2013-02-13
Madam Speaker Purick took the Chair at 10 am.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of staff from the Department of Infrastructure undertaking a tour of Parliament House. On behalf of honourable members, I welcome you and hope your tour is successful and enjoyable.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I advise honourable members the Minister for Indigenous Advancement will be away for part of Question Time this morning. Any questions relating to her portfolio areas are to be directed to me.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the routine of business for Tuesday, 19 February 2013 commence at 2 pm and be reordered in the following manner:
1. Prayers
2. Notices
3. Petitions
4. Questions
5. Government Business – Notices and Orders of the Day
6. Ministerial Statements
7. Papers
8. Consideration of committee reports and government responses and the Auditor-General’s Reports
9. Discussion pursuant to Standing Order 92 (Matters of Public Importance).
I do not believe I have to be on my feet for a long time to explain this; this is to allow for the acknowledgement of an important component of our history in Darwin, the dreadful and awful bombing by the forces of the Japanese Empire on 19 February 1942. We commemorate that every year as we intend to do on 19 February, which is the day in question. The reordering of business will enable those commemorations to be conducted so all members of this honourable House can participate in those commemorations accordingly.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Port Darwin. Obviously, the Commemoration of the Bombing of Darwin is a very special day in Darwin. This is a very sensible rearrangement of the notices for 19 February, and the opposition welcomes the change in the Order of Business for that day.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): In closing debate, thank you very much for the opposition’s support.
Motion agreed to.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that, unless otherwise ordered, this Assembly authorises the broadcast, rebroadcast and televising of all or portions of the debates or proceedings of the Assembly or a committee for the purposes of section 23 of the Legislative Assembly (Powers and Privileges) Act, in accordance with the following provisions:
1. Recordings and broadcasts may be made only from the Legislative Assembly sound and vision monitoring system, unless otherwise approved by the Speaker or his or her delegate, and in accordance with guidelines determined by the Speaker from time to time.
2. Recording and broadcast of sound and vision of committee proceedings are subject to any conditions or restrictions agreed to by the committee.
3. Broadcasts of excerpts shall be used only for the purposes of fair and accurate reports of proceedings, and shall not be used for:
4. Reports of proceedings shall be such as to provide a balanced presentation of differing views.
5. Excerpts of proceedings which are subsequently withdrawn may be broadcast only if the withdrawal is also reported.
6. Excerpts must be placed in context. Commentators should identify members, at least by name.
8. Where excerpts are used on commercial networks, the stations should try to ensure that advertising before and after excerpts is of an appropriate nature.
9. Where the audio excerpts of the proceeding are used on television, their use may be that of audio over still frames or overlay material.
10. Any other conditions determined by the Speaker.
11. Non-compliance with the guidelines listed above may incur penalties imposed by the Speaker.
I shall not be on my feet for long to discuss this. This is part of the government’s commitment to let the public know what is going on in this House. This was discussed by the Standing Orders Committee and unanimously agreed to by all members in the committee. The motion before this House ensures the public are, in a fair and balanced way, able to see what their parliamentarians are doing. This is a good thing.
We live in an age of modern communications, and the electronic media needs to communicate with people beyond the ability of people to attend this House and watch what is happening from the public galleries. As a consequence, this gives a fair and balanced proposition to this House and the media, and we anticipate the media would use any material made available under these rules within the parameters as described.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend this motion to honourable members.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Mr Deputy Speaker, as the member for Port Darwin said, this was brought up through the Standing Orders Committee which the member for Nelson is also a part of. The opposition, Independent and government members all support this motion about ensuring our parliament is broadcast. This is very similar to what is already on the website - the Speaker’s Rules - and it is a slight tidying up of language. We want to ensure parliament is broadcast and people have access to it. It is not always as interesting as Question Time but what happens in this parliament is always important. We will be debating some bills later today, and a ministerial statement, GBD, and it is good that it is broadcast.
Mr Deputy Speaker, we support this motion.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the motion. It is important people know what is happening in this House.
I am disappointed the government has scrapped the broadcasting of Question Time through Territory FM saying it is available through streaming live on the Internet. As one who used to work outside, I still have trouble working out how I stick the computer on my tractor.
It is a mistake because many people listened to Question Time using the radio and will now miss out on that opportunity. It is all good to say these are modern forms of communication, but the reality is wireless - I am not talking about WiFi but the normal wireless people use in their car, their workplace or just sitting in a park - enables people to listen to Question Time. It might sound a bit strange, but many people listened to Question Time on the radio.
The move by the government - I know it was looking at cost cutting for the reasons they have given many times - was a bad step because it will not fulfil the intention of this motion before us today as well as it could have.
Territory FM is broadcast over a fair part of the Northern Territory. It was an opportunity for people who cannot have the benefits of using the Internet or viewing the live streaming as the alternative. People will miss out and that is a downside of one of the changes the government has brought in.
