tailings dams and the effect on the environment, especially as this mine is surrounded by the Kakadu National Park. Many other mines in the Northern Territory need to take what ERA has done and try to replicate it, because a number of mines throughout the Northern Territory have left a legacy of damage to the environment. I will not go into that. The minister has already heard from me in the last sittings about leakings from tailings dams and Redbank.
There are other mines, and one day I hope to get to some of those mines where I believe there is environmental damage. It is good to hear the government has, at least, set up a fund. We would not need that fund if we did things the right way the first time. There is no doubt in a tropical climate with high rainfall our biggest concern is the tailings dam. Mt Todd is a continuing problem. More research needs to be done into managing that area of mining which continues to be a problem.
It is all very well to say mining is great, but mining has some issues. If we are to call mining a sustainable industry, we should not require the taxpayer to pick up the bill when they have gone, nor for the environment to be damaged permanently. They are the two key issues if you want to prove sustainability of mining in the Northern Territory.
There are issues such as roads. I have travelled the Roper Highway and seen the work Sherwin Iron is doing maintaining the dirt section. They say they will put in extra passing lanes. Mining, in general in the Northern Territory, uses our roads and they come in for a pounding. Mining or trucking companies might say, ‘We pay our taxes to the federal government’. Not all that money comes back into roads.
Look at roads in my electorate. Recently I was standing on Gunn Point Road watching triple after triple coming out of the extractive mining area of Howard Springs. That does not take into account the trucks with rock coming from north of the Wallaby Holtze area. There are trucks coming out from Mt Bundy along the Arnhem Highway, travelling down the Stuart Highway, along Jenkins Road, and there are trucks coming from south of Jenkins Road as well. They do an enormous amount of damage to our roads and that is a cost to the community.
When we talk about sustainability, we want to ensure mining can stand on its own feet and not require the taxpayer to pick up the bill to allow those industries to make profits – not all, some industries struggle. We have to be careful when industries start that they can pay their way, otherwise we are kidding ourselves. In the case of extractive mining, there needs to be a more accurate cost of what it is to extract gravel and sand from our environment.
Extractive mining has been occurring in the rural area for many years. I raised this issue with previous governments, both Labor and CLP, when I was president of the council. If you flew over the rural area you would see numerous gravel piles and sandpits. My concern is in the rush to get so much of the material out because of the growth of Darwin, is there adequate rehabilitation of the area? In the past, we know it was not done very well. In the distant past, it did not occur at all. You can see that by the piles of gravel and old materials dumped. The bush should be tidied up and the topsoil replaced, but that has not occurred in some places. There are requirements of the extractive mining industry to strip the good soil from the top with the seeds and seedlings in it and, when they have finished their gravel pits, they are to bring that back with the hope it will revegetate. That is not easy because when you dig a hole below the surface you create a dam. You get into the acid soils, and in many cases it does not rehabilitate very well and grows weeds.
The government needs to look at the Howard Springs/Humpty Doo area, even Middle Arm, and conduct an audit of the extractive mining areas to see which ones have been left without rehabilitation and what areas are being mined and need to be rehabilitated.
We have also moved into a new phase, even though this has been operative in Central Australia for 30 years, of fracking. Its proper term is the non-conventional fracturing of rock to produce shale gas. I have no problem with producing gas from fracking but the government, if it does not want to be left behind in this debate, needs to be on the front foot. No doubt there are people who have concerns about fracking. Some of those concerns are legitimate, and some are that we are producing more greenhouse gas emissions from another form of fossil fuel: shale gas. We can argue whether we should be producing more gas and, therefore, more greenhouse omissions, but we can also argue whether fracking itself is a problem.
I was listening to a program on fracking of shale on the BBC on Saturday night. It is being debated in the United Kingdom and, as one scientist said, fracking is not really the problem; what happens afterwards can be the issue. I will give you an example. When fracking occurs, sometimes the concerns are about contamination of ground water. If the regulations are properly enforced that should not happen because of the encasement of the pipes that go into the ground to stop water mixing with the shale gas being brought up. That is one issue, the other is sometimes there can be leakages. If methane is leaked, the idea of producing gas with fewer emissions than coal can fall away because methane is a greenhouse gas. You have to ensure there are no leakages in the system when it is brought up from the base or when it is transported.
The issue raised in the BBC radio report was that it is all very well, but do we have enough people on the ground to ensure all regulations are enforced. I will cite a case in the United Kingdom. The company drilling, when asked if there was a government person to ensure all been done, said ‘No, all we do is fill out the form’ and the government said that was okay. They quoted another case where that had happened.
The government has said it will be tightening directions regarding fracking, and I hope we ensure we have qualified staff to ensure those directions are carried out. My concern is if the government is not on the front foot in relation to this – I know the minister spoke about the enormous quantity of potential gas underground in the Northern Territory.
I have a document from the CSIRO which talks about the Georgina Basin, the Beetaloo sub-basin and the McArthur Basin, all of which have huge potential. However, we have to bring the community with us if there are concerns about contamination, the chemicals used in the process, even earthquakes. Some small earthquakes caused by fracking occurred in the United Kingdom and the government had a moratorium to find the cause. They found if there was not too much pressure during the process, earthquakes did not occur. If the government wants to be on the front foot it should ensure people know what fracking is. It has the potential to produce amazing amounts of energy for the Northern Territory.
At the moment there is a debate in the United Kingdom which is relevant to us. If we produce shale gas, which is a relatively cheap form of gas, will there be electricity benefits to the Northern Territory? Probably not, because we are locked into, I presume, another 25 years – depending on what Gove uses from that supply – a contracted price for gas from ENI.
Whether we get direct benefits from the exploration and use of that gas, I am unsure. In communities which rely on diesel, there may be options for that gas to be used to reduce the cost of producing electricity. I am interested in what the government has to say about its potential for Territorians, not just for export.
In relation to what is happening at the moment, I visited the ilmenite mine several months ago. It is really no more than extractive mining. It only digs between 1 m and 2 m of topsoil, puts it through a centrifugal separator and brings out ilmenite. That is in its early stages, as we know. The first shipments will go to China, and it will be sent to other countries as well. My concern, and the minister might touch on this when summing up, is they told me they get their water from the McArthur River. I asked about restrictions on pumping the water and was told when it reaches a certain level they cannot pump it and the mine cannot operate. What effect will some of the new water licences in the Mataranka area have on the ilmenite mine, especially if the water drops too low? I do not know the relationship between the Department of Land Resource Management, which issues water licences, and the Department of Mines and Energy, which approves water licences for mines. I do not know if they work these things out together. However, it would be a shame if there were not some discussions about taking too much water from one area which would affect another industry. I do not know if that has happened.
An issue arose when I watched Sherwin Iron load their iron ore onto a ship to China. When I asked if this could be railed, I was told it was too expensive. Has the government done anything to encourage more of these materials to be moved by rail so there are fewer trucks on the road? That is one of the advantages of rail, and I bet if Tim Fischer was here he would give many reasons why rail is better than transporting materials like bulk iron ore by road.
The minister has given an upmarket statement on mining, and that is good. We have to ensure people in the Northern Territory receive long-lasting benefits. Aboriginal people not only want jobs, they need to show their children that by getting a good education they can not only be truck drivers, mow the lawns, plant trees and those things – nothing wrong with that – they may move into managing a mine, learn about geology, and learn about mining so they get more hands-on benefit from the mines in the area, not just from royalties and jobs at the lower end of the scale. That will prove whether mining in the Northern Territory is of benefit to people on the land they own.
I wonder if there is uranium near Alice Springs. I remember the debate in parliament about Angela Pamela and know the government has spoken about the importance of mining in the southern part of the Territory. Angela Pamela is still there, if there is uranium in the area. I do not oppose mining uranium as long as it is done properly. There was a lot of debate from members of the government, when in opposition, from the Alice Springs area, and those who were not, during the last sittings in Alice Springs.
Mining is important. We need to ensure it is done correctly, that the people of the Northern Territory, especially with mines on land they own, benefit in the long-term and that the key word in developing mining in the Northern Territory is ‘sustainable’. It should not be supported by the taxpayer and should not cause permanent damage to the environment. If it can avoid those things and help the people of the Northern Territory enjoy a better future it will be good for everyone. If it does not go down that path it will be a legacy we will pay for a long way into the future.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing this statement before the House. It is good to hear of the many things the new CLP government is building upon and planning to deliver, many of which are projects started under the former Labor government which the new government now claims ownership of. The Marine Supply Base, which I seem to recall being lampooned under our government, and an outstanding achievement, within your statement is ‘our’ Marine Supply Base.
Both the minister and Chief Minister will not be surprised to learn my interest in contributing to this debate is based on the current crisis facing Gove and the mining operation there, the wider community, not just in the township but in the region, and the crisis the community faces because of the sheer incompetence of the CLP government.
I note acknowledgement of CLP support of the industry in developing world-class deposits in places like Gove, a development which had nothing to do with the CLP – not even an entity at the time – but everything to do with the federal government given the start-up was pre self-government.
Not only does the Territory still benefit from major projects established over 20 years ago as the minister’s statement says, in the case of Gove it says it was a project established more than 40 years ago. The minister is dead keen when he wants to develop jobs, develop regional centres, develop infrastructure, but what about supporting existing players in the industry? What about supporting a region opened in the late 1960s?
It is with some umbrage that I respond to this statement and note the one-liner addressing the urgent need to provide gas to Gove. Obviously, that degree of urgency sits very high on the agenda for people who live in that region.
Gove’s contribution to the Territory through mining is phenomenal, from the original owners of the Gove joint venture under its manager Nabalco, followed by Alcan, who came along in 2000, and in 2008, Rio Tinto. They built not just a mine and a refinery, but a port, a power generation facility, and an entire town. There are schools, a hospital, shopping centre, police station, post office, court house, town hall, Olympic-size swimming pool, roads, an airport, and hundreds of houses and units to accommodate the people who lived there and not only worked for the mining company, but supported their operations. In the early days when the town was built other facilities popped up like the Arnhem Club, the pub, the Walkabout Lodge, tennis courts, a golf course, squash clubs, churches, a surf club, and many other facilities that make it much like any other small country town.
No other player in the industry comes close to the contribution the original Gove joint venture has made to the Northern Territory. Yet, all of this seems to be at risk. At the time, it was the second biggest construction project in the history of the nation, second only to the Snowy Mountains Scheme in New South Wales. The cumulative contribution to the nation’s GDP through exports, taxes, jobs, both directly and indirectly, and royalties must surely, over 40 years, run into billions and billions of dollars. The growth of a regional hub, which has seen Nhulunbuy grow as a service centre – a hub for the public and private sector across the region of northeast Arnhem Land.
The successive mine owners have been good corporate citizens. They have been big employers and providers of training and apprenticeships for Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. They have been sponsors of local organisations and events, and major corporate sponsors of all manner of organisations, including those such as Landcare and the Territory’s own AFL team, Territory Thunder. The benefits are not just for the small mining town of Nhulunbuy and the region’s surrounding communities like Yirrkala and Gapuwiyak and the associated homelands, but are also there for the Territory and, indeed, the nation.
I have lived there for more than 20 years. I was employed by the company in a community relations role for more than a decade. I am pretty familiar with how they work and how successful they have been. I remember a time I was working there when the manager for community affairs said, ‘We have to stop entering into the Northern Territory’s export awards because we win every year. It is about time we pulled out of the field to allow other companies in the industry to step up.’
Today, the Gove operations continue to make an enormous contribution. I look at what Pacific Aluminium contributes, which is more than $500m to the Northern Territory’s gross regional product annually, and indirectly and directly employs thousands of people. On-site there are around 800 to 900 employees and probably around 300 contractors. You then have that flow-on effect of indirect employment. The company bought, last year, $170m of goods and services with 89 local and Territory businesses being beneficiaries of that. In the last five years they have delivered $76m in royalties directly to the Northern Territory government.
With the proposal for gas to Gove, which would involve the conversion of the steam power station from heavy fuel oil to a gas energy source, there is also the construction of a 600 km to 700 km pipeline to convey that gas along the Central Arnhem Road into Nhulunbuy. That in itself is a project worth some $1.2bn, not to mention – should it proceed, and we hope it does – hundreds of people being employed during the construction of that gas pipeline.
We recognise as well that Rio Tinto’s investment in this area and its huge desire and need to convert to gas effectively will double the size of the gas market, drive further investment in gas exploration, increase the long-term gas supply and the opportunities for other businesses and create jobs in the Territory.
On that level, it sounds like a win; sadly, it is not. The big difference for Pacific Aluminium is it has been running at a considerable loss for several years. There is a number of reasons for that, but it started to turn pear-shaped in 2008 when the global financial crisis struck. It is well-known the investment in the G3 expansion project did not deliver the benefits they hoped. There were issues around investment in some of the engineering components which did not deliver what was expected at the time they were commissioned. Of course, competition from cheaper producers makes it all incredibly difficult, as well as the changing market conditions and the high Australian dollar, which is down slightly at the moment.
They need to convert the steam power station, which is run on heavy fuel oil, to a cheaper energy source. Gas is critical. Keep in mind this power station fires up the whole of the Gove peninsular, the township, the surrounding communities such as Yirrkala, Gunyangara, and Barraratjpi. There is no other generator of power there, so we are entirely reliant upon that power station.
Gas to Gove is not a new plan. I will make it very clear, as I have been in the past. Rio Tinto and its subsidiary, Pacific Aluminium, have a big role to play in this; hindsight is a wonderful thing. They had the opportunity on a couple of occasions to convert to gas, having signed MOUs with suppliers previously, including ENI from the Blacktip field as well as a potential supplier in PNG. They did not take a long-term view, opted out of those gas deals, and invested the capital in projects like G3. In many ways, the writing was on the wall.
The other benefits of converting to gas, apart from the fact it is cheaper, are the environmental benefits and the reduction of emissions from the steam power station stacks. From an environmental perspective, a safer fuel to handle opposed to the massive shipments of heavy fuel oil which arrive in the pristine harbour of Melville Bay in Gove which come from Kuwait every six weeks or so. Coming from the Middle East, there is always exposure to the volatile political situation which has long been a threat to the continuity of provision of fuel and power.
The Chief Minister of the previous Labor government, Paul Henderson, was in negotiations with Rio Tinto, or Pacific Aluminium, the subsidiary created as they endeavoured to divest the package of unprofitable sites in Rio Tinto around the Pacific Aluminium region, which included Australia and New Zealand. It also included Tasmania and operations on the New South Wales coast. Certainly, the former Chief Minister had proceeded with dealings. A gas task force was formed and negotiations were occurring.
With the change of government last August, Pacific Aluminium commenced dealings with the new CLP government, and it was not long after the election that the seriousness of the situation and the dire need to convert to gas become more apparent. Rio Tinto upped the ante in speaking publicly for the first time about the fact that without the availability of gas the company would have to consider the worst case scenario: the option to suspend its refining operations, be it partial or otherwise.
This was one of the biggest issues the new CLP Chief Minister, now former Chief Minister, the member for Blain, had to deal with upon taking on the leadership role. That is what happens when you are the head of state of a government; you have many issues to deal with. The negotiations, the process around getting gas to Gove from the change of government through to February when the deal was struck, were well documented in both the Territory and national media because this has and continues to be an issue of national interest. The views of members on both sides on trying to resolve the gas to Gove issue have been well documented on the floor of this House.