By all means we should be, as far as possible, promoting in the community that people listen to what is going on in this parliament. People need to hear what their local members are saying, what the policies of the government are, and what the policies of the opposition are. For many people who are busy, and live a long way from this Parliament House, the only way they can hear at least some of that debate - that is, during Question Time - is over the radio.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the motion but I am disappointed that Question Time is not being broadcast on Territory FM. That was a backward step by the government.
Mr CONLAN (Tourism and Major Events): Mr Deputy Speaker, I pick up on a couple of comments made by the member for Nelson. I question the viability of broadcasting parliament on Territory FM. The reach and audience it had has been looked at over a number of years.
It did not go into Alice Springs. You talked about it going all over the Northern Territory or large parts of the Territory. I also question that. I just asked my colleague, the member for Katherine, whether it was broadcast into Katherine, and it was not. It was not re-broadcast into Katherine. It was not broadcast into Tennant Creek. I am almost certain you could not pick up Question Time from the Territory FM broadcast into the Barkly region, or Central Australia into Alice Springs. It was a Top End indulgence which came at considerable expense.
I understand your concerns about the rural area, but it is an FM frequency and FM frequencies do not travel very far. You might pick it up about 50-60km away. Once you pass that, it is gone. How you can hear it when you are on the tractor anyway, I am surprised. Maybe you had your headphones on.
I understand what you are talking about. I would love to hear it on radio, as radio is in my heart and my soul. I love the medium and I would love to see a robust radio service throughout the Northern Territory. However, in this case, it had run its course.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this move to cease the broadcast of parliament. We need to move into the best form for all Territorians and capitalise on the best efficiencies, that is, through the Internet.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank honourable members for their support. I understand what the member for Nelson is saying. From time to time, the reality of government is that it has to balance the value of money spent on a project with the potential outcome. I do not want to be seen to be bashing up radio stations, but even radio today is undergoing a substantial change in the nature of the industry.
The move away from amplitude modulation to frequency modulation in the 1980s caused a stir at the time. Prior to that, of course, there were the old MW frequencies, which are the short wave frequencies, and, prior to that, we were standing around with our crystal sets trying to pick up information.
The nature of communication is changing. Digital radio is changing the industry. The Internet - I think everybody in this room was born before anybody had ever heard of the worldwide web - is now such an intrinsic part of our lives that the iPhone and such technologies are an essential part of our being. Technology moves on and, from time to time as a government, you have to make decisions to support that technological change.
The broadcast that is available to people is available through the Internet. The Internet is now sufficiently well accessed by the community as to be able to rely on it as a broadcast medium. Unfortunately, a decision - I think it was about $50 000 a year - had to be made. Whilst I am sympathetic to your arguments, I am also sympathetic to the position that if we do not move along with the times we will continue to be using chamber pots and buggy whips to this day. It just does not happen.
As I said, I do not want to be having a go, but we, as a government or as a parliament, want to get our debates into the public domain. The idea of broadcast through radio has been pretty much caught up with. For our purposes - and I am not saying other purposes - with the Internet and the various devices people now have access to, if they are interested, with very few exceptions, I suspect we have sufficient broadcast capacity to get what we want, as parliamentarians, into the public domain.
Motion agreed to.
Continued from 4 December 2012.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, the opposition understands this bill fulfils an election commitment as part of their proposed stand on law and order matters. Of course, we all want and expect to feel safe in our workplace and to ensure workers can go about their lawful business knowing they have the full protection of the law. Indeed, any government has a duty to do all it can to protect its citizens from violent crime and ensure those who commit crimes are dealt with adequately and appropriately.
Everyone should respect people who are working, in particular workers dedicated to serving the public. Sadly, there are those who do not respect workers, so we need laws which provide strong consequences for those people. We, on this side of the House, have examined this bill thoroughly and have some reservations that, in its haste to meet an election commitment, it has been rushed and not thoroughly or properly tested.
There seems to be a reluctance on the part of the new government and the Attorney-General to use the mechanism which the former Labor government used on occasions, which was to provide, where a change of legislation was significant, an exposure draft so all interested stakeholders could review the legislation and provide feedback to government, with the potential to include drafting amendments to achieve a better result and workable legislation in the best interests of Territory citizens, especially when they are at work.
It is difficult to discuss this bill in isolation knowing the next bill for debate is about amendments to the Sentencing Act and mandatory sentencing. I do not know when that bill is coming forward. I thought it would be today but we have had no word so ...
Mr Elferink: Tomorrow.
Ms WALKER: … perhaps it has been pulled for some amendments. That bill which we will discuss, as the Attorney-General is telling me, tomorrow, is another CLP election commitment.
There are many who believe that adequate laws are already available to the courts to impose appropriate sentences for serious assaults. That is the stand we will be taking, along with defending the competency and capacity of our judiciary to make the call on appropriate sentences with all the facts at hand. Anyway, that will come on tomorrow.
On this side of the Chamber, we are more focused on outcomes. That goes to the heart of prevention of crime occurring in the first place. We are especially mindful that by far the majority of assaults causing harm, on workers in particular, are all too often alcohol- and/or drug-related. That is why the previous Labor government introduced measures to restrict access to alcohol for problem drinkers, and, in 2008, introduced tough penalties and no second chance for serious violent assaults. That is why we worked with police and the hospitality industry to tackle alcohol abuse and assaults by drunks in our nightclub precincts.
It is, sadly, ironic that the new government put drunks back on the streets, opened up the rivers of grog and then introduces mandatory sentencing to lock up offenders after there is a victim who has suffered harm affecting their health and wellbeing.
It is another poorly-thought-through election commitment to promise to dismantle the Banned Drinker Register and replace it with nothing nearly six months after its axing, which is a stark example of a government failing in its duty to protect its citizens by effectively removing a measure which was working and showing results ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: Oh, it was not.
Mrs WALKER: There are a number of people who will attest to that, if not the member for Katherine. The retiring Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Richard Coates, in an interview which appeared in the NT News on 28 January on the subject of alcohol, described Labor’s alcohol reforms as radical and recognised they were one way of curbing violence in Aboriginal families. I quote from his interview:
No one is sure what the nuts and bolts of their idea is for replacing the BDR with whatever measure that might be, other than we know we have many people back on the grog, back out on the streets, fuelled up on alcohol, and committing violent crimes against innocent Territorians, be they workers or otherwise.
It is not only the DPP and members of the legal fraternity the CLP continues to ignore, it is Territorians. There was a brilliant letter in the Letters to the Editor yesterday, which was tagged as the letter of the day from a Ms Maria Woodgate of Alawa who puts in a great case as to why the CLP’s argument is incredibly weak. She said:
I will not read the whole letter but it reflects the sentiments that have inundated the Letters to the Editor page, talkback radio, and just about every forum I have been a part of.
The Australian Labor Party, more than any other political party, has always held the health, protection and wellbeing of workers as central to our values, in stark contrast to the CLP. That remains a core part of our being, most recently witnessed by our support for workers fighting against draconian industrial relations powers that stripped away workers’ rights, particularly those of young workers and, most recently, reform to national occupational health and safety legislation. It was good to see the many unions and their members and, no doubt, other citizens who were not necessarily union affiliated, rallying to send a message to the new government yesterday. They were described by the member for Greatorex during Question Time as ‘grubs’. Well, is that not a real compliment to Territorians from a member of the CLP government?
That rally was not only about their rights as workers but, more importantly, those people expressed their grave concerns about the slashing of government spending to essential frontline services intended to protect the health, safety and wellbeing of Territorians.
The Labor Party has always worked to send a clear message that workers are entitled to a safe workplace and to go about their lawful business without fear of assault or any other harm. With this history, we would be supportive of legislation that built on previous work to provide a safe workplace. We would be open to that if there was more evidence of broad community consultation and support for the detail of this bill. Unions NT, for instance, has heard nothing of this proposed legislation and how it might protect their members.
I am very interested to hear from the Attorney-General what level of consultation has been taken beyond the consultation sessions conducted in November last year and a general overview of the proposed changes in a paper that was available online through the Department of the Attorney-General and Justice. I note - as I did in debate last year - that these face-to-face sessions were held in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine and Darwin, but not in Nhulunbuy. I would like to hear from the Attorney-General as to why four large communities in the Northern Territory had the opportunity for face-to-face consultation, yet the community of Nhulunbuy, bigger than Tennant Creek, was not privy to this consultation. There may be other consultation channels I am not aware of which I look forward to the Attorney-General sharing with us when he closes the debate.
Basically, the opposition cannot and will not support the bill in its current state. We suggest to the Attorney-General that he withdraw the bill and consult more broadly on what the bill seeks to achieve and how best to meet that end: consultation with workers, employers, unions and community groups affected by this legislation and, importantly, with the legal fraternity to try to understand what exactly are the inadequacies of the existing legislation.
This legislation had its beginnings in the premise that workers in the service of the communities - ambulance officers, nurses, teachers, taxi drivers and the like - deserve a high level of protection. In particular, there is a deterrence factor of strong mandatory minimum sentencing which will follow to help prevent assaults on workers. We know this is coming on tomorrow.
The Attorney-General, in his second reading speech, highlighted assaults on taxi drivers. I well recall, as I am sure we all do, the taxi drivers’ snap strike on 8 July last year in Darwin. It was a protest about the levels of violence invariably inflicted by intoxicated persons. I applaud taxi drivers for taking such a strong stand and sending a very strong message to the community and the government that they would not tolerate violence in the course of their duties, nor should they.
When drivers of commercial passenger vehicles are already singled out within the provision in section 188(2)(fa) is there a perception taxi drivers are not already covered? It says commercial passenger vehicle drivers are already included.