On 11 February a deal was struck and announced for the on-selling of 300 PJ of gas from Blacktip. Gas had been contracted to the Northern Territory government. When Chief Minister Mills made this announcement it was welcomed by everybody. I recall members on the opposite side of the House singing the praises of Chief Minister Mills for securing this deal, and what a great deal it was. At home it was very welcome news. It provided, for the first time in almost a year, certainty for people who lived there. I am not just talking about mining company employees; I am talking about people who own businesses there and traditional owners. Mining company employees – as much as people love living there and the demographic of the place shows it is families with young children who opt to move there because it is a wonderful place to work and raise a family – many of those families would have options to move on to other places.
For local businesses there is nowhere to go. If they cannot sell their business they are stuck there. Traditional owners, by virtue of who they are, where they live and their connection to country which is inextricably theirs, are also not going anywhere. On news of the announcement in February that 300 PJ of gas would be made available, not given away at taxpayers’ expense as some people believe, a commercial deal was struck to on-sell gas to Rio Tinto to convert the power station and ensure its long-term future, and people made decisions.
People refinanced their business. Other people turned down jobs and decided to stay in Nhulunbuy. Rio Tinto, as owner of the mining operations, invested heavily on the strength of that news to progress its plans to get gas to Gove. Its figure is in the vicinity of $20m a month to progress the conversion of the steam power station, to progress negotiations, the EIS, and how a gas pipeline might look. Of course, the Commonwealth government was involved in committing to underwrite the construction of the gas pipeline. It was always the case that gas needed to be secured before there could be any commitment to underwrite the gas pipeline. Many people and companies made decisions to invest on the strength of securing gas. Everything was looking good then things started to change.
First, we had the coup led by the member for Braitling on 13 March when the Chief Minister was on a trade mission to Japan, working to secure further relationships and investment in the Territory with key overseas players. In Gove, we had no reason to think plans around gas would be any different until a bombshell was dropped on Friday 26 July, Darwin Show Day. When the fact it was a public holiday was raised with the Chief Minister when he slipped out to Gove last week, he said it was only a public holiday in Darwin. However, it was a public holiday in Nhulunbuy as well. When the news arrived most people missed it. Being a public holiday, people were doing other things on a fine July day. I almost missed the news with my phone on silent, enjoying some time with my family, only to find when I glanced at my phone about an hour-and-a-half after the announcement I had umpteen text messages and voicemails from people wanting to talk about what on earth was going on.
When that bombshell was dropped we discovered there was not 300 PJ of gas available, but 195, and the offer was a dual fuel option, gas and heavy fuel, which had been explored by Rio Tinto during the review it undertook between October and January 2013. Obviously they had looked at all the options and discounted that one. Nobody could understand why the offer had changed from 300 PJ to 195 PJ. As the Leader of the Opposition said in her contribution, the message the Chief Minister sent to the corporate world was to be very careful. Do not trust the Northern Territory government, they are small fry and not accustomed to dealing with the corporate world. They will tell you one thing, do another, and you cannot trust them. The sign about the Territory being open for business had been taken down.
The current relationship between the Northern Territory government and Rio Tinto is not positive. It is quite a hostile relationship, the hostility coming more from the Northern Territory government with some of the remarks, comments and media releases the Chief Minister continues to make. It has not been a positive relationship with the people who live in northeast Arnhem Land and are reliant on the long-term future and viability of the mining and processing operations there.
Essentially we are looking at the worst case scenario. The figures are stated in the government’s report, and should the worst case scenario eventuate and refinery operations are curtailed, the population of the township will drop from 4000 to 1500 people. In the report the social and economic impacts are described as significant. Interestingly and disappointingly, there has been no social and economic impact study on what it would mean. Our poor old Chamber of Commerce and local businesses have, once again last week, been asked to complete another survey on what the impacts would mean for them if the refinery was to curtail its operations …
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request an extension of time for the member for Nhulunbuy to complete her remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Ms WALKER: Imagine the population of a community that size dropping from 4000 to 1500. It is significant and will gut the community. The reduction in government services would be obvious. It is probably helpful for the Education minister as he would lose quite a few teachers. There would be a reduction in health services, but what does it mean for local businesses? Apart from the fact they will struggle to sell their businesses, their customer base will drop. Economic opportunities just about disappear, employment and training opportunities are drastically reduced, and most at risk is the future of traditional owners.
I remember the day the rally was held in Nhulunbuy in January, calling on Chief Minister Mills to release the gas – on-sell the gas and make a decision – an open letter was placed in the Northern Territory News by the Chairman of the NLC, Wali Wunungmurra,appealing to the Chief Minister to make this deal and recognise:
- Your election as Chief Minister last year was historic. You came to high office with the support of the city, the towns and the regions, and with the support of both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people.
Gas to Gove is an opportunity to fulfil the promise of your electoral victory, and to deliver an outcome which benefits all Territorians and brings people together as one.
That was a fantastic letter prepared by the Chairman of the NLC and, thankfully, the news was good on that day.
The news is not good today, the news was not good last week, and the news is not looking great for tomorrow either. If there was any glimpse on the horizon we received a visit from the new federal Minister for Industry, Ian Macfarlane, who came to Nhulunbuy on Monday 30 September. He gave a couple of days’ notice he was arriving. I was pleased to receive an invitation to the meeting, but the extent of it was only one business person per business, which was a shame in a venue the size of our town hall which can seat up to 250 people. I reckon that is how many seats were put out but, sadly, there were only 60 or so people because there had been a few wraps put around that meeting. I wonder if that was because the Chief Minister came to the meeting, not that he announced it, and his name was not on the invitation. There were rumours he was coming so people could only surmise, because he had avoided the community for so long and had avoided and not responded to any community request to attend a meeting. It must have been at the Chief Minister’s request that the meeting have tight reigns around it and police present in the event of a lynch mob or protest.
The federal minister arrived with the Chief Minister in tow to a very orderly and anxious group of people who were keen to hear what was going on. It was a very interesting meeting. Minister Macfarlane basically led the meeting. We were surprised to hear he had flown all the way from Amberley RAAF Base that morning because he wanted to break the news to Nhulunbuy that 300 PJ of gas was available. He said this announcement was so significant he had asked the Chief Minister to change his itinerary to ensure he could be there so the Chief Minister chartered an aircraft. He wanted the community to hear that announcement first, which is why the Chief Minister got a briefing in the 10-minute drive from Gove Airport to the town hall.
We thought it was strange the Chief Minister did not know about this given it is his gas, or ‘Adam’s gas’ as minister Macfarlane called it. We were also a little struck that the federal minister, as he reminded us, had only been in government for two weeks and, in that time, had been able to achieve what the Chief Minister had not been able to in the time he reneged on the deal in July.
The news was welcomed with some caution because we did not know where the gas was coming from. We do not know when it will be there, and at what price. Of course, the news was very new that day and, whilst two of Rio Tinto’s people were present, they were in no position to comment on it. Rio Tinto has always said it will enter into negotiations, but the fuel needs to be at the right price. That is the $64 question, I guess: what is the right price on this gas the federal minister has found. He flew all the way to Gove to tell us something the Chief Minister was not able to.
People had a few questions to ask, but there were also comments. People took the opportunity to let the Chief Minister know how unhappy they were with his performance, and still could not understand why he had reneged on the original gas deal. The asked whether he knew how much he had hurt people and if he understand how hard it was to sell a business or a house in Gove. Comment was also made that perhaps one of the reasons there were empty seats was (a) a number of business people are just over it, and (b) many business people have had to let staff go, therefore, are running their own businesses and do not have time to attend meetings.
Mr Deputy Speaker, that describes where we are today. Life in Gove still hangs in the balance, but it is not just about the people who live in northeast Arnhem Land. The impact and ramifications of the curtailment of operations in Gove will spread across the Territory and nationally. It will hurt businesses in Darwin. I have met with the Chief Executive Officer of the Chamber of Commerce in Darwin to appeal to him and the Chamber to stick up for businesses in Gove and to recognise that should operations be curtailed, the impacts will pass on to businesses in Darwin.
Yes, the mining industry is important in the Northern Territory. I am thrilled the mining minister has managed to fly all over the world and all around the Territory. I believe he has only made one visit to Nhulunbuy. It is starting to become obvious to those of us who live there, not just in Nhulunbuy, but Yirrkala and Gunyangara, that not too many ministers make their way to Nhulunbuy ...
Mr Elferink: I have been there three times.
Ms WALKER: I acknowledge the Attorney-General has been there a few times and is doing good stuff in the Corrections area. We have seen the turnover in portfolios. Today I asked the Education minister to come out. All he can say is, ‘In good time’. It is not just me who asks this, I represent the people who live there who ask, ‘Where are the ministers, we do not hear from them?’
It is perhaps an overused phrase and rhetoric about whose court the ball is in. Rio admits the ball is in their court, but I say the ball sits with the Northern Territory government. They have a role to facilitate and do all they can to broker a deal. That does not include being openly hostile towards one of the biggest corporates in the world, nor the local community, but being open, transparent, accountable and prepared to talk and communicate with people. What a shame it would be, under the watch of the CLP government, to see one of the longest serving mining companies downscale its operations dramatically, and with it, the downscaling of a very important regional hub.
I once again ask the government to work cooperatively and proactively with the stakeholders. That includes the people who live and work there because they have a lot to lose. Thank you.
Debate adjourned.
TABLED PAPERS
Travel Reports from Members for Blain, Johnston, Arnhem and Casuarina
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I table seven travel reports from the members for Blain, Johnston, Arnhem and Casuarina pursuant to clauses 4.1 and 4.12 of Remuneration Tribunal Determination 1 of 2012.
MATTER OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
Teacher Numbers and Education Cuts
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, Madam Speaker has received the following letter from the member for Fannie Bay. It reads:
- Dear Madam Speaker
I propose for discussion this day the following definite matter of public importance, the impact on the teachers and students across the Northern Territory from the CLPs cuts to teachers and education.
The letter is signed by the member for Fannie Bay.
Honourable members, is the discussion supported? The proposal is supported.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank my colleagues for their support. We all consider education in the Northern Territory to be a definite matter of public importance, and teachers, parents and students would agree. It does not get much more important than the future of our children. The CLP has made the decision to have fewer teachers in our classrooms. The CLP’s education and teacher cuts will result in two things: creative classrooms in urban areas and empty classrooms in the bush. In our cities and towns, with fewer teachers classes will be crowded. In the bush, where we have a serious problem with attendance, a teacher’s job often involves converting enrolment into attendance. Fewer teachers in the bush will mean empty classrooms. This is not a good result for our teachers or our parents, and it is definitely not a good result for our students.
Not only do these cuts set back the education of our students now, but they set back the future of the Northern Territory. In understanding the impact of the cuts the CLP is making, we need to understand what the CLP outlined it would do for education before the election. I want to start by reading quite a few statements from official CLP policy documents. I will read them in order and assess how they are tracking.
Let us start with a quote from the public letter from Terry Mills:
- If you are on the front line of police, education or health, regardless of how much you earn, your job is safe, I GUARANTEE IT.
From the CLP’s education policy:
- As well as being the backbone of our education system, it is impossible to overstate the role of teachers in shaping the development of students as they step out of the classroom into the workplace.
Again from the CLP’s education policy:
- The high proportion of teachers on temporary contracts in our schools only contributes to the poor rates of retention. Upon completion of an appropriate probation process, the Country Liberals will offer teachers secure conditions of employment over the long term and recruit experienced educators to work in senior roles as classroom mentors providing support, guidance and direction to improve the skills of our teachers. We will introduce a standardised regime of term testing for all year levels to give teachers the tools to accurately assess a student’s level of achievement.
- We will train and employ more local teachers.
From the public service policy:
- The Country Liberals give two firm commitments to Territorians. We will do absolutely everything possible to ensure Territory families can walk the streets safely at night no matter where they are, and ensure priority is given to resourcing frontline services, like police, teachers, nurses and health workers.
It is obvious these firm commitments from the CLP are some of their biggest failings. None of these election policy commitments have happened. In fact, while it is very easy to find promises they have broken, it is extremely difficult to find promises they have kept.
In short, before the last election Terry Mills described teachers as the backbone of education, promised them secure employment, more assistance, support, and more resources in the classroom. Now, Adam Giles as Chief Minister, is cutting teacher numbers and removing support programs from our schools. Despite having ripped up every promise they made to teachers, the Chief Minister accuses them of protesting his cuts simply because they are unionists and on a political agenda. This completely dismisses and minimises their concerns, and the concerns of students and parents, all of whom are worried about the nature of these cuts.
Teachers have been treated appallingly by this government. We have heard the Minister for Education, our third Education minister in 14 months, call them lazy. I know he regrets those comments, but he made them and teachers remember them.
Of all the education cuts, the ones to teacher numbers are the most damaging. The CLP have openly admitted they are cutting 127 teachers from our middle and senior schools. Our middle schools went backwards in NAPLAN this year, down in seven out of 10 areas based on last year, and the CLP response is to cut teacher numbers.
It is madness and fails the logic test. The minister’s justification is that because results are down we need to do things differently. Having fewer teachers in our schools is, quite frankly, insane. It would be like the Melbourne Demons football club starting next year with 16 players instead of 18 because they did not win many games this year. It does not make sense; it does not stack up.
Minister, I want you to understand that not a single person in the Northern Territory believes cutting teacher numbers will improve education. Not a single person believes the key to improving our education standards in the Northern Territory – bringing them in line with the rest of the nation – starts with fewer teachers. Not a single person believes their child will receive individual attention in the classroom from their teacher with fewer teachers. The CLP’s logic does not make sense. ‘Education results are poor so let us employ fewer teachers.’ Absurd logic.
It would be like cutting police on the beat because violence on Mitchell Street has not decreased. It would be like cutting doctors and nurses because the emergency room is under pressure. It is ridiculous logic, but it is the logic the CLP is implementing in our schools. We could go on. If you cannot get a taxi from the airport at midnight, how about having fewer taxis? If you have poor service at a restaurant, why not cut back on waiters? It does not make sense that the approach to fixing education in the Northern Territory starts with fewer teachers. They are all ridiculous examples, but nothing will have a worse impact on the future of the Northern Territory than the decision to cut teacher numbers.
Earlier today, the Chief Minister said there was no research to show smaller classrooms led to better education outcomes. I invite him to type ‘class sizes’ into Google. It will not take long, and he can sit back for hours and read all the research clearly showing the link between smaller class sizes and better outcomes. He can find research all the way from Darwin to the White House supporting that class sizes affect education. I am very happy to quote from Barack Obama, Investing in our Future: Returning Teachers to the Classroom August 2012: .
- So, it should concern everyone that right now – all across America – tens of thousands of teachers are getting laid off … Think about what that means for our country. When there are fewer teachers in our schools, class sizes start climbing up. Our students start falling behind. And our economy takes a hit.
It sums it up. It is obvious to parents, teachers, principals and students that if you cut teacher numbers it will impact on education. You do not need to be President of the United States to realise it. Parents and teachers in the Northern Territory understand this. The cuts to teacher numbers will see crowded classrooms in our urban areas and less individual attention for students, but it is possible the impact in the bush will be even worse because it will lead to empty classrooms.