While we can see the legislation brings a strong punitive element to the sentencing of offenders causing physical harm, we do not see that the link with prevention is well-established, especially when alcohol is involved and impairing the judgment of individuals. This was highlighted during the taxi drivers’ strike with commentary around the fact drivers were, rightly, sick and tired of being targeted by drunken hooligans.
We acknowledge, as I said at the outset, that the CLP went to the 2012 election promising to be tough on perpetrators of assaults on people providing a public service. Indeed, the Attorney-General’s second reading speech quoted the Chief Minister directly, promising to:
We understand the argument that this was an election commitment, and you will claim a mandate for this legislation, which I have no doubt will be passed regardless of what I or anybody else has to say.
However, the bill before us goes much further than what was suggested by the Chief Minister in July 2012. The bill seeks to broaden the definition of ‘worker’ to include any worker who is performing their lawful duties, whether they be a butcher, a baker or even a candlestick maker.
I see the inclusion specifically of ‘volunteer’ in the list of workers, so I ask the Attorney-General whether this means, for instance, a volunteer representing a political party has some recourse when assaulted verbally and nastily by a torrent of abuse from another member - let us say at a polling place - who has seen fit to deliver a tirade of abuse. I would like him to address whether it constitutes assault and explain where psychological harm fits into this picture. I know the former member for Araluen, Ms Jodeen Carney, was a proponent of recognition of psychological harm, recognising that this kind of harm can and does manifest in physical suffering which can lead to loss of earnings, quite apart from the psychological damage.
The bill goes further still; it includes contractors, the self-employed, volunteers, apprentices, trainees, and work experience students. I am pleased to see work experience students included in the list. However, are sex workers covered under this bill? I would like to hear from the Attorney-General where sex workers fit into this bill.
What of members of parliament? I note that section 188(2)(e) of the Criminal Code Act includes a member of the Legislative Assembly, the House of Representatives or the Senate and if the assault is committed because of such membership - I guess because it has been in the news very recently about the member of Port Darwin, who was assaulted in the lead-up to the election. I am very sorry he went through that. I can imagine it would have been extremely stressful and distressing, completely out of the blue and, no doubt, a source of stress for his family. I would feel exactly the same. However, I do not know if those two individuals realised who it was they were assaulting. I would like the Attorney-General to provide a little more detail for me on where members of parliament sit in this, and whether politicians are listed as a separate category, given we have others listed there. Maybe not.
The CLP seeks to pass legislation that is much broader in scope than that which they promised, and employers, employees, and the community more generally should have more opportunity to understand and comment on how it will work in practice, as their representative bodies: their unions and the Chamber of Commerce which deals with employer and employee matters.
To give one example around a lack of consultation - I throw this one out from left field - we are not aware of any consultation with the sports sector to discuss the application of this law to cover umpires, whether they be paid or unpaid, and other volunteers who assist with the administration of support who, in the heat of the moment, may find themselves on the receiving end of a blow, for instance. How will these changes affect them and how are they different from the protection that is currently available to them?
I move on to another point. We are very wary of the apparent side effect of diminishing the heavy weight of a higher penalty for assaulting a police officer going about their potentially dangerous work on behalf of the community. On my reading of this legislation, it elevates the maximum penalty for serious assaults on any worker to the same as that for assault causing harm to police. These are listed in section 189A in Part VI, Division 5 of the Criminal Code Act.
In elevating that, it will mean if the victim - this is any worker, not just police - suffers harm and the offender is found guilty on indictment, the penalty is seven years’ imprisonment. If a person is found guilty summarily, the penalty is three years’ imprisonment. If the victim does not suffer harm from an assault and the offender is found guilty on indictment, five years. If the person is found guilty summarily without harm to the victim, imprisonment would be two years.
Community standards might expect the requirement of very strong deterrents for assaults on police higher than for other categories of workers. I would like to hear from the Attorney-General on that front, especially after yesterday’s discussion of the bill before the House around amendments to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act. We both commented on the dollar values which are attached to victims’ injuries, and that those values can be seemingly arbitrary and almost macabre. What price do you place on varying degrees of injury to an individual following an assault? In that same vein I maintain that the current section 189A, specifically for assaults on police, is somehow devalued - noting the exception, however, that there are provisions that remain in section 189A(2)(b), which recognise that should an officer assaulted suffer serious harm the offender is liable to imprisonment for 16 years.
Most people would agree that police, firefighters, ambulance and health workers, and public transport workers deserve a high level of protection through the courts, more so than other occupations, because of the degree of risk and exposure. We call on these workers to provide services on the front line. They are, as we all know, working very frequently with intoxicated or drug-affected people. There is an argument that offenders assaulting them and causing harm should face a higher penalty, but I am not sure your amendments do this.
We are concerned with the linkage to the mandatory minimum sentencing for all of the reasons we will be outlining tomorrow, including the complementary Mandatory Minimum Sentences Bill which will provide for at least three months’ gaol where the victims suffer harm. It is very difficult to talk about this bill without making reference to the bill which will come before the House tomorrow.
I will go to my close now. I had some comments about mandatory sentencing, but it is probably more appropriate that I hold on to those until tomorrow.
In his second reading speech the Attorney-General said all Territorians should be assured that when they go to work they will be protected by the law. They are already. We support that notion. We want to know what evidence from experts - not what evidence from the experiences of the member for Port Darwin as a police officer for many years or somebody with a law degree – there is to the contrary.
We are of the view this is rushed legislation to help make the CLP appear tough on crime to fulfil an election commitment. At the same time, as we know, they have recklessly abolished the Banned Drinker Register, put drunks back on the streets to bash partners, fight amongst themselves, and harass families and workers going about their lawful business.
Labor has always proudly supported a safe environment for workers. We certainly support tough penalties for assault on workers, but we believe there should have been far more consultation and consideration of the very broad application of this bill and how it will work in practice.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I look forward to hearing what other members have to say about this bill. I know the member for Nelson is going to speak on this bill and I am interested to hear what other members from the government benches have to say about it. I can only conclude by saying that the opposition does not support this bill.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, there is no doubt we become concerned when workers are bashed. I certainly support tough sentencing for people in those positions. The first paragraph of the Attorney-General’s second reading relates to an assault on 8 July 2012 when a taxi driver was bashed. He said that the government reacted to that intolerable level of violent behaviour towards them. It became one of the CLP’s promises that they were to introduce an offence into the Criminal Code Act which carries a minimum three-month prison sentence for an assault with circumstances of aggravation against anyone who serves the public.
I cannot support this bill because it is so closely associated with the next bill. Whilst I do not have a problem with the government saying it wishes to protect workers - the definition of workers is a good one - I have some questions about who a worker is. A worker is defined as a person who carries out employment-related activities in any lawful capacity, including an employee, a contractor, a subcontractor, an apprentice or trainee, a student gaining work experience, a volunteer, a self-employed person, and a person appointed under the law in force in the Northern Territory to carry out functions or to hold an office.
In the last paragraph, the Attorney-General said this – I will paraphrase slightly – goes some way to ensuring all workers in the Northern Territory should feel safe and protected when they go to work each day or night. That should be the case. However, I went to some briefings, and I thank the minister for allowing me to have a briefing.
What I believe we need to do if we are to bring in this legislation is to bring in the evidence that, under present laws, people are not being punished sufficiently. We are saying to the magistrates and the judges that they are not sentencing people who committed assault to a reasonable sentence that relates to the seriousness of the crime. That is the question I asked during the briefing, Attorney-General, and that information has not come to me.
In a court case, before you condemn someone or find them not guilty you hope the evidence is there so you can make a rational decision about whether someone should be found guilty or not guilty. In this case, I am asked to support a bill for which I do not have evidence - I only have the second reading - and I did ask for evidence. Some of the evidence I asked for was what the punishment was for the person who assaulted the taxi driver. I do not have that evidence either. That is one of the reasons I cannot support this bill.
The other reason I am concerned about it is I do not know whether real discussions were held with judges and magistrates regarding this law. If they are giving out adequate sentences, then this is a slap in the face to them. If they are giving out adequate penalties, then why are we introducing this? Are we saying if a person who had just assaulted a taxi driver, a bus driver, or the girl behind the counter in a Macca’s store came before that magistrate or judge they would not consider that was a very serious offence and, accordingly, sentence that person to something that recognised the seriousness of that offence? I cannot imagine any judge would be letting someone off for bashing up a taxi driver or a bus driver.
The Attorney-General might say, ‘You are wrong, here is the evidence’. Well, the evidence was not presented to me in the second reading, nor when I asked for it last week. I have not received anything which could give me a belief that present sentencing is not adequate. A number of people in the government have told me ‘we are overregulated’. Well, this seems to be a duplication of existing legislation and, without the evidence, seems to show we are duplicating legislation unnecessarily.
I do not have a problem with the idea of bringing in this new concept of a worker, but I do have a problem with this being associated with the other bill and, to some extent, this bill saying magistrates are not providing adequate sentencing, because that is what people sometimes think. We need to inform the public of what is the actual case.
As I said, I understand where the government is coming from and I make it clear that I support tough sentences for assaults on people who are in the workforce serving the public.
The government is talking about mandatory sentencing - we will get into this debate tomorrow - however, can anyone tell me if anyone under the influence of alcohol and drugs will really care what the sentence is? Maybe when they are sober they might but, unfortunately, people get drunk and forget all the good promises they might have made that they were not going to lose their temper or get into trouble. This is an area that needs debating. Will this make any difference to that person? Will they be back reoffending? I understand we should punish a person, but part of that punishment period is also, hopefully, rehabilitation. A broader approach is not being manifested in this debate about why that person is drunk or on drugs.