The biggest problem in the bush has always been getting students into the classroom. Teachers have a critical role in working with parents and the community to get students to classes. When you cut back on the number of teachers at a bush school, the biggest impact occurs. Unfortunately, we will see empty classrooms in our bush schools. Consider the desperate needs we have in the Territory, and what fuels a large part of our poor education results is getting kids to school regularly, especially in the bush, yet the CLP’s decision has been to put fewer teachers into the bush.
There are bush schools now with only one teacher. How can a teacher be in the classroom while at the same time trying to track down kids who do not turn up? It will not happen. They have to be there to work with the parents in the community. That is the relationship. Healthy schools have a functioning relationship with the local community. That is how you get kids into classrooms. When you cut back on teachers there will be a serious impact on the number of kids that rock up to the classroom.
It will have a huge impact. Some of the bush schools might have three, four, five, six teacher positions at that school, but on the ground they might only have one or two because you cannot always get teachers to bush schools. There will now be fewer teachers.
The CLP would have you believe the cuts to middle and senior schools are about providing more teachers in the early years. Why cut middle and senior school teachers to put extra teachers into primary schools? They have different training. A senior school teacher requires a different qualification than a teacher in a primary school. It is like saying we need to cut road engineers to put on primary school teachers. Because you are teaching Grade 12 does not mean you can teach primary school. Different qualifications are involved and that person might not want to teach primary school.
There is a reason people teach high school. There is a reason for being in a classroom full of bright young kids at that end of their schooling. You might not want to be in a classroom with Grade 1. That might not be your vocation.
Importantly, there is no revolution happening in our early years, despite the CLP rhetoric. From the documents the minister gave us, in my electorate Parap Primary School, despite its enrolment and attendance numbers increasing, has two less teachers after the first year of the CLP government. There are examples across the Northern Territory. My colleagues, when speaking to this, will talk to those examples. There is no revolution in early childhood or in our primary schools. It is a furphy. We are losing teachers from the system and will not have the sudden massive impact in our early school years. There will not be a sudden revolution in early childhood years to drive massive education changes in the Northern Territory.
Instead, we see a massive impact to our senior and middle schools. Darwin High is losing five teachers a year, every year, for up to four years, maybe five years. That is over 20 teachers. These massive cuts will have huge impacts on outcomes for our students. Despite the CLP rhetoric, there will not be a sudden early childhood revolution.
Talking to redeployment, many of the best teachers in our primary schools are losing their jobs at the end of this year. I go back to the CLP promise that contract teachers will be offered permanent positions. We have contract teachers in our primary schools. There was no fine print on the letter I was just looking at which said, ‘I guarantee your job if you are a frontline worker earning under $110 000’. I did not see the fine print, but apparently there was some saying, ‘Your job is guaranteed unless you are sacked’. I could not read it. Apparently, your job is guaranteed unless they decide not to renew your contract.
There are teachers in our schools right now who will not have their contracts renewed. They will not be available to teach in schools next year despite the fact they want to. It is very simple. If a teacher has a job in a school this year and is not offered one next year, they have lost their job. They had a job teaching kids and they no longer have that job.
The minister’s ludicrous suggestion that if a contract runs out you have not really lost your job is ridiculous and offensive. There are teachers who want to work next year but will not have their contracts renewed. Some of the best teachers in our schools are on contracts; they are young, bright and keen. We have examples of people receiving scholarships to become teachers and in their first year in a school are told they will not have a job next year. They are young, bright graduates teaching in classrooms. They have a job, and next year, because the CLP has made a decision to cut teacher numbers, they will not have a job.
We may lose our young teachers for good. They will find a job elsewhere in Australia, will teach kids in that community, and will become part of that community. They will no longer be in the Northern Territory contributing to our kids’ education.
Some of the best teachers are older. Some terrific teachers in our classrooms have been there for decades and continue to make a wonderful contribution to our education system. However, some teachers made a career choice or a life choice to move out of the classroom into support roles. Many teachers choose to move into a variety of support roles involving anything from curriculum development to student counselling, or specialist training such as Information Technology. They have moved into a vital support role. It is fantastic that teachers take up those opportunities, especially after years in the classroom.
Former teachers are now being forced back into the classroom. Their support positions are being scrapped and, as permanent employees, they are told if they want their job they have to go back to a school. However, there are no extra teaching positions in our schools because the CLP is cutting teacher numbers. When you force an ex-teacher who no longer wants to teach into the classroom, the contract teacher who wants to teach is forced out. We are putting ex-teachers who do not want to teach, who have made a career choice to do something else, back into the classroom, and young contract teachers who do not have permanency are being forced out.
Darwin High School is losing more than 20 teachers over the next few years. That school will also be required to take on redeployed teachers, which means they will lose contract teachers. Contract teachers are losing their jobs to redeployed teachers who may still be fantastic teachers, but have made a career choice, a life choice, to no longer be a classroom teacher. Our students deserve teachers who want to teach.
We know that 140 school support positions are at risk. These positions include ICT support, counselling, behaviour management, language assistance, and many other areas of vital school and classroom support. People are losing their jobs and positions are going. At some stage the girls’ academy, GEMS, is going. The department found funding for the second half of this year and has tried to save the program. However, as it stands, Cabinet has scrapped funding for that program. The minister still has time to save the GEMS program. It could continue next year, but it requires the minister to take action.
Looking at the bush, the CLP education cuts will be profound in our remote areas. The key to closing the gap on Indigenous disadvantage must start with closing the gap on education. Without improved education, health, employment, and community safety will continue to lag. Cutting education in the bush opens the gap. On this side of the House, we have heard countless reports of remote schools having teacher numbers reduced. My colleagues have come back from school council meetings having heard terrible stories about the impact on schools, and the school council has spent time talking about how to cope, what they can do, where they will go. ‘How do we address the loss of teacher positions, support positions and resources?’ We hear these stories from school councils which are fully briefed by their principal on the impact of these cuts to their school. My colleagues will be talking to that in this statement.
The CLP talks about positions and vacancies, but the only thing that matters is how many teachers are teaching at a school. As I said, you might say a certain bush school had six positions, but the reality often is they might have two, three or four teachers. A position is not a person. One teacher at a school struggles. You struggle to hold and retain teachers when you do not have many in a community. They form their own community outside the school which helps retain teachers in the community.
No student graduated from senior school in the bush prior to the Labor government. The policy of the previous CLP government was to not provide secondary education in bush schools. They are heading towards that policy again. The budget earlier this year flagged cuts to bush education. The budget for Indigenous enrolment in senior schools was cut by 215 students in just one year, and that is in the budget books.
We know the CLP has radical plans for remote education. We know they are looking at no senior school enrolment of less than 40 students continuing. The CLP’s plan is centralised education: open education using technology to provide online education to the bush. It sounds good, but if you do not have teachers in the classroom how do you cope? It will not happen.
The CLP have broken so many election commitments to cut the cost of living, cut crime, protect frontline workers, and none are more comprehensive or damaging than what they have done with education and the impact it will have on the future of the Territory and Territory kids. If the CLP have decided to reduce education outcomes in the Northern Territory, then the course they have taken is the right one.
Mr Deputy Speaker, the state of education in the Northern Territory under the CLP is a matter of public importance.
Mr CHANDLER (Education): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Fannie Bay for bringing on this matter of public importance. Educating our children is important. Before I start, I need to point out a couple of things. We now have the chance to correct the record on a number of points raised in this matter of public importance today. A media release was issued this afternoon saying the CLP guarantee to teachers has been broken. It says:
- Contract teachers who are right now teaching in our classrooms will not have a job next year.
Wrong! I have a statement to deliver with some facts direct from the Department of Education, not Google. I would appreciate it if the member for Fannie Bay would use the information provided by the Department of Education before looking at Google. I assure you, the information is far more correct. Now, let us talk.
The third point you opened with today, member for Fannie Bay, was in regard to teacher contracts. As of term 1 2012, when the Labor Party was in power in the Northern Territory, we had 1687 teachers, 710 of whom were on temporary contracts. That is almost 30% of the workforce – more teachers uncertain of their future. Almost 30% of the teaching profession in the Northern Territory were on contracts. As of term 2 2013, under a Country Liberals government, we have 2042 permanent teachers and 380 temporary teachers – about 14% of the workforce. If you want to quote figures, why not look at the fact that when the Labor government was in power almost 30% of all teachers in the Northern Territory were on contracts. Today it is around 14%.
Do not lecture me about not taking teachers off contracts and making them permanent. That is exactly what we have done! Saying we are not fulfilling our election commitments is rubbish.
Considering Labor’s atrocious record on education, I find it extraordinary and a little embarrassing that they attempt to lecture us on our performance in just over 12 months in government.
Let me highlight a few of the key facts, not taken from Google but from the Department of Education. These facts set the scene and paint a clear picture about how Labor governed, particularly how they administered education.
Over the last five years under Labor, the total number of full-time equivalent employees increased by 790, or around 20%. Interestingly, student numbers over the same period increased by 173, a rise of 0.05%. This is extraordinary, almost unheard of. How is it the number of employees increased at such an astronomical rate when the growth in student numbers was nowhere near it? How did student numbers increase by only 173, while the number of departmental staff increased by 790?
If there had been an exceptional improvement in education outcomes in the Northern Territory one would praise the former government, but that is not correct. This was aimless growth, not targeted, not focused, and it did not deliver results for Territory kids. Typical of Labor and everything they lay their hands on, they equated more spending with improved outcomes, yet where are the improvements?
Let us look at the results, interrogate the data, and see what they achieved during their time in office. In 2012, the proportion of Year 3 students achieving results at or above national minimum standards in numeracy was 70%. Almost a third of our students could not reach the minimum benchmark set by ACARA. Five years before, Labor added 790 new positions to education, the proportion of Year 3 students achieving results at or above national minimum standards in numeracy was 77%. That is right; our results in the Northern Territory went backwards. Labor spent more money, put on 790 more staff over five years, and results in Year 3 numeracy, a key indicator, went backwards.
Let us look at another key indicator, Year 5 reading. In 2012, the proportion of Territory Year 5 students achieving the national minimum standard in reading was 61%. Well over a third of our students were not achieving the national minimum standard in reading, a truly appalling statistic. Again, what is even more appalling is from 2008 these results went backwards.
In 2008, the proportion of Year 5 students achieving the national minimum standard in reading was 62.5%. Despite an increase in education department staff of 790, results in Year 5 reading went backwards. We cannot continue down this path. We cannot continue spending in such an untargeted way. We want to know what works, what will improve results, and will target our spending accordingly. That is the smart way to do business and is how government should operate.
When we took government just over 12 months ago, there had been no significant change in student national testing results across reading and numeracy for five years. This is despite the Northern Territory recording by far the worst results of any Australian state or territory year after year. However, both the NT and Australian governments’ investment in education had increased significantly over the same period. Over the past five years to 2012, education staff had increased by around 20% from 3857 full-time equivalent staff in 2007-08 to 4647 staff in 2011-12. At the same time, the government education budget had increased by over 46%, from $467m to $686m. Increases in staff and funding were not matched by an increase in enrolments; the number of students in our schools had not changed significantly over this period.
In 2007-08 total student enrolments were 32 986, and in 2011-12 this had only increased to 33 159 – up 173. While the government education budget had increased by $219m or 46%, Education department staff had increased by 790, or 20%, student enrolments had only increased by 187, or 0.5%. Worse, this dramatic and unprecedented increase in spending had failed to achieve any real improvements.
If you agree, as many do, the definition of madness is to continue doing the same thing while expecting to get different results, clearly to go on as we have done for the last 10 years and pour more money into education without seeing improvements in results is madness. These efforts, well intentioned and popular as they may have been, have not yielded positive results for our children. In fact, a generation of Territory children has been lost to this failed attempt.
It is time to take stock of the direction education is heading in the Northern Territory and challenge the simple-minded and false conventions which equate more money to better outcomes. As a fiscally and socially responsible government, it is paramount we ensure future spending on education will directly contribute to providing the social and economic capital that will build the Territory’s future prosperity.
Some of our first actions to build and recalibrate the education system are as follows: to commission a review into Indigenous education to determine a more responsible and effective approach to addressing Indigenous student outcomes; increase support for the early years of learning and development that are so important as a foundation of each person’s future life chances – we have not heard much from the opposition on that one – establish the behaviour management task force to assist schools manage the escalation of poor behaviour disruptive to teaching and learning for too many students and teachers for too long.
The government has also commenced rebuilding the relationship with the non-government school sector recognising the importance of this sector in providing choice for parents, building stronger relationships with our northern neighbours as part of the 10-year plan to develop the Territory as an international educational hub, and making arrangements for a state-of-the-art distance education facility to ensure children across the Northern Territory, wherever they live, can access high quality education services delivered through the latest technologies available.
Let me go to the Indigenous education review, because this will be critical to how we do things differently – how we target spending to improve results. Interestingly, the last independent review into Indigenous education in the Northern Territory was commissioned by the former Country Liberals government back in 1998 and was completed in 1999. It was called Learning Lessons and was an entirely comprehensive review. Unfortunately, after the change of government in 2001, that review was shelved and none of the recommendations were taken seriously by the incoming Labor government.
We will not let this issue lay idle. It is why we have commissioned the latest review as a first order of business. In consultation with educators, partnerships, bodies and Indigenous communities, the review will assess what is working and what is not to improve student attendance, engagement and other outcomes; determining the best use of the significant resources that have been and continue to be invested; providing an understanding of how parents and families are engaged in the process and informed of education standards, attendance and achievements; looking at current and future demographic trends in the Indigenous student population; evaluating how the department can better support Indigenous education; looking at the partnership arrangements, the opportunities that exist, and how to empower local communities.
This is an independent, open and transparent review being conducted in consultation with educators, stakeholders and communities. Bruce Wilson, a respected independent consultant, has been appointed to lead the review. Bruce has more than 30 years’ experience in education, specialising in curriculum policy and development, and has specific knowledge of the Territory, having undertaken previous extensive work with the department on curriculum and schooling models.
The report and its recommendations and findings will be submitted to government for consideration in the first quarter of 2014. The review will drive a more strategic approach to Indigenous education service delivery, including negotiating funding with the Australian government aligned to a strategic and evidence-based plan to improved outcomes for Indigenous students. It is easy to put your hand out, but how do you spend that money and what improvements will there be in outcomes?
The Northern Territory has been investing in early childhood education and recent results indicate this investment may be starting to pay modest dividends. The Australian Early Development Index measures how well prepared children are for school by the age of five. There have been significant improvements in the Territory’s Australian Early Development Index results, particularly for Indigenous children. However, according to this measure, our levels of developmental vulnerability remain the highest across the nation.
Our NAPLAN results also show improvements for children in the early years. While these are encouraging early signs, there is more work to be done. There is more investment in this area and we will enhance the early learning services and support available to children and parents across the Northern Territory.
Early childhood classes will be boosted by 63 teachers in 2014, creating additional teacher positions in Transition, Year 1 and Year 2. These teachers will support students in their early stages of education and ensure they are provided with a strong foundation for their future learning and engaging with schooling.
This government has initiated a $150 000 annual fund distributed to long day care centres for the purchase of toys and equipment to assist them to deliver quality and educationally-based early learning programs for children in their care. All 72 long day care services in the Territory, which are supporting children in some 3200 places, have benefited from this program this year.
A behaviour management task force has been established to provide advice about managing inappropriate and antisocial behaviour in schools, including bullying, assault, verbal abuse, indecent behaviour, dangerous acts, weapons, property offences, and substance abuse. The task force includes school principals, as well as representatives from the Northern Territory Council of Government School Organisations, NT Health, the Association of NT School Education Leaders, the Australian Education Union Northern Territory, and clinical psychologist, Mr Andrew Fuller. Advice from this group will assist the Department of Education to respond to critical behaviour incidents, suspension actions, extreme behaviour support, and data collection and reporting, and will inform changes to the Education Act to implement new behaviour management strategies. It is imperative that students and teachers feel safe and supported at school.
The Northern Territory is an international education hub, and we can do so much more in that area. Another new initiative we have introduced is to open up Darwin as Australia’s front door to Asia. We are exploring opportunities to strengthen ties with the Asian region through building stronger education links with countries in our region, trade in international education, and teaching Asian languages in schools. We are re-establishing ties with educational authorities in Indonesia to recommence a reciprocal student/teacher exchange program which, at its peak, supported eight teachers and 16 students per annum.
We are exploring opportunities to enable Asian teachers to provide language support to Territory schools to enhance the availability of language education. The Department of Education is working with the Department of Business, the Chamber of Commerce and Tourism NT to identify opportunities for growth in international services and, by April 2014, a 10-year plan to establish an international education hub in the Northern Territory. The plan will position the Territory as a location providing education services of choice to our northern neighbours, as well as opportunities for the transmission of in-reach education programs across the region.
The existing Northern Territory Open Education Centre facilities are not designed to provide the level of technical capability needed to continue expanding this very important service into the future. Over 550 students access this service annually, 40% to 50% of whom are Indigenous. It is important we are able to provide a service that is targeted and meeting the needs of all students.
Public private partnership opportunities will be explored to build the infrastructure needed to develop a purpose-built facility at Bullocky Point which positions the Northern Territory as a world-class provider of contemporary distance education services. This will be equipped with cutting-edge distance learning technology and virtual classrooms. This service will provide high-quality and comprehensive learning programs to a diverse range of students no matter where they live. In time, the plans for the new distance education service will include in-reach into Asia.
Early initiatives of this government have addressed our immediate concerns about increasing the focus on early years, addressing Indigenous student outcomes, moving to contemporise distance education, and addressing safety and wellbeing issues in our schools.
All this is about ensuring we have a targeted approach to improving education outcomes for Northern Territory children. We will not do things the way Labor did because they did not work. We will not apologise for doing things differently. Let me again refer to those figures in my introduction. During the last five years under Labor, the education budget increased by $210m, or 46%. Education department staff increased by 790, or 20%. This was while student enrolments increased by only 173 students, or 0.5%. The key in all this is results did not improve. We are determined to improve outcomes by making positive changes such as reviewing how we deliver Indigenous education and bolstering our investment in the early years. This is based on evidence.
If the Labor Party, those in opposition, were fair dinkum they would recognise their results were not good enough. Their approach was wrong and there needs to be change. If they really valued education and our children, they would support change instead of trying to bring down education and destroying morale by spreading untruths and misinformation. If they truly had a vision and if they cared for education, they would embrace the challenges instead of going weak at the knees the first time there is evidence of resistance, like they always have. The education of our children is too important for Labor to play the loathsome games they have been recently. Again, I quote, from today’s media release by today’s shadow minister for Education and Training:
- Contract teachers who are right now teaching in our classrooms will not have a job next year.
That is totally wrong. In term 1 2012, under a Labor government, there were 710 temporary teachers; 30% of your workforce was temporary. As of term 2 2013, we have 2042 permanent teachers and 380 temporary teachers, around 14% of the work force. Under Labor, 30% of teachers were on contracts, under a Country Liberal government, around 14%. We are delivering on our promises. Thank you.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the matter of public importance and no more important debate could we have than one on education …
Mr Giles: Supporting the new Leader of the Opposition.
Ms LAWRIE: A political crack first up, to your shame, current Chief Minister. This is a serious matter of public importance not cheap political cracks.
We have an argument from the government that increases in education resources during the Labor years yielded no results. That is factually incorrect. The minister cherry-picks through NAPLAN results but ignores all the NAPLAN results which showed improvement across, not just age groups, but also disciplines. He selectively, as Education minister, cherry-picked a few NAPLAN results rather than listing all the results which showed a clearer picture. There were real gains in education outcomes for students in the Northern Territory, real gains in areas where more work had to be done to bring them up to the level of improvement we would wish to see.
The minister should stand condemned for trying to mislead people by saying all contract teachers will have their jobs next year. That is blatantly untrue. Teachers at our primary schools, middle schools and senior schools have been advised they do not have a job next year as a result of the cuts being made to the Education budget by this Education minister under this current Chief Minister, not because the contracts have magically come up for renewal.
Do they put much attention or priority on education? You need go no further than the current Chief Minister’s Framing the Future document. There are 14 objectives listed. Education is not listed; it is missing. I cannot imagine a developing jurisdiction like the Northern Territory, with the vast potential the Territory has, with the degree of social disadvantage this jurisdiction has, not having education front and centre to any plan for developing its future potential. They care so little about the education of our children that it is not in any of the 14 objectives of Framing the Future.
They care so little that they are hell-bent on taking an axe to the Education department budget and forcing teachers out of bureaucratic jobs in the department – some have not been in the classrooms for 20-odd years, but because you are permanent, you are not a contractor, we will redeploy you into the classrooms. Contract teachers who have worked for a few years, often young teachers enthusiastic in the early years of their career, are being let go. They have been told by their principals they do not have a job next year. There is a cohort of them talking to us about how it is affecting them and their schools.
Then you have what I call the unattached, a category where teachers have been advised they are not attached to that school. Somewhere, at some stage, they will be told where they might be teaching next year. You might have, for example, an unattached specialist teacher – these are real examples, but I will not identify the teachers – at a middle school who is yielding enormous results with the cohort of students in participation, attendance and learning outcomes. However, because they are a specialist and the school is losing 13 teacher positions, they become unattached and lose their jobs at the middle school although they have permanency in the department. They are waiting to hear whether they can apply to a primary school. This is a ridiculous scenario playing out across all our middle and senior schools.
The government has led people to believe these results are okay because only five teachers per school will be lost this calendar year. With their new student-teacher formula, over four years you might lose 20 teachers, but that is okay because they have capped it at five a year. The reality on the ground is very different.
There are five permanent positions and the rest are contractors. A senior school in Darwin is losing 13 teachers, five of whom are permanent positions. They will become unattached and float into the broader system to see if they can land a job. There is a big question mark over that as well, because of the amount of people being moved out of the agency and the contract teachers who do not have a job. Rosebery Middle School in Palmerston will say goodbye to 13 teachers, Sanderson Middle School 12 teachers, and Dripstone will lose13 teachers. That is not the five teachers the CLP would pretend in the public domain. They are double the number plus.
That means when the rubber hits the road there are fewer subject choices and the teaching lines become crowded. Casuarina Senior College is a classic example where the government is saying one thing – pretending something – and the rubber hitting the road is far worse. Casuarina Senior College has already withstood cuts, as have all schools because of the change from enrolment to attendance. That occurred as a result of the mini-budget formula changes in 2012. It has affected the 2013 calendar year. The schools we are discussing have already lost teachers.
The senior and middle schools all lost teachers as a result of the funding formula change from enrolment to attendance. We also saw dramatic losses across the bush schools with the funding formula change in enrolment to attendance. How do you get better education outcomes with fewer teachers in the classroom spending contact hours with the students, be they good students academically excelling who flourish with extra attention and direct contact, or struggling students who genuinely need the additional attention and contact to flourish or get through and make it.
We have already seen losses in the 2013 calendar year averaging two or three teachers at least across our larger schools, and one or two teachers across smaller schools. They are making a real impact on how crowded the teaching lines have become. Casuarina is being advised they will need to teach the entire five lines next year, which means they will have no break in their teaching day to spend time with the students who need additional effort.
This government finds these debates a laughing matter to make some political shots, but the impact it will make in our children’s lives is very different. It will affect a generation. It will affect the generation entering middle school now, and it will affect the generation who go from middle school to senior school. Teachers are aghast because they know what that means in education outcomes for our children. It is a lost opportunity for this generation. This is not about saving teachers jobs, although at the very least it ought to be because the government guaranteed frontline teachers their jobs would be safe. You did not put an asterisk next to that promise saying, ‘We only mean permanent not contractors’.
At the core of this is the genuine need to ensure an improved quality of education for our students. In that you are failing and will create failure for a generation. It is the most appalling attack the education system in the Northern Territory has ever experienced.
When you look at the loss of student cohort in 2013 as a result of the formula change, then look at the loss that will occur in 2014 as a result of the student-teacher ratio change. I have the splits by electorates. For example, in the electorate of Arnhem, a bush electorate, 16.5 teachers will be lost. I do not know if the member for Arnhem is aware that from schools in her bush electorate 16.5 teachers are gone ...
Mr Tollner: You do not know that.
Ms LAWRIE: It is on the data the department of Education provided in estimates. It is the 2013 loss as a result of the formula change, and the 2014 loss as a result of the student ratio change. If you combine those two changes, the member for Arnhem loses 16.5 teachers from her bush schools.
The government has some explaining to do.
Sixteen teachers are gone from bush schools across Arafura. Have a conversation with the school at Maningrida or Gunbalunya, both losing three teachers. These are public schools in your electorates, in your heartland, losing teachers.
You might want to look at Sanderson. I know the member for Sanderson has been visited by teachers from Sanderson Middle School imploring him to stop these teacher cuts, who spoke to him about the impact on education for the cohort of students going through Sanderson Middle School. I know it was a very uncomfortable meeting for the member for Sanderson, but this is real.
Has the new minister been advised that eight teachers are lost from schools in her electorate? Does she know Nyirripi is already lost?
What about Drysdale? The member laughed at jokes being cracked during this education debate, but has she seen the split? Is she aware she will lose 7.5 teachers from her schools? Is she okay with that? Is she comfortable with that loss?
Have you been given the numbers for your electorate, member for Greatorex? There are 6.5 teachers gone from your schools. Member for Namatjira, you are losing 6.4, not as high as the member for Arafura, who loses 16 teachers from his schools. However, 6.4 teachers from your bush schools is far too many for schools to withstand. The rumour around Central Australia is they will be given up ultimately. Lasseter schools will go, possibly to Finke Mission. The government will wash its hands of its responsibility to ensure a quality education for children in your communities.
In Braitling, perhaps you are feeling comfortable, Chief Minister, that 5.5 teachers are going from your school. Perhaps that is okay. Katherine loses five. Four Corners is doing a show on the Katherine region. Can you, after watching that show, tell me you can lose five teachers from schools in Katherine? This is unbelievable.
Mr Tollner interjecting.
Ms LAWRIE: The member for Fong Lim laughs because he is getting more. You have gone up almost one whole teacher, member for Fong Lim, so perhaps you can afford to laugh. The big cuts and big pain are in the bush electorates, but they do not know. The urban seats in Darwin have small gains if you look at primary schools. You lose heavily in senior and middle schools, but the primary school gains push into the positive. It is to your eternal shame if you have not explained these cuts to your colleagues, which happen in real time at their schools. How do you justify taking a teacher out of Acacia Hill School, the special school? How do you justify taking teachers out of Henbury and Nemarluk? Will that see a better education outcome for our special needs students? You seem very comfortable taking $250 000 out of the special needs budget. You are comfortable with that and it is okay to put $300 000 into a golf club.
The argument from our perspective is not about how you manage a budget. Labor had $1.6bn in actual debt when we left government, with projections in 2015-16 to $5.5bn …
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member’s time has expired.
Ms LAWRIE: … and you will have $5.1bn. You have the wrong priority …
Madam SPEAKER: Opposition Leader, your time has expired.
Mr TOLLNER (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, what a note for the opposition to leave on, talking about debt. It is something the Opposition Leader knows about. For 11 years, the former government banged on about spending as an outcome. Every time we listened to a debate on anything, it was about how much money was spent and never had anything to do with the outcome itself. It was never based on health or education outcomes. The outcome was the spending of money. As the Opposition Leader just said, debt does not matter; it is for the next generation to worry about. The main thing is to spend money.
I do not suggest I am a great expert on education, but I grew up in a family of teachers. My mother, father, brother and uncle are all teachers. My uncle retired from the Queensland education system as one of the highest qualified teachers in the state. He cut his teeth in remote schools. It was nothing for him to teach several different years in one classroom. In fact, at a little school just outside Thangool in central Queensland, he was teaching eight grades in one classroom with 30-something kids. My mother, in another small country town, Baralaba, taught the first three years of school – Years 1, 2, and 3 – in a class of 45 kids. All those kids got reasonably good marks. These were Indigenous kids as well, but it was a different place, different time, different era, and there was a greater level of commitment in those days of parents getting their kids to school. They valued education probably more than some people do these days. As a result, most kids got a reasonable education.
The Chief Minister this morning in Question Time made several statements in response to a question which drew gasps from those in opposition. He said something along the lines of, ‘More resources do not necessarily equate to better outcomes’. There is no research to show smaller classes make a difference in any years, apart from the early years, or perhaps in some schools with special needs students. The Chief Minister advised several areas where this was mentioned – the Productivity Commission, the Grattan Institute and the Queensland Commission of Audit. I did some research on the Queensland Commission of Audit and found some interesting lines which I will quote. This is the Queensland Commission of Audit Final Report – February 2013, Volume 3. Page 116 of that report says:
- Class sizes are often considered to have a significant impact on teaching quality and student outcomes. In its 2012 research report, the Productivity Commission notes that the average student-teacher ratio in Australia fell by over 40% between 1964 and 2003, with further reductions since that time.
However, research in Australia and internationally shows that below a relative threshold, smaller class sizes primarily benefit only younger students and students with special needs, such as learning difficulties and disabilities. According to the Productivity Commission report:
- … the across-the-board approach to class-size reductions has been a costly policy that has not translated into a commensurate improvement in overall student outcomes. It has tied up funding that could otherwise have been used for a range of more worthwhile purposes ...
That statement sums up some of the thinking on this side of the Chamber regarding education.
There is also another quote I would like to mention in relation to overseas experiences. This is from the same report and says:
- Concerns about the focus on class sizes have also been raised by the Grattan Institute. For example, its 2012 report on high performing school systems in East Asia notes that average class sizes in public schools in South Korea, Hong Kong, Shanghai and Singapore were much higher than that of Australia. Average class sizes range from between 35 and 40 in East Asia school systems compared with 23 in Australia. The four East Asian school systems were ranked in the top five best performing jurisdictions based on the 2009 PISA results and significantly improved their performance over the past decade.
That says what we all know: kids in Asia value education. I often tell my children, who I wish were performing better at school, that I do not put their lack of performance down to teachers. I often tell my children that kids in Asia value education, turn up to classes, are like big sponges and want to learn. They value the time people take to give them a good education and they turn up.
That is the point the Chief Minister made: it does not matter how much money you spend on education if kids do not want to be there. That takes me to a conversation I had with a young lady in in a cosmetic store in China a few years ago. I complimented her on her wonderful English and she thanked me and said she spoke seven languages. She also had three degrees and was working in a cosmetic store. I told my children many kids in Asia want to be at school and want to learn.