I raised the question today about the possibility that the government might scrap the SMART Court. I really hope the government does not scrap it, at least for the time being, until an independent audit of the appropriateness and effectiveness of that SMART Court can be done.
The government has scrapped the BDR. The statistics in relation to the BDR had nothing to do with the scrapping. It was opposed in the Assembly by the opposition, now government, before the statistics came out. When they scrapped it they said, ‘We have found the secret statistics and that is the reason we scrapped the BDR’. They did not support it from Day 1. I do not have a problem with that, but to use the statistics is a latter-day excuse. The fact is they did not agree with it.
I did not believe it would work because of secondary supply, but it should have been allowed to run for an adequate term so an independent assessment could see whether it had some effect. It was never going to be the be-all and end-all of alcohol problems. It was one of a series of approaches any government should try. The problem with the discussion about alcohol in our society is that it is so tied up with party politics. It is a shame because it is such a serious issue for all members of this parliament and for Territorians.
Where, in this debate, are we getting at the underlying causes of why the taxi driver was bashed? I have asked time and time again which government will stand up and say drunkenness is not an appropriate behaviour for people. It seems we support people being drunk as long as they do not stand in front of a car. We do not mind them being picked up. We make all the excuses in the world such as get a Sober Bob. The message means you can get drunk and, as long as you have a Sober Bob, it is all right. There is no question about whether drunkenness is appropriate or is something we say is okay as long as you do not drive. That is something no government wants to tackle because behind all this is big business. It is big business with the Australian Hotels Association and the breweries, and sponsorship of sporting groups.
The underlying issue is Australian society is influenced and used by big business for the sale of alcohol. Go to any party – I am not a drinker and not saying people should not drink – and find the odd person who gives you an orange juice. How many people have a beer or a wine? It is normal today. I do not have a problem with that, but there is no effort to say it is infiltrating our society so much we are not willing to look at where it is heading.
There have been some documentaries on television recently - it is not just in this country, this was in Britain - where people drink at home and are just about at the point of being drunk and then head off to the nightclubs and get well and truly sloshed and cause problems in places like Mitchell Street. I have been to Newcastle and looked at the changes to reduce violence in the CBD of Newcastle. Who opposes those changes the most? It is the AHA and the government, whether it is a Labor or Liberal government.
Those changes have reduced the number of people presenting at Newcastle hospital considerably. You can get on the website and find what that experiment has done. The closing times, things like not having shots after a certain time or saying you cannot leave a pub after 1.30 am - you can stay in a pub until 3.30 am, but you cannot do a pub crawl - all those things have made big changes.
Who puts pressure on the government to turn that around? It is the AHA because they do not accept it. They believe pubs will lose business. There are big players in this game.
When we look at this small bill there does not seem to be much effort in asking why that person was drunk or drugged out of their brain. We know most violent offenders in our prisons have been affected by alcohol. It is still sad that, whilst people jump up and down about the BDR, they do not accept the fact that the government was trying. It was expensive. It went for just over 12 months. If I was a statistician looking at broad trends, there is no way I could believe you could say that experiment either failed or succeeded.
When the now Opposition Leader was discussing this issue when she was in government and she started to use three-monthly figures, I said you cannot use three-monthly figures, it is far too short, and you cannot use 12-monthly figures; you would have to use at least three years’ worth of figures. Statistics need a fair length of time before you can make value judgments as to whether things are effective or not.
That, of course, does not take into account the anecdotal evidence from people in relation to less humbugging around shopping centres. There will not be any statistics for that. You have to rely on what people say. I have some papers on what people have said about less humbugging around Fannie Bay shopping centre. One of the Aboriginal organisations, AMSANT, also said they believed there had been a reduction in that sort of behaviour. They did not have statistical data to prove it, but they said anecdotally, from people they have talked to, there had been changes.
I slightly digress, but, to some extent, this is window dressing. I understand the government made a commitment and it would hate to be seen to not fulfil a promise. However, I want good law. I want law based on statistical analysis that this law is, first of all, needed and, secondly, will be effective. I do not have that evidence today. It is more about fulfilling a political promise rather than showing us that existing laws are not working, and proving this law will be more effective in stopping people from bashing workers.
That is why I have trouble with this legislation. It is not because I do not support tough sentences; they might already be given tough sentences. I do not have the proof to show that is not the case. I will not support a bill that sounds good and looks good but in reality is duplicating something that is already happening.
The other issue, of course, is about who are workers. The member for Nhulunbuy mentioned that. I have raised this question previously with the Attorney-General about the role of someone on a sporting field. In my case, I umpire. You get a few dollars for umpiring so, technically, I am a worker. If someone clobbers me as an umpire, normally they are reported. But, in this case, do they fit into this realm and get three months’ mandatory sentencing for clocking me?