If you asked kids across Australia one thing they would like to be doing right now, I doubt many would say be at school. That is the way we are in Australia, but it reinforces the point the Chief Minister and the Education minister made. Ultimately, we want to see kids getting to school, we want to see them actively engaged in school, and we want to see teachers actively engaged in educating them. The point the Education minister made is vital to this argument. In the time the Opposition Leader was Treasurer, the education budget in the Northern Territory increased by 46%, staff numbers in Territory schools increased by 20%, but our results went backwards. Is that not shameful? You would think with the worst education results anywhere in this country and its history, somebody would realise we should not be spending more money on staff because we are not getting results. Our results are going backwards and there has to be something else. It is the something else this government is focused on, particularly our Education minister. There is no doubt our education system in the Northern Territory is broken and faltering because our results do not equate with any other jurisdiction in the country. When you compare us to overseas jurisdictions, we are failing miserably so something has to give.
This debate is not necessarily about money, but more about the results our kids are getting in Territory schools and the education they receive. We want to see that changed. It is only the Leader of the Opposition who engages in voodoo economics, who thinks it is good to spend more, to rack up more debt, employ more people and leave the next generation to pay for it.
It is like the Power and Water Corporation. You pour hundreds of millions of dollars into a failing organisation, fail to reform it, fail to allow it to charge a reasonable price for its services and keep pouring money into it. You expect a future government to keep doing that when you can see efficiencies going out the window, waste everywhere, and, ultimately, you see that organisation facing destitution because the taxpayer can never supply enough money to keep it going.
We have the worst results in Australia and the system has to change. To his credit, our Education minister is looking at more ways of getting kids to school and to improve results in Territory schools.
The Chief Minister has made a large commitment to education. I remember him, during the election campaign, saying what a Country Liberals government would do in relation to people living on outstations. The Chief Minister at the time said we were happy to support people on outstations provided they are engaging in the economy: they have a job or are receiving training and their kids are attending school or getting an education. Whether that is School of the Air, something over the Internet, or children attending a boarding school or a public school it does not matter, the main thing is they are engaging in education. If people wanted their outstation houses renovated and maintained at government expense the message was clear: get your kids to school, take an interest in their education and get involved. Where kids want to be at school and their parents want them to be involved, it does not matter what size the class is. When I was in primary school I never knew a class below 30 students. The majority of classes were larger than that. I am getting a head nod from the member for Barkly, a chalkie from way back, who would understand education in the bush.
You cannot teach kids who do not want to learn, and you cannot get a horse to drink no matter how much water is around. The key to education is getting kids engaged, getting their families engaged, and making people value education. That is not an easy thing. It is difficult, particularly in remote communities, to convince children they need an education when they know very few people who have an education or a job. The goal of getting people jobs is getting them to value work, to understand there is more to life than welfare, and there is opportunity for their children should they wish to give them a decent education.
Madam Speaker, this matter of public importance is nothing but a political stunt. There is a whole lot of covering up of the previous government’s failure in this area. To suggest class sizes cannot change by a couple of people in relation to the ratios is wrong. Ultimately, we have to find a better way of doing things. That is what this government is about, our minister is about, and anybody who does not believe our education system needs to change significantly needs to have a good hard look at themselves.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I participate in this debate because the impact on teachers and students across the Northern Territory from the CLP cuts is devastating in the generational impact.
It is ironic I stand after the Treasurer, because the Treasurer jumped into – rather moderate tonight –that murky pit of politics, then jumped out again because he has a family experience of education. He chose to quote me in his debate but is talking about 50 years ago, and I am proud of my age. I am well and truly over 50. The Treasurer is basing CLP education policy on 50 years ago. It happened 50 years ago, and if it was good enough 50 years ago it is good enough now. Let us cut to the chase because the other irony is the Treasurer and the Chief Minister have handed the Education minister – the third one – the bag of spiders called efficiency dividends.
As a Labor government we did that because it is responsible governance. The Leader of the Opposition said it is about priorities, and education must be a priority. The bag of spiders has been dished out to the Minister for Education by the Treasurer and the Chief Minister, and he is suffering. I have had conversations with the Minister for Education about his exciting job, how great the work is and how responsible it is. He ain’t happy! He is under pressure because he has been dealt the straw which will break the camel’s back – our children’s future.
I will tell you a little about myself. I came to the Territory over 30 years ago and spent 30 years building schools in the Northern Territory. I worked with contractors to set up caravans in the bush, and then I worked tirelessly to gain the trust and respect of Aboriginal communities whilst working to get kids to school. At Epenarra School, I had 46 kids in a silver bullet to start off and the Treasurer wants to tell me I would deliver education outcomes. You are joking! What the Treasurer is not telling you in the Cabinet process, and it is not in the bag of spiders, is the truth. The truth is we are talking about kids with high support needs in English as a second language, socioeconomic support, and behavioural and emotional needs. Things have changed, gang, in 50 years. Every member in this House will admit to that honesty.
The Treasurer and the Chief Minister have applied the flat earth strategy and handed the deal to the Minster for Education. They will be known in history as the CLP who got back into government and back to the future we go with the economic review cuts of the 1990s.
The Leader of the Opposition spoke about priorities. Every member in Cabinet and Caucus on the Liberal side should be irate and fighting for the efficiency dividends to be reduced in education. Go after the Minister for Infrastructure. Go after the $9.5m in the Chief Minister’s department. Go after the $5m to be spent on a scoping study for Palmerston hospital, when the previous minister for Health offered the study for nothing. Go after the money allocated to consult on local government changes. There is plenty of cash around for that. There was $1m for your mates to study Territory finances, a report we have never seen. There was plenty of cash around for that. Go after the Chief Minister and the Treasurer and demand that this efficiency dividend being driven down the throat of the Education department be reduced, because it is our kids in the frame.
What does it relate to? It relates to the Territory; it does not relate to rural Queensland or a Grattan report in Queensland. It does not relate to southern jurisdictions. It is about us, our diversity and our needs.
Let us take the mainstream schools; we have all been there. As minister for Transport, I visited several in the Palmerston area – brilliant schools with incredible NAPLAN results and dedicated teachers and support staff doing an incredible job. What will the cuts imposed by the Chief Minister and the Treasurer do to a school in Drysdale? They will cut subject choice, reduce education diversity, increase class sizes and start to dumb down the whole exciting project of education by an economic rationalist approach. ‘Just cut it and make them work harder. It will be okay because we did it 50 years ago.’ What a joke! What a disgrace!
Let us travel down the track to the area where I put in 30 years of blood, sweat and tears to build schools. Two of those schools, from a meagre one teacher start, have five teachers, complemented by five support staff – local people in real jobs. What will this policy do? It is the same deal. It will cut teachers and school budgets, and principals under the pump will have to tell local employees, the guy who has been nurtured, encouraged, and mentored, to come out of a remote community to take up a job at the school looking after the garden. ‘Sorry, do not come next year, things have changed. Our Chief Minister and our Treasurer tell us it will be tighter, we will be leaner and meaner, so you do not have a job here.’ That person goes home to the community with what story.
What demoralised outcome is that when we have spent 30 years and longer trying to ensure we get local employees into the school? The small school in the bush loses teachers, has its budget cut and loses local jobs because the principal has to tell people he cannot afford them any longer. They are not valued, not worthy because these politicians – the Treasurer admitted he does not understand education, he is a fantastic politician. That is a disgrace. It is, as the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Fannie Bay say, about priorities.
Let us go to an interesting point the Minister for Education raised about early childhood. I have been lobbying for most of my education career, as a local member, a member of government and now as a member of the opposition, for increased resource allocation and support into the early childhood area. Sarcastically, the Minister for Education said in debate, ‘You guys have not mentioned that’. Minister, I will talk about it now because when the CLP started that conversation I took an interest in it. I gave credit where credit was due. However, it has now unfolded in the bag of spiders and the economic rationalist policy by default. It is, ‘We will put numbers into early childhood when we sack senior and middle school teachers. When we terminate contracts, when we fudge the numbers, people will be put into the early childhood area, the most important area of a child’s life and education.’ It is zero to eight years, not four, five, six, seven, eight. Important programs were brought on by the Labor government in the Northern Territory – those numbers the two gentlemen leading the team throw around as money not outcomes. Look at some of the early childhood programs, but this measure by default will force people into the early childhood area.
I happen to be old school and was trained as an infant primary teacher. I know the specialist nature of a job like that when working in the early childhood sector. If you are not trained, do not have a passion, do not see it as a vocation rather than a job, you will not deliver results.
Your policy, minister, is rhetoric and spin because it will go down the drain. It is a waste of resources because middle school students will start to suffer. If there is one thing the opposition can offer in this debate it is to revisit this disastrous economic rationalist policy which will affect us all.
The Leader of the Opposition has highlighted which electorates on that side of the House. We are dealing with electorates on this side of the House, and the Chief Minister and the Minister for Education would deny it saying we are making trouble. Who do you think is telling us this? It is teachers, support staff, parents, but mostly teachers anonymously because they are terrified of this government. I lived through that in the 1990s. I was a radical, I went on strike, I was locked out and I lost pay. We fought them, and teachers will fight you now for the rights of our children.
Let us say the economic rationalist approach is the right way to go. A person came to me recently at a garden function on the main street of Tennant Creek, an educator with the department, ‘Please do not tell anybody my name. This is completely anonymous, but support staff for schools in the Barkly has gone from 24 to 12.’ One of those staff is doing a great job in the language and culture programs. Even worse, I attended a Batchelor graduation and there was not a dry eye in the house, including mine, because I knew half the graduates, some from when I enrolled them in preschool. Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education took notice of what is happening in the Barkly. At the celebration and photo shoot with the families I shared all the stories about the students as little kids, and we shared the laughter. I then found out, on the main street on Saturday, the mentoring positions with the department of Education – doing a fantastic job – have gone.
This is what is rolling out through the system that the economic rationalist Chief Minister and the Treasurer do not tell you. Why? Because they do not know. Minister for Education, go south of the Berrimah Line, go into the bush and see how it works, and talk to teachers on the front line who do an incredible job.
We are starting to lose specialist positions. Another member chatted with me – no names, no pack drill, ‘We have mortgages to pay. We are frightened of these guys.’ That is the reality; I used to be there.
I was talking about ICT. I am all about arts in education; I am about the old school, but everything has moved on. It is not like 50 years ago where the Treasurer said, ‘She’ll be right, mate’. Things have changed, including the kids and the families.
I was told the average small school in the bush has about $75 000 in information communication technology teaching aids. That is SMART Boards and the important technology support to help young enthusiastic teachers do their job. What happened? They cut the ICT support teacher. There is no longer anyone to go around in their spare time, do the repairs, maintenance, and all the extra stuff in bush schools on Saturday. Anybody who knows about a bush school understands the collegiality and importance of morale, high self-esteem, and team work.
They cut the position in Barkly so ICT support will not be provided. Do you know what happens to ICT equipment in the bush when it gets dusty and starts to break down, that investment in education? It stops working. Do you know what happens when teachers are not skilled up and do not get professional development? They start to slow down, become jaded and leave.
Madam Speaker, this policy is destructive and the minister knows that. I feel some sympathy for the minister; he has been handed a bag of spiders. I encourage every member opposite not to go down in history as the CLP did in the 1990s. Guess what happened? They were thrown out of government. Start to challenge this Cabinet. The Chief Minister and the Treasurer are the architects of this destruction. Turn it around!
Ms MANISON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, I speak to this matter of public importance about the future of our schools. Every member would agree education is an essential building block to a life of opportunity for every child, and all children across the Territory deserve and need a good education to have a good life.
Nobody is under any illusion about the challenges in the Territory education system. It is clear from the NAPLAN results that students in the Territory face the greatest challenges in education across the nation. This is driven by the fact we have the highest disadvantage in the Territory, especially in the bush.
The Territory needs to improve at a rate faster than other jurisdictions. In order to do this, it is essential the government invests in education. The stories we have heard today about what is happening are all doom and gloom. Only a few years ago the NAPLAN results showed the Territory had outstripped the national average in improvements in 11 of 12 NAPLAN categories. We were heading in the right direction because we were investing in teachers and schools across the Territory.
Under this government we see huge changes to education which are attracting wide condemnation from teachers, principals, parents and the broader community. It seems this government has lost focus on delivering better education outcomes and, instead, appears focused on efficiencies.
Most people I speak to believe government should never scrimp on education. People believe the investment you make in education is a good one, and people with a good education will become productive members of our society. People with an education will get a job and have a good future. Instead, the government is cutting education and teachers are being cut from the system. This, essentially, means fewer programs to support students in schools, fewer teachers, and less support for students in the classroom and, of course, bigger class sizes.
The Minister for Education was recently interviewed on ABC Mornings with Kate O’Toole and was asked if fewer teachers in senior schools would make for better education outcomes. He said:
- Every expert that I have ever spoken to, everything that I have read about improving education says to me – demands that we need to improve teacher ratios in the early years, it does not talk about our senior years, and for years in the Northern Territory we have had the most generous teacher student ratios compared to every other jurisdiction. What we are doing is aligning ourselves with other states and territories.
What the minister fails to recognise with his move to align teacher ratios to the national average is that the Territory has the most disadvantaged students in the nation. The minister’s answer is that rather than investing in education they have decided to strip money from the budget and cut teachers. Frankly, it makes no sense to me.
It is timely we debate this issue because schools are currently grappling with some very tough decisions. They are looking at their current teaching staff – who is permanent, who is on contract – and are being told staff on contracts will not be coming back. They are making decisions about which permanent teachers they have to lose from their school.
Schools in my electorate tell me this is having a profound effect on morale. I have seen the looks on school council members’ faces, and see the anger and fury when they hear how many teachers schools have to lose and about the instability it is creating at schools that have to move teachers to accommodate staff moved from the Education department or senior and middle schools. It is creating a great deal of stress in schools.
In schools which educate students in my electorate we are losing a huge amount of teachers. Dripstone Middle School will lose 13 teachers next year. At Casuarina Senior College, the senior school for northern suburbs students which prepares them for university, vocational training and jobs, massive cuts are being made with 12 teachers set to go. In those two schools alone 25 teaching jobs are gone. That is a disgrace. The CLP government is removing 25 teachers from two schools with a growing population. Muirhead is growing, and that will continue for years to come.
Dripstone and Casuarina schools take students from Muirhead. Seeing 25 teachers disappear from these schools makes no sense. Of the contract teacher you are removing, some are graduate teachers. These are people who have been supported by the Department of Education to pursue a teaching career. Those teachers are eager to start their career in the classroom. Their future in the Territory is looking very bleak thanks to decisions of this government. I worry about the impacts on graduate teachers coming out of CDU and their job prospects at Territory schools next year. I also wonder how this will impact numbers of people deciding to take up a teaching degree at CDU in the near future given they have seen such uncertainty and instability.
We hear it is teacher versus teacher. In order to cut permanent teachers, schools are asking teachers to submit their rsum and fight it out amongst each other to get a job. Although they are not technically ‘being sacked’ they are being sent to jobs they never intended to do. These are teachers in the middle and senior years who will not have a job where they want next year as a result of these changes. You are, effectively, sending them into schools when they thought their jobs were safe in the school they were in.
As much as the CLP government tries to sell the changes to primary school ratios as a win, they do not seem to understand the consequences of their actions. This is creating instability at primary schools where many are about to experience significant changes to their staff as they try to place permanent teachers displaced from middle and senior years, and people the Department of Education is sending to the classroom.
In primary schools, contract teachers have been told they no longer have a job. I have been told the Department of Education is telling primary schools to keep their Year 5 and Year 6 classes vacant of teachers to make way for displaced teachers from the middle and senior years. This will mean huge change and disruption to the structure of primary schools. They have to make dramatic changes to staffing as you force teachers out of the department and out of middle and senior schools.
School councils are grappling with the situation and the impact it will have on their schools. It is not just urban schools; bush schools are also losing significant numbers of teachers. It makes me wonder which members on the other side are attending school council meetings to hear the impact this is having. We have heard Rosebery Middle School is losing a significant number of teachers. We have also heard, as the Leader of the Opposition pointed out, Sanderson Middle School is losing many teachers. Bush schools also face big teacher losses.
Significant challenges will be presented to schools with fewer staff in the Department of Education to support them as school support staff are moved back into teaching positions. There will be less support for schools, teachers, students, and families as a result. The losses will be in important areas such as ICT, behaviour management, and counselling. Schools will not have the support they once did.
The department is moving staff back into schools who may have decided a career in education outside the classroom was something they wanted to pursue. I am sure people impacted by the move back to schools will do everything they can to deliver the best results for their students. I am also sure they did not expect to be in this position, given the firm commitment the CLP government gave to teachers and people in Education about important frontline areas such as education.
Hearing last week in the media this government is focused on efficiency when it comes to education deeply concerns me. This is not a government focused on education outcomes, this is a government focused on cutting investment. Teaching takes a special kind of person. Each one of us would have fond memories of teachers who made a difference in our lives. Teachers can have a profound impact on the lives and future of children.
It is deeply disappointing to see the direction of the CLP government and their attitude towards education. The government has released its Framing the Future document, which outlines its visions and priorities for the next three years. It fails to mention education. It shows what value the CLP government places on education and teachers. Sadly, today’s children will be the most affected by poor decisions and priorities across the Territory.
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Fannie Bay for raising this matter of public importance which impacts on everyone in the Territory.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, no members opposite are interested in participating in this matter of public importance. Presumably they are satisfied to see cuts to schools in their electorates. Presumably it sits quite comfortably with their conscience. Presumably, as the member for Wanguri suggested, none have attended school council meetings, because if they had, as we on this side have, they would have received strong messages about how unhappy school councils, as representatives of school communities, kids, teachers and parents, are about the cuts coming or already started. Sixty-nine teachers have already gone from the system since the CLP came to government a little more than a year ago. We know this because the government supplied us with the document showing where those cuts are coming in 2014.
I thank the member for Fannie Bay for raising this important matter. I have listened with great interest to the contributions from not only people on this side, but members opposite. Some of them found it rather amusing, had a good chuckle, and accused the opposition of cooking this up. However, we are looking down the barrel of cuts which are in black and white in Excel spreadsheet tables provided to us by the government. We are certainly not making anything up.
I am concerned about the state of education in the Northern Territory in a little over a year of CLP government. I am concerned they have been so dysfunctional, with three Education ministers in less than a year. I am horrified about the cuts not just to teachers, but to other resources within schools. I am also concerned with, but not surprised at, the continual breaking of election promises by members opposite. I am concerned as a parent of two boys in Nhulunbuy High School and what it means for them and their education in the next few years. One is endeavouring to complete senior school and is challenged with some special needs. He has been extremely well supported throughout his schooling, and I am concerned for him and his capacity to complete his NTCET with the withdrawal of funding for special needs and the fact he is a special needs student who may find himself in a much bigger class next year.
I am concerned for my youngest child in Year 8 and the size of the classes he will be in next year, not only the size of the classes, but the restriction there will be on subjects offered. I am concerned as a former teacher. A teaching job brought me to the Northern Territory in 1987.
I am concerned as a school council member, having sat in meetings with Yambirrpa School Council and one at Nhulunbuy High School council recently, and hopefully phoning in to the next one. Those concerns cumulate into the fact I am the elected member and representative for people in the electorate of Nhulunbuy and north east Arnhem Land, and how these cuts will seriously hurt children and diminish education outcomes, and with it, the prospects of a bright, promising future and the choices they might normally have.
As a former teacher, I reject outright the proposition there is no correlation between class size and education outcome. I wonder if the Minister for Education has ever endeavoured to teach Macbeth to a class of 25 in Year 11 compared to a class of 10. Let me assure you, minister, there is a correlation between the number of students and the education outcomes you can expect. The more individual support you can give a student, particularly in the senior years when they are trying to grapple with specialised subjects such as maths, physics, chemistry, outdoor education and the theory component that goes with subjects like that, the better. As a teacher of English literature, trying to teach poetry, drama and literary text to a group of 25 versus a group of 15 – minister, they are worlds apart. You should do some work experience.
The Attorney-General has done some work experience in the courts. How about you do some and attach yourself to a teacher in one of our hard-working government run schools and follow them for a day to see how they go. You will find they are not only in front of a class teaching. When they are not teaching they are not sitting down with their feet up on a desk drinking copious cups of coffee, having a good chat and on Facebook; they are marking work, preparing programs, probably doing a relief lesson during the day. There are probably more relief lessons being handed out at the moment because we are beginning to see an increase in absenteeism amongst teachers, as happends in the workplace when stress levels increase. What do people do? They phone in unwell because they struggle to get into the workplace because of related stress. Staff on duty will be picking up extra relief lessons.
They will be filling out necessary paperwork to take a group on an excursion. That could be an excursion during the school day, or perhaps a school camp or a trip interstate. If you are lucky enough to attend Nhulunbuy High School, every second year you have the opportunity to go on an overseas trip to England and Europe. I am unsure if teachers will be willing to take on the extra curricula activity they currently do.
Let us add to that the counselling they provide: the one-on-one support they provide to students, not just academically, but helping young people with their day-to-day issues. This can be where you detect something is not quite right with a child, or there is an issue around why they cannot do their homework or they are struggling to meet course work requirements. It requires a teacher, sometimes a support person as well, to be part of that conversation and find out what is going on in a young person’s life.
Believe me, compared to when you were at school, minister, the complexity of being a school teacher and educator has changed. The role is enormous and, in your ignorance, you have completely misunderstood what it is teachers do on any day.
To suggest having fewer teachers in schools is okay because there is no correlation between the education outcomes and class size is balderdash.
Your answers during Question Time today were unsatisfactory. Your answer to my question around cuts to Nhulunbuy High School, and particularly Yirrkala School – we will go to disadvantaged schools in a moment – was unsatisfactory. I inferred from your answer that in cutting teachers the void will be filled by NTOEC. That is what we can expect. We cannot put teachers in front of a class, but we will hook kids up to correspondence courses. I am sure the parents at Yirrkala School and Nhulunbuy High School will be thrilled to hear that news. Even better, they would love to hear that news from you face-to-face.
There is no doubt some of the members opposite have avoided going to Nhulunbuy. Minister, you have many schools in the Northern Territory, but it is incumbent upon you to visit these schools. You should visit as many as you can, especially those in remote areas, to ensure you hear firsthand what peoples’ concerns are and, believe me, they are really concerned about the cuts you are inflicting.
There is not a single school in my electorate unscathed by the knife you are wielding through the Education budget; not a single school escapes. Not Nhulunbuy Primary School, as they are down two teachers as of next year. Nhulunbuy High School stands to lose 3.2 teachers next year. In addition, Shepherdson College – here is a beauty for you, minister, and how about you come out and I will give you a briefing. I will take you to these schools and show you the hurt you are creating. I will also show you what Labor did in 11 years. Do not tell us Labor did nothing. That is rhetoric because not one Indigenous student in the bush graduated from Year 12. Why was that? There was no secondary education in the bush, courtesy of the CLP. In 11 years we spent a lot of time playing catch up so it was possible, minister, at Shepherdson College and Yirrkala School, to go from preschool all the way to Year 12 and come out with an NTCET.
These schools are challenging. The kids come from challenging backgrounds. We have kids who are challenged for all types of reasons. These kids’ lives can be complex, and we know attendance is an issue. School councils in these communities recognise that. However, to base your staffing formula on attendance not enrolment is scurrilous, wrong, and shameful in communities where populations continue to grow. Galiwinku on Elcho Island, where Shepherdson College is the government school, is a case in hand. There is an enormous demographic of young people yet Shepherdson College, in 2012, had 54 teachers, in 2013, 47 teachers. That is seven teachers gone and another five positions to go in 2014. Minister, I do not know how you expect the people of Galiwinku to educate their children when numbers continue to grow yet you are ripping 12 teaching positions out of that school. It is shameful.
This school has worked incredibly hard over the last few years. I take my hat off to former principal, Bryan Hughes, who was Principal of the Year in the NT Teacher Awards several years ago and is now Director of School Performance for our region. I daresay he is struggling to manage these cuts because, at the end of the day, he is a teacher, he knows about education, best outcomes for kids, and an awful lot about education in the bush, unlike the minister. I am extremely worried about Shepherdson College.
Yirrkala Homeland School has already lost two teachers, with a further two to go. How will Yirrkala Homeland School manage this? At the homeland school we have one teacher in front of a class of children from Transition through to Year 6. Some schools might have middle school kids as well. There is no understanding of the challenges homeland teachers face in dealing with a cohort of English as a second language speakers ranging from four to 14 or even 15 who, somehow, have to deliver education.
What is more, as visiting teachers in those schools three days a week – I remember the member for Namatjira commenting some time ago in the media that it was unacceptable some homeland centres only had visiting teachers and schools needed full-time teachers. They asked her as much when she came to GanGan.
Quite apart from taking on board that message, you are ripping resources out of homeland schools. In addition, Yirrkala Homelands School is at risk of losing its IT officer. Good luck with that, minister. How are students supposed to hook up to the brilliant IT infrastructure installed in the last few years let alone, if you expect them to take on correspondence through NTOEC? Yet, somehow in this mix, Taminmin – and good on them – managed to retain the five teachers earmarked to be removed from the school in 2014.
We know when schools lobby – it helps when they are in close proximity to Darwin and, therefore, closer to the minister’s ear – decisions can be overturned. The further away from the Stuart Highway you are the less chance you have of getting the minister’s ear. If you are in an electorate with a Labor member, your chances are even fewer.
Minister, your reference to Labor playing loathsome games is disgraceful. These are not loathsome games; these are real cuts. We are not talking about games; we are talking about a mean-spirited government which seems to be doing everything it can to ensure people do not vote for it in 2016. You are mean-spirited, and you need to travel to Nhulunbuy. You can go to Scotland, you can scoot around the place, but my advice is do not come on a charter, do not follow the lead of the Chief Minister, get on a commercial plane and do not feel the need to have police at meetings because you will not need them. You must address the cuts not just in my electorate, but across all schools and the bush as well.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I took the advice of the member sponsoring this MPI, the member for Fannie Bay, when he said to look it up on the Internet. I have. I was trying to find how we rank in the OECD for class sizes. I looked up the OECD for Athens, because I wanted to make the point that class sizes in Athens were going through the roof as a result of their financial woes, which is exactly what the minister is trying to avoid. It is interesting to note in Athens they had lower class sizes in the recent past. However, I bet you they do not now.
The curious thing is Australia, as a nation, is about the average of the OECD. I draw members’ attention to OECD Education Indicators in Focus document. I will quote a couple of things from it. It says:
- How does class size vary around the world?
- In OECD countries, the average class size at the lower secondary school level is 23 students …
Which is, in fact, more than what we have now:
- … but there are significant differences between countries, ranging from over 32 in Japan and Korea to 19 or below in Estonia, Iceland, Luxembourg, Slovenia and the United Kingdom.
Remember that figure, 32 in Japan and Korea.
- Class size together with students’ instruction time, teachers’ teaching time and teachers’ salaries, is one of the key variables that policy makers can use to control spending on education. Between 2000 and 2009, many countries invested additional resources to decrease class size; however, student performance has improved in only a few of them.
What the former Northern Territory government did is exactly what other countries did with the same results. It goes on to say:
- Reducing class size is not, on its own, a sufficient policy lever to improve the performance of education systems, and is a less efficient measure than increasing the quality of teaching.
That is exactly what the minister was banging on about. I scrolled forward to a further quote from that document which makes these observations …
Mr Vowles: Four minutes.
Mr ELFERINK: I have heaps of time and will not be on my feet for long.
It goes on to make these observations:
- Thus, reducing class size is not, on its own, a sufficient guarantee to improve the quality of education systems. But what is the impact on student performance?
- Apart from optimising public resources, reducing class size to increase student achievement is an approach that has been tried, debated, and analysed for several decades. Class size may affect how much time and attention a teacher can give to individual students, as well as the social dynamics between students.
We heard those arguments from the member opposite. In fact, the member for Nhulunbuy ran exactly those arguments. It says:
- However, findings from the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) suggest that systems prioritising higher teacher quality over smaller classes tend to perform better, which confirms other research showing that raising teacher quality is a more effective measure to improve student outcomes. The examples of Japan and Korea are compelling: the school systems of these countries, which show comparatively high levels of spending by educational institutions, tend to prioritise teachers’ salaries over class size. Both countries report higher than average student performance in PISA ...
They have larger class sizes in Japan and Korea, and spend more money and focus on teacher training and how that service is delivered in the classroom. Despite the fact they have an average of 10 students more per classroom in Japan and Korea, they achieve better academic results.
That is just the OECD. I am not an educator, but I reckon the guys who put the PISA report together, which includes Jenny Macklin’s husband if memory serves me correctly, carefully research these things. Let us be, as the member for Fannie Bay said, guided by the information we can find on class sizes from the Internet ...
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, the time for the matter of public importance has expired, given the two hours duration.
STATEMENT BY SPEAKER
Election of Deputy Chair of Committees
Election of Deputy Chair of Committees
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise that under Standing Order 12, the member for Nelson has been nominated by the Speaker and has agreed to act as Deputy Chair of Committees, replacing the member for Stuart.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Madam Speaker, since the MPI has finished, I will adjourn on this matter tonight because it affects my electorate greatly.
Education is the key to changing lives. It empowers people and gives them skills and confidence. It is the building block towards getting a job and contributing positively to our society, something the member for Port Darwin constantly goes on about.
Our teachers do a fantastic job giving our children the best start in life. A teacher is far more than an educator imparting information to a class. They perform many different roles in a day. They are in charge of our most precious assets, our children. These are the people who guide our students day in and day out, and the way those opposite have treated them is appalling. Daily they play the role of counsellor, mentor, organiser, sports coach, artist, and the list goes on. They arrive at school early to get organised, start yard duty and then head into the classroom to teach. At the recess break they are often dealing with left over morning work with students or another session of yard duty. They might get a quick toilet break or a chance to grab an instant coffee from the staffroom, no chance for a latte or cappuccino here. Lunchtime is filled with make-up lessons for students who missed out for various reasons, student representative council meetings, Tournament of Mind activities, sports practice or library duty. After school is filled with staff meetings, professional development, inter-school sports, and various other activities. Weekends and evenings can be spent marking, planning and preparing. We all know an unprepared teacher quickly sinks in a classroom of students.
Teachers spend hours preparing and planning lessons. The disrespect the Minster for Education has shown our teachers is appalling. To comment they have ‘quite a bit of down time’ is truly appalling. Minister, I am not sure what teachers you have spent time with, but I do not know any who have ‘quite a bit of down time’.