What about another player? What about players in A Grade in the Darwin AFL? They get paid for playing football. If one player assaults another player, is that person liable for three months’ mandatory sentencing? Do they come under clause 188A?
I raised this issue during the briefing; I have been told that a nurse working on a remote community would not be a worker once they left the clinic and went home. The point is, I know from living out bush that nurses - especially if there is only one - are on call 24 hours a day. It is not quite as bad, but when I lived at Daly River the nuns were the nurses. On the weekend, I could bet my bottom dollar they were at the clinic pulling fish hooks out of people who had misguided casts with their fishing line. They should have had the weekend off, but they were in the clinic looking after people.
If someone is assaulted at home and they are a nurse - say a nurse is assaulted on a remote community - are they like a policeman, for instance? Would a policeman at home off duty who is assaulted fall under this regime as well? I use the nurse as a similar proposition, not so much in Darwin but on a remote community where that person would be the only one who would be available if someone was sick or injured. ACPOs would be a good example. Are ACPOs off duty once they go home? These are not meant to be mischievous questions, Attorney-General, but they need some clarification when you are giving your response.
Mr Deputy Speaker, as I said at the beginning, I understand where this legislation is coming from. I support tough sentences, but I have no evidence to prove existing sentencing has not been adequate. I do not believe any judge or magistrate in their right mind would give a lenient sentence to someone who has just bashed a taxi driver doing their job. I believe this is a duplication of legislation. I understand it has this part which pulls together the definition of ‘worker’; I can live with that. However, overall, the legislation is duplicating something. I have no evidence to show it is different to what we have at present.
Debate suspended.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I seek leave of absence be granted to the Minister for Sport and Recreation, Mr Conlan, for 14 February 2013, which is tomorrow. Mr Conlan will be attending a peak interstate conference in the best interests of Territory sportsmen and women.
Leave granted.
Mr WOOD (Nelson)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I present a petition not conforming with standing orders from 1212 petitioners relating to the new workers village on rural blocks. I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
Mr HIGGINS (Daly)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I present a petition not conforming with standing orders from 1083 petitioners relating to commercial crabbing in Bynoe Harbour and all its tributaries to Dundee Beach. I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I respond to the debate here today. I thank honourable members for taking the time to do some homework and receive briefings on the bill before the House. It was quite correctly identified by the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson that this is an election commitment of the Northern Territory government and the Country Liberal Party. Moreover, not only an election commitment, but it was pointed out, I believe by both members but certainly by the member for Nelson, that we will claim a mandate to bring this legislation before this House. Indeed, it would be remiss of us not to because not only do we have the mandate, but we were elected, in part, on the basis we would fulfil our promise to protect workers in the Northern Territory.
I confess to some surprise at the Labor Party’s determination not to support this legislation, considering that a little over 24 hours ago they were standing in front of a group of unionists saying how much they care about workers in the Northern Territory. I am mystified that, within 24 hours, their support for the working people of the Northern Territory evaporated in a puff of cynicism and political opportunism.
We all remember the circumstances that led to the announcement of this policy. However, this policy has certainly been in my mind, and the minds of a number of other members of the government, for a number of years. I harken back to the Northern Territory government when Dr Peter Toyne was the Attorney-General. It was forced into a place where the Criminal Code Act needed to be amended for what Dr Toyne, at that time, called the Good Samaritan bill.
However, Dr Toyne was a decent and upright fellow and he knew he had to respond to pressure from this party, the Country Liberals, because we were trying to force through the parliament legislation which would be protective of certain types of emergency workers and ambulance officers, if my memory of that bill in 2005 holds true; in fact, I believe it was about 2004. At least Dr Toyne had the courtesy to acknowledge his bill was based on the work being done by the Country Liberals - particularly me - in this area. Whilst it was not quite on all fours in what I wanted in protecting emergency workers, it was sufficient to underwrite the need.
The history of this policy dates back the best part of a decade as far as I, and the Country Liberals, are concerned. I draw members’ attention to the debates on Thursday, 15 February 2005, when the government of the day finally capitulated and allowed workers legislation to be changed to protect what they called Good Samaritans.
I walked away satisfied that had been done, but it was always in my mind’s eye, despite those improvements, that legislation could be cast even further. I do not recall exactly when it was, but the amendments to the Criminal Code Act in relation to police officers were also something I was driving in relation to assaults on police officers.
To put this bill into some context is useful for members opposite. I see the world very much through the lens of an economic prism. I am a liberal by disposition - and I mean that philosophically – and a Country Liberal by party allegiance. Seeing the world through an economic prism means one of the greatest things you can do for a person is protect their capacity to generate income for themselves. This, by the way, does not put me at odds with the union movement at all; I expect unions would also believe that was an important principle. The capacity to go to work and labour - they have a party named after it on that side of the House - and labour for the good of your family and yourself, for the shelter of those people who are close to you, and for your economic independence is not only an important place, I would go so far as to say it is a sacred place.