Every student in a classroom depends on their teacher. Teachers set the tone for the classroom; if they are angry or upset this is passed on. If they laugh and teach humorously, students learn in a happy environment. What you are doing to our teachers is already affecting our students. Teachers’ attitudes leave a long-lasting effect on students. They have the ability to raise self-esteem or to crush dreams. We all remember some of our favourite teachers; they leave a long-lasting impact on our lives.
Every parent wants the best learning environment for their children. Children need a variety of programs and support to learn and this is best achieved in small class sizes. The notion the Minister for Education has about smaller class sizes not mattering is wrong. This morning in Question Time he told us there is no research which shows smaller class sizes make a difference in any year levels except early years. That is wrong. The minister told us there is no clear research to show students perform better in smaller class sizes. How can less individual attention improve a child’s learning?
The CLP’s increase in class sizes means students will have less individual attention in class, teachers will be stressed, and we will not see better outcomes. The United States understands this - we just had the lecture from the member for Port Darwin – ‘so it should concern everyone that right now - all across America - tens of thousands of teachers are getting laid off … Think about what that means for our country. When there are fewer teachers in our schools, class sizes start climbing up. Our students start falling behind. And our economy takes a hit.’ Who are those words from? President Obama gets it in his report Investing in our Future: Returning Teachers to the Classroom August 2012. Teachers get, it but our Education minister does not.
In the President’s same report he discusses the negative effect of larger class sizes. America has had numerous studies, numerous examples:
- … a detailed look at the evidence - based on well-designed randomised experiments - confirms that larger class sizes have lasting negative effects: lowering high-school graduation rates, reducing the chance that students take college entrance exams like the ACT or SAT, and lowering the chance of college enrollment and completion.
- If we want our country to be a magnate for middle-class jobs in the 21st century, we have to invest more in education, not less.
That is from the President’s report. Invest more in education? Not in the Northern Territory under this CLP government.
This is only a small example of numerous reports and research which show large class sizes do not improve education outcomes. One British report I read showed students were closely observed by teams of researchers who monitored their ‘moment to moment movement and behaviours in blocks of 10 second intervals. The researchers found that adding five students to a class decreased the odds of the student being on task by nearly a quarter. A 25% drop in being on task with five more students in your class.’ That is some research the minister might like to consider.
In my electorate of Nightcliff we are losing up to seven teachers next year. Nightcliff Middle School is growing. Next year we are forecast to have four Year 7 classes yet teacher numbers are cut. Casuarina Senior College, the senior school for the northern suburbs and my electorate, is losing 12 teachers.
It is not just our middle and senior schools that are dealing with cuts, primary schools are also losing teachers. The CLP government is putting our children’s future at risk by cutting teachers. Minister, today you admitted teacher number cuts were not all about improving education but about trying to save money. Over the past few months, numerous residents have raised these issues with me. Parents, teachers, grandparents, are worried about the cuts.
Minister, I am not sure if you have even compared these cuts to your strategic plan 2013-15. One of the stated goals is, ‘To recruit and retain high-quality staff’. Yet, at the same time, our middle and high schools are losing teachers, many of whom are specialists in their field. In primary schools, contract teachers with proven practical skills and expertise are being informed their positions are being axed - no longer needed. That is not a policy of retaining teachers.
Further in the strategic plan it states, ‘Decisions are best made and resources have the most impact closest to the point of service delivery in schools’. A key action is to ‘Increase the school autonomy and decision-making’.
Minister, if you had attended any school council meetings recently you would know your strategic plan is not being implemented because you are forcing schools to get rid of teachers. The way in which school councils, principals, and teachers are being treated is appalling. Teachers are not interchangeable, regardless of their expertise. You are turning your back on your department’s strategic plan and Territory teachers.
Former Chief Minister, Terry Mills, guaranteed every teacher’s job was safe. You have broken this promise. Contract teachers who are right now teaching in our classrooms will not have a job next year; they are already leaving our schools. I saw farewells at the end of last term, Term 3. Students, parents, teachers, and principals all know what is happening. They are experiencing the CLP teaching cuts right now. Minister, you are not up to the job.
You mentioned in Question Time this morning:
- Have I been focused on other areas of my responsibility in the last few days? Yes, I have more than one responsibility. The environment is an important responsibility, as is Lands and Planning.
You have focused on other things over the last few weeks while our education system is in meltdown. Staff members from our schools are being farewelled, yet you are overseas looking at planning models. It would be good if you put on the public record where you went. What could be more important than our children’s future - an investment in our future? You have broken your election promise.
As a mother whose son starts school next year, I worry what the system will be like. What will the class size be? What is happening to student services? All these questions need to be answered but, no, you were travelling around the world. You claim primary schools will be better off, but people are telling us that is not the case. The formula you are using is ill-conceived ...
Mr Chandler: Did you get that off Google?
Ms FYLES: No, I did not get the formula off Google. Teachers and principals who are telling me …
Mr Chandler: It is what you were provided in your briefing.
Ms FYLES: Minister, your government is cutting education as a short-term measure – you have admitted it – to save money without thinking about the long-term. You are cutting teachers from our bush schools claiming nothing changed under Labor. Why did we see our first Indigenous graduates from the bush under Labor? Your short-sightedness means we are not seeing the true results. What do your bush members think about this? They are very quiet. What teachers are going from their schools? We saw the first graduates from the bush, something I am proud of. You should be ashamed of your government’s actions, taking education back to the Stone Age.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I listen to the member for Nightcliff from time to time. If in any doubt about her subject, her first starting point is ‘suffer the little children’. That is a very easy place to go. It is an easy place to go because people are concerned about children. It is somewhat unrealistic to say to members on this side of the House we, somehow, do not care about kids …
Ms Walker: You do not.
Mr ELFERINK: I pick up on the interjection, ‘You do not’. This demonstrates the poverty of your world view. The member for Nightcliff mentioned her young son starting school next year. I understand a mother would be concerned; however, what about when he goes to high school and we are paying back a $5.5bn debt. We will not be able to support that high school in an effective fashion and the class sizes will be 40:1 because that is the challenge we face. We care enough about kids to make the hard decisions now.
I pick up on a point the member for Nightcliff made saying how proud she was of the first high school graduates from the bush. I remembered the member for Nhulunbuy at the time, Syd Stirling, answered a question in this House about how much it cost to educate one of those kids. I cannot remember the figure, but it was hundreds of thousands of dollars. To educate one in the bush to make a political statement, we spent hundreds of thousands of dollars. What could we have done with that money in other areas? With that money we could have given them a private school education at some of the best schools in Sydney, and many more kids in Darwin high schools could have been educated. The choice was made to invest that money in one place on a handful of students.
The problem was there was so much pressure on the department to produce results they started graduating kids. Some of those Year 12 graduates cannot read and write, and I can give you an example of it because your former Leader of Government Business, Dr Chris Burns, who was Education minister, admitted one of the major problems with kids coming out of bush schools with Year 12 certificates was they were functionally illiterate. He admitted and accepted that. It made quite a bit of noise publicly.
The issue about equating classroom sizes to outcomes is not as strong as the quality of the teaching. The member for Nightcliff was quite accurate when she said everybody fondly remembers great teachers. I do, and could name them. I also remember some complete and uttered duds. The quality of the teaching was what captured me as a student, not necessarily the size of the class.
The OECD report I quoted not 15 minutes ago, reinforces that finding. When students in Japan and Korea can be in classes with 10 students per class more than the Australian or OECD average and consistently produce results far beyond the rest of the OECD, it is indicative there is something else at play than class sizes. The OECD has clearly pointed out class sizes are a response that schools or governments have pursued with limited results as a result of the extra expenditure. They say between the 2000 and 2009, class sizes were attended to by a number of OECD countries with limited results.
I made that clear and noted the member for Nightcliff was in the Chamber at the time. Yet, with a prepared speech, she continued to ignore that truism and continued to roll out the political line of what the government is doing is wrong.
I understand the government’s decision has been challenging for a number of schools. I understand it is causing some grief in the public domain which is amplified and fuelled as much as it possibly can by utterances similar to what we have heard from the member for Nightcliff. However, that is barely rational and, of course, she immediately takes the children of the Northern Territory as a human shield to justify anything she says, saying, ‘think of the children’. We do think of the children. However, we do not need to think of the children of next week or those beginning school next year. We think about those children in lower primary today who will be in senior high school in 10 years’ time. We are thinking of those kids, the kids the member for Nightcliff referred to. That is the frustrating thing about the approach the member for Nightcliff takes. There is heaps of emotional rhetoric about saving children today, but not a single utterance of how we will rescue and educate children in 10 years’ time.
You do it, whether the member for Nightcliff likes it or not, through prudent fiscal management. Any form of borrowing is a source of money you have to pay back. If we increase borrowing to feed ourselves or our education system today, we are borrowing from the future and we will not be able to ensure class sizes are of reasonable size into the future.
The Minister for Education has made it clear the ratio changes are well within the boundaries of the Australian average. They are not extreme by any stretch of the imagination, and they do not ask anything more of teachers in the middle and senior secondary schools than happens in other jurisdictions in this country and, dare I say, in other parts of the OECD.
The policy of government is to retain good teachers and give them a career path. That policy will be pursued by having enough capacity in the piggy bank to ensure quality training and a capacity to recruit quality teachers. I would rather follow the findings of organisations like PISA and the OECD and be guided by their science, which we are so oft urged to do by members opposite, than the hysterical rhetoric we just heard from the member for Nightcliff.
To take on the mantle of the defender of children at all costs, and use them as an emotional shield in an argument will, doubtlessly, inflame the debate, but it will also make it unreasonable and a slanging match. We have seen that in this House tonight. Above all else, it takes away from the fact what we need for better education outcomes for our kids is a quality of education in the classroom driven by passionate, qualified and well-supported teachers. That, I know, is the object of the Minister for Education.
Ms FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Mr Deputy Speaker, in adjournment tonight I talk about some wonderful things happening in Drysdale, as always. There is no shortage of wonderful things in my electorate, despite what the Labor opposition will have you think.
I was extremely proud and privileged to attend the Northern Territory Baking Show a couple of weeks ago, held at the Charles Darwin University Palmerston Campus. It kindly sponsored and hosted the baking show over two days. On the first day they had the Apprentice Excellence in Baking competition, and the winner of that competition will go to the national titles. It has a very high standing in the baking industry and was a very sought-after prize to take out for our young baking apprentices. I could not be prouder to have heard Chris Field won that. Chris is an apprentice at Ben & Sam’s Caf & Bakehouse in Palmerston, which is a new Palmerston business established at the bottom of Highway House near the water towers. That was excellent, and I wish Chris the best of luck at the national titles.
The following day was open baking categories. I have to say an enormous congratulations and well done to Brumby’s Palmerston and Ben & Sam’s Caf & Bakehouse, which took out a number of the prestigious awards at the Baking Show. They showed the clout of Palmerston business the quality of their baked goods. It was very humbling to be in the presence of bakers who, whilst they may rival each other in business, their camaraderie and passion for what they do was truly inspirational.
I was lucky enough to speak briefly at the awards presentation. My family started one of the first bakeries in Darwin, in competition with the renowned Quong family who also had a bakery, and my family went on to own Darwin Bakery. It was another one of those small world Darwin connections that Phil Barnes, owner of Brumby’s Palmerston, apprenticed under my cousin at Darwin Bakery 22 years ago. When I mentioned it to my cousin, there was a funny story to tell about my cousin, Phil, and something to do with the seventh severed finger. Perhaps I will leave that story for a separate adjournment debate. I am sure it is worthy of 10 minutes storytelling, and I believe a Ferrari is involved as well.
Brumby’s Palmerston took out the ultimate prize, which was the Most Successful Trades Exhibitor. They also went home with a swag of other prizes, including first prize for the 680 g white sandwich loaf, first prize for the 400 g crusty French stick, first prize for the 450 g white three-strand plait crusty dough, second prize for the 680 g wholemeal loaf high-top, second prize for decorated cup-cake category, third prize for the 450 g fruit loaf high-top, and third prize for the 90 g white lunch roll.
If you are looking for a fluffy, crunchy loaf of bread, you should be going to Brumby’s Palmerston and supporting that tremendous local business. A total of 39 bakeries and food outlets participated in that competition, from as far as Nhulunbuy, Alice Springs and Jabiru. It was a very tough competition and the prizes for the class categories were well-won. Again, congratulations to Phil and his team.
Ben & Sam’s Caf & Bakehouse is a new Palmerston business and Rob Hartwig is the owner. He and his staff have done an exceptional job. Their business also won Most Successful Student Exhibitor, which was another major prize. It went to their apprentice Rachel Dixon. Congratulations to Rachel, who has a long and illustrious career in baking and, hopefully, in business ahead of her.
Ben and Sam’s took out an exciting number of prizes. They won first prize for decorated sponge with inscription, but what Territorians are most keen to know about is first prize for plain lunch pies and first prize for pasties. Palmerston officially has the best white loaf and the best pie and pastie in the Northern Territory, something we can be exceptionally proud of. If you are in the market for a bloody good pie and pastie go to Ben & Sam’s Caf & Bakehouse, they will be happy to see you.
I also would like to thank the Baking Association of Australia for bringing together the event. They brought experienced judges from interstate who were excellent. Unfortunately, I did not get to taste any of the amazing produce, but I put my dibs in for next year to be honorary judge or something so I could sink my teeth into some of the amazing produce. Well done to all involved, particularly Palmerston businesses, who shone amongst the 39 bakeries and food outlets. I could not be prouder of your achievements. I will order a few more pies and pasties now to support the business with the best pies and pasties.
Also this month we had an emotional, wonderful, exciting moment in Palmerston Football Club’s history. As patron of the club for a number of months, I have been involved in the secret scheming of the naming of the soccer stadium’s grandstand. Bill Miller is a pioneer of soccer in the Northern Territory and has made a long-standing and utterly selfless commitment to the Palmerston Football Club and football in the Northern Territory for more than 40 years. He has been CEO of Football Federation NT and is a life member, has coached a number of junior clubs, has refereed, was president of the Sanderson Junior Soccer Club, Marrara Soccer Club, and was president of the Palmerston Football Club from 2009 to 2013. He has been awarded, over the years, a number of commendations including Australian Sports Medal, the Football Federation Australian Achievement Award and Life Membership of Marrara Dragons Soccer Club.
It was particularly moving and emotional because it was so powerful to see the committee, the core supporters, and people who are there every Sunday setting up the grounds, working in the canteen, doing all the hard yards, rally together to say, ‘We identify this individual as someone important and special to us’. It was uplifting for everyday Palmerston residents who wanted to recognise the enormous contribution of this individual. With a little help, we were able make that happen. It was a complete surprise. At times we were a little worried the surprise would be given away. Poor Bill thought I had secured a major naming rights sponsor for the stadium. I could not help but wonder if he would be disappointed when we announced the stadium was named after him, because that meant the big cash was not coming.
Needless to say, he was blown away by President Steve Lawson’s announcement at the Cyclone Cup that the stand would be named Bill Miller Stand. It was humbling and amazing to see a grown man almost brought to tears for being recognised for his lifelong contribution. That was very special.
That night the club also recognised a number of life members: Howard Carter, Troy Callaghan, Terry Daye, Anna Daye, Marshall Chin, Katie Chin and, of course, Bill Miller all became life members. There was much celebration.
The official sign has now been erected on the stadium wall. I have not come across one person in football in the Northern Territory who has not heard of Bill, all saying he deserves recognition of his contribution.
Bill, as patron of the Palmerston Football Club, I have been thrilled to work closely with you over the last two years. We are proud to have recognised you and we look forward to your ongoing contribution to our club.
Mrs PRICE (Stuart): Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to adjourn by picking up from where I finished this morning. I was talking about the department I am minister for, the Department of Community Services.
Community Services is responsible for a range of service delivery areas such as the Remote Engagement Coordination of Language Services. Provision of language services is by the Aboriginal Interpreter Service across the Territory. There are 500 qualified interpreters in that department.
The Office of Women’s Advancement provides policy advice and options to government on women’s issues. Men’s Policy provides policy advice and options to government on men’s issues, which is very important. Service Delivery Coordination coordinates the Stronger Futures National Partnership Agreement and other federally-funded programs.
We intend to engage widely with remote communities, homelands, and township camps about ways the Giles government can make a real difference for people living in those places. I want to look at ways to engage Indigenous people in those areas in local jobs, local business opportunities, and better social outcomes, through sport, health, education, and positive women’s and men’s policy, to reduce family and domestic violence in those communities.
As well as the Department of Community Services, the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority falls within this portfolio. AAPA is a statutory authority established by Northern Territory law to administer the protection of sacred sites on all land and sea areas across the Northern Territory, with 33 staff across Darwin and Alice Springs.
I believe we need to get the balance right between preserving and announcing Aboriginal culture with the economic, social and cultural development of the NT. I will continue working with and developing the relationship AAPA has with its key stakeholders such as the NLC, CLC, developers, and traditional custodians to ensure mutually beneficial outcomes are negotiated so the economic and social development of the NT can continue while protecting my people’s sacred sites.
I want to thank the Chief Minister and my colleagues for their trust. I look forward to working with each one of them to deliver real change across the Territory, unlike Labor, who did nothing for 11 years. I would like to thank all my staff members who prepared me for the first day of my ministry, and I want to thank all my family members for encouraging me to enter politics. I look forward to working with your son as well. I will have the greatest team on level 5, and I congratulate all my staff members.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Mr Deputy Speaker, tonight I thank a big company for solving a small problem. The Ichthys project is massive and is only just ramping up. The latest figure is more than $5bn is forecast to be spent on the project in the NT alone. A range of recent reports from the Australian Bureau of Statistics highlight the scale of this project: engineering construction work is up 83% in the last year; total construction up 55%; private capital investment up 162%, and the list goes on, all largely due to the INPEX factor. In fact, pretty much every piece of economic data at present has the INPEX factor. Many local companies, big and small, are benefiting right now from the project.
I have followed progress of the INPEX project closely from the start. I was working for Clare Martin when she launched the audacious bid to lure INPEX to Darwin. I then became a member of parliament and part of Paul Henderson’s team as he concluded the hard work over several years to secure the project for the Territory. During this time I have been impressed with the commitment INPEX, and their partners, have shown in ensuring they work with the community at every stage through the approval processes and logistics. They are extremely open about the project and their awareness campaign and community consultations are some of the best we have seen. They have proven themselves extremely good corporate citizens from the support they have provided to institutions such as the Larrakia Training Centre and the North Australian Centre for Oil and Gas at CDU, through to support and sponsorship of Territory Thunder and many other sporting and community groups and events. They have launched their own Reconciliation Action Plan with measurable targets to ensure the project benefits Indigenous Territorians.
Of course, a project this size brings some logistical issues with it. Accommodation and traffic issues have been well documented. In Parap, we had our own issue. Some of the staff working for JKC, the construction contractors of INPEX, live in Parap near the shopping village and are collected each morning by bus. Several of their colleagues were driving to Parap and parking in the village to take the bus. This was causing a few parking problems, and traders and customers were finding it difficult to find a park at the village in the morning.
On behalf of traders, we worked with Mary Durack from INPEX and Ali Kelly from JKC. JKC has now issued instructions to staff to use the park and ride facilities at the airport and not park at Parap. People can still catch a bus to and from the INPEX project. This is a small issue on the scale of things, but one JKC took seriously and solved quickly. I would like to thank Ali and her team at JKC and the community feedback area.
As an opposition, we fully support the INPEX project. We will continue to support INPEX and work with them as the project unfolds. I commend them for the community involvement they have undertaken, and for solving a small problem we had in Parap.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the actions of a group of people in our community who have contributed a great deal over many years. The event they run on an annual basis is called India@Mindil.
I acknowledge the great contribution the Indian community has made to Darwin. Like many other ethnic groups in Darwin they work hard, they pay their taxes and contribute to our community. More specifically, they bring with them such a rich culture. Not only do they move into our communities and provide services, both professional and technical, but they bring with them this rich, vibrant culture along with some very tasty food.
Every Dry Season Territory residents and the world have an opportunity to peak through the window and into the heart and soul of one of the most ancient cultures on Earth, India. I learnt some years ago when I was in Varanasi that it is the oldest and longest continually inhabited city in the world. It is a great culture, with great food and great people.
On 22 June this year I was extremely fortunate, as Minister for Multicultural Affairs, to have the honour and pleasure of attending India@Mindil 2013. This was the 16th India@Mindil and, from the moment I set foot on Mindil Beach, I was impressed with the work and effort put in by so many volunteers.
A record crowd of between 10 000 and 15 000 enjoyed a great performance. I attended the first India@Mindil, and have been to just about every one since. I have watched it grow from a small event to something which has locals, families, and interstate and international visitors enjoying a fantastic performance. The variety and colour of the Indian costumes, alluring jewellery, and the aroma of spicy food have undeniably transformed this part of Australia by embracing the Spirit of India, the theme for India@Mindil 2013.
To quote my grandson, ‘This really rocks’. It did. The dance and entertainment went on and on. It started at about 5.30 pm and, at 9.30 pm, was still pumping out music. If anyone has seen the Bollywood movies, or the stage production of Bollywood, you would appreciate this was exactly the same. I could not believe the energy people were putting into the dances and there was one after the other.
It was a great honour to be there with other dignitaries: Her Honour the Administrator of the Northern Territory, Hon Sally Thomas was there were her partner, Duncan McNeill; the High Commissioner of India, His Excellency, Mr Biren Nanda; and the Consul General of India, Mr Subbarayudu.
Lighting of the traditional brass lamps by the Administrator, the President of the Indian Cultural Society Mrs Asha McLaren, His Excellency, Mr Biren Nanda, the High Commissioner of India and I signalled the start of the cultural program. It was an honour to do that. It is a big event and the experience is one you never forget.
The organisers of India@Mindil 2013 reinvented the festival, making it bigger and better than ever before. I would like to touch upon some of the salient changes as a matter of record, as there are a number of firsts. They changed the location of the stage along Mindil Beach on the western foreshore so as that the setting sun created an aura around the stage. Two large screens were set up on either side of the stage to magnify and project the stage performance to the audience.
However, there was a problem fitting so many people in. This event has become so popular they had trouble fitting people in. What a fantastic problem to have; to know next year you have to make room for many more people. The quality of the show is bound to attract many more people next year, as this event goes on Facebook, and into Lonely Planet and other sites where you can find what to experience in Darwin.
The food and variety stalls were set up on either side of the stage, allowing easy access for the audience and the public. This is a very well-thought-out and executed event. Congratulations must go to the people who co-ordinated it. Tiered seating was also provided to cater for a larger audience, and next year they will have to get more in.
For the first time in Australia the Koodiyattam Dancers from the Mani Madhava Chakyar Smaraka Gurukulam, Kerala took to the stage. The dancing was superb. This is an ancient form of Indian dance drama which is ritualistic. The dancers were highly stylised with elaborate makeup, masks and headgear, again just like you see in Bollywood.
The specially invited guest artists from India conducted dance workshops and classes enabling a local, Miss Kiran McLaren, to perform the prized role of Lord Sri Rama while enacting a story from the Indian epic Ramayana.
A variety of dances from the subcontinent were also choreographed and performed to perfection by local artists. The quality of dancing and choreography was outstanding.
I wish to acknowledge the contribution to the Northern Territory of the Indian community who, with their many talents and skills, form an integral part of our society.
Congratulations go to the committee for their hours of selfless community service in staging such an amazing event: Mrs Asha McLaren, President of the Indian Cultural Society of the Northern Territory Inc; Mrs Savita Valadian, Vice President; Mr Ramamoorthi Jayaraj, public officer and committee member; Mr Aswin Bhudhavaram, Treasurer; Mr Ramanand Naik, Assistant Treasurer; Mr Sumit Sharma, Secretary; Mr Raj Nagaraj, Assistant Secretary; Mr Atma Maharaj, planning advisor; Mr John McLaren, event coordinator; and Mrs Kabita Ghosh and Mr Ratan Ghosh, cultural coordinators.
India@Mindil has grown since its inception to the point it may be extended and conducted over the duration of a day instead of just an evening. The amount of stalls selling fantastic jewellery, clothing, and all types of Indian products is amazing. The lights are on at night - they love bling and all the shiny stuff - and the whole event is one ongoing production of shops, food stalls, the stage, the dancing, and it just goes on and on.
Planning is in place to dedicate a second entertainment area and a place where people can sit and eat.
Discussions held that night and subsequently mean next year we will probably have to shift the stage into the car park area because thousands of people want to see what a fabulous production India@Mindil is.
I again congratulate all those involved in the planning, production and running of the night. Mr Deputy Speaker, they did a fantastic job and should be congratulated. Well done to the Indian Cultural Society, and each and every one of you involved in India@Mindil 2013.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to speak about my recent trip to Bali. I met with people instrumental in working with Royal Darwin Hospital to train doctors, medical staff and nurses for Sanglah Hospital, Bali.
The idea of working with Sanglah Hospital came after I had discussions with Royal Darwin Hospital Trauma Centre and Dr Len Notaras. As you are well aware, Royal Darwin Hospital played an instrumental role in both Bali bombings. We discovered a significant number of people injured in those two bomb attacks were treated at Royal Darwin Hospital. Something not well-known to the public is during the first bombing in Bali quite a few people received treatment there but when they came here had to receive treatment again, at great cost and delay to their recovery. Some people, according to people at Sanglah Hospital, died because of lack of proper communication between our respective medical staff, doctors and nurses. If people were aware of treating methods and cultural differences, and the way things are done differently in Indonesia, these people may still be alive.
Previously, I believed the next crisis would not be a terrorist attack but could be a typhoon, a cyclone, an earthquake, or a phenomenon which might create some problems. They would then request assistance from the Australian government to overcome the difficulties in a poor country not as well-equipped as Australia.
In the beginning the department had some reservations about the level of support they could provide to Sanglah. However, after my visit with Mr Colin Macdonald QC, and also people of the department meeting with Dr Satarga and Dr Supriyantoro, who is Director-General of the health service in Indonesia, we soon realised any attempt to create a sister relationship between the two hospitals and train their people in Darwin would be beneficial to both parties.
We have now trained 78 nurses and doctors at Royal Darwin Hospital and, in other results, have seen a significant improvement in methods of treatment and facilities at Sanglah Hospital. You may ask, why Sanglah Hospital? Bali is closer to us than Perth or Adelaide. About one million Australians visit Bali every year and quite a few, for many reasons, end up at Sanglah Hospital Emergency Department. I was pleased to visit the hospital, pleased to be briefed on the achievements Sanglah Hospital has made since the beginning of the sister hospital relationship started, and pleased to see the improvements.
I discovered Sanglah Hospital now has the first and only clinical educator in Indonesia. I also saw the hospital school, the first ever to be established in Indonesia. This was established at Sanglah Hospital because people who trained at Royal Darwin Hospital visited our school and saw how it operated, and they took those ideas to Sanglah. I visited the renal dialysis unit, which is now operating to our standards, with our processes and, most importantly, the emergency department.
The first time I visited Sanglah Hospital I was taken for a tour of the facilities. I walked into the emergency department which, at the time, was overcrowded. In the emergency department, I saw a Balinese women being resuscitated with no concern for her privacy. When I visited the hospital this time I was pleasantly surprised. They have implemented a triage system similar to what we have in Australia. They have changed the layout of the emergency department with a waiting room, cubicles, and with a special area for treating children.
I was impressed with the changes, and am very proud I insisted the relationship between Royal Darwin Hospital and Sanglah Hospital continue. I am thankful for the help of the Australian government at the time, especially the then Minister for Foreign Affairs Kevin Rudd. Without his assistance, we would not be able to provide the $400 000 to $500 000 for the program to commence and continue for three years.
It is a worthwhile program benefitting not only Balinese people, but also the thousands of Australians who visit Bali every year. In case of emergency, there will be closer cooperation between our two hospitals. People will be treated the same way they would in Australia, so if they have to be medevaced to Darwin we do not have to commence treatment again.
Also, Bali Hospital has decided to accept the Australian standard of accreditation, which is very important, and to continue this practice in other hospitals around Bali. We have also entered into a second stage, with a request from the authorities in Bali to assist in the training of other medical staff and personnel from other hospitals. This includes areas which are now experiencing an increased presence of Australian tourists, like east Bali and northern Bali.
I was proud to see what they have done and thankful to Mr Colin McDonald QC, who was instrumental in introducing us to the people at Sanglah, and to Professor Dave Brown, who worked at Royal Darwin Hospital for many years and was instrumental in training people at Sanglah Hospital. Well done! This can be translated to similar arrangements with other hospitals in our region, namely Kupang Hospital and, perhaps, Dili Hospital. It will be interesting and beneficial for all of us if we can work together and assist our neighbours and, in the case of an emergency, be able to treat Australians in the Territory after they receive initial treatment in a neighbouring country.
Mr Deputy Speaker, tonight I listened to the debate about education. As a father with a 13-year old attending Dripstone Middle School, I am concerned, like every other parent in the Territory, about the changes in class size and the reduction in the number of teachers. Tonight I heard for the first time the minister admit the cuts to teacher numbers are not because he wants to improve outcomes in education, but simply as a cost saving measure. I also heard other people tell us money does not mean anything in education; big classes do not mean you receive a different standard of education than in the smaller classes.
I am the product of a country which spent more on defence than education. I was in a class with 40 children. Many of us aspired to go to university, but many of us did not because we did not receive the education we deserved to prepare us for university. Education is paramount. If we want a better future for our children education is very important. If we are to see improvements in our country, if we are to be a clever country, if we are to progress as a clever country in the region we have to start with the best education for our children.
I understand the example of Asian education the Treasurer used - things are different in other countries. My wife and son are from China, and I am familiar with the type of education they receive in China. It has become clear to me, in China in particular, children go to school not to learn how to think but to learn what is written in the books and, when they have exams, to repeat what is written in the books. To give you an example, children the age of my son will go to school at 8 am and finish about 5 pm. They go home and then go to a coaching school because the pressure is enormous and they are pushed to achieve because the competition is enormous.
Yes, governments in Asia spend money but not as much as we spend in the Territory. If we are to see real outcomes we have to provide the best education for our children, and that is by an appropriate ratio of teachers to students in every class.
The most prestigious schools, not only in Australia but also Asia, have small classes and spend a lot of money educating children and employing the right number of teachers. That tells us something. We should take an example from the private schools and learn from it. If everything is about saving money, can the minister advise if he has cut funding to non-government schools the same way he has cut funding to government schools. I would like to know that and the justification for it. Thank you.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016