I have used that expression on a number of occasions in support of this legislative instrument, and I continue to use it because it is the place where you provide for yourself, contribute to the community not only through the services you provide as an employee, a self-employed person, a volunteer, or any other definition before the House at the moment, but by your excess productivity being paid to the community of the Northern Territory, as well as the community of Australia, by virtue of the fact your productivity generates wealth for taxable purposes. Of course, that does not apply to volunteers but, generally speaking, that is what the place of work is.
I heard the comments from the member for Nelson that people are already protected. Yes, that is true, they are protected. However, reflecting the philosophy I am trying to describe, the workplace, in particular, is something we should throw a shield around as much as we can. The intent of this legislation is to build a shield around the workplace to make it as safe a place as possible.
I pick up on the comments of the member for Nhulunbuy where she seemed to assert there was no plausible link between punitive responses by the state and prevention of crime. I disagree on that point. Our whole criminal justice system is predicated, in part, on the assumption that if you commit a crime you suffer a punitive response from the state and, hopefully, that would prevent people from committing those crimes. That is why we fine people, put people in goal, why people are brought before the courts - so they can undergo some punitive response from the state. Not only that, but to use them as an example for the rest of the community, to say to that community, ‘If you do these wrong things, there will be a punitive response from the state’.
Thank God the vast majority of people adhere to that principle. In fact, the vast majority of people do not commit crimes because they are just decent and upright people. Nevertheless, there are, doubtlessly, many crimes not committed by virtue of the fact that people are scared of the consequences of committing those crimes.
Therefore, the punitive nature of the penalties described in this bill before the House is aimed at reinforcing a greater resonance amongst the minds of people so that, if they do commit assaults on workers in the workplace, they will face more serious sentences by virtue of the fact that a person has gone into that workplace, has done something that causes harm unlawfully to another person, in circumstances that qualify as an assault and, as a consequence of that, will be held accountable for their actions to a higher level than if their victim was merely a person on the street.
That is not to lighten or in any way diminish the seriousness of assaults generally, but to place a greater emphasis on those assaults of people in the workplace. We have done it for policemen, we have done it for Good Samaritans, and now the Northern Territory government proposes to this House – hopefully, with the support of the majority of the members in this House – to do it for people who provide for themselves, their families, and their loved ones. I do not see why there is a difficulty with that principle in the member for Nelson’s mind.
In rereading the contribution of the member for Nelson in the Good Samaritan legislation in 2005, I note he supported the legislation at the time. He said:
... for introducing it in the first place.
Something has changed in the member for Nelson’s world view because at that stage he was prepared to accept there was the requirement to fulfil a community expectation in legislation. There was no evidence in that debate provided by Dr Toyne - or by me for that matter - on how people have been dealt with by the courts in the past, and what statistical evidence supported the introduction of this legislation. All he said was, ‘Yes this sounds about right’, because he was a man in touch with his community.
Now the CLP is in government and the member for Nelson makes less of an impression than he did in the past. All of a sudden, governments have to satisfy his need to provide him with voluminous statistical evidence to support the requirement for legislation.
I do not think the member for Nelson has lost that much touch with his electorate and the people of the Northern Territory, at least I hope not. Surely, on the face of it, he would concede that people in the workplace would like to know that workplace is taken extremely seriously by the government of the Northern Territory and, as a consequence of being taken seriously, we pass legislative instruments which support that belief.
I get what the member for Nelson is talking about. I am just surprised he is no longer prepared to accept there is a public expectation. I used the quote yesterday in the condolence motion that sometimes the truth is better than just the bare facts, or words to that effect. That is exactly the sort of thing I am talking about.
I want to deal with issues raised by both members. The first issue raised by the member for Nhulunbuy was in relation to the offences being adequate. I heard and understand the argument, but the former Labor government went down a similar path, specifically in relation to police. If the principle is that all assaults are dealt with in a generic fashion, then her criticism of this bill must resonate as a criticism of singling out police officers or Good Samaritans for special treatment. If that principle does not hold true because she supports singling out police officers or Good Samaritans, then there must be something different about workers in general where she is prepared to make a distinction between the Labor government’s policy in relation to police and workers in general. That, however, does not concur with her assertions that she believes in protecting workers’ rights.
There is a philosophical inconsistency with the approach she has taken. I reject it on the grounds that workers should be protected. Who would ever have thunked that in a parliament of Australia anywhere, it would have been the conservative forces of darkness, from the Labor Party’s perspective, that were championing workers’ rights over and above the party?
The second comment I make is that, because of the lack of critical capacity in attacking the bill, to fill out time I suspect, the member for Nhulunbuy went down a number of different paths which had substantially little to do with the bill.
I believe in a broad range of debates. I listened carefully, and one of the things is this hoary old chestnut about putting drunks back on the streets - that the CLP put 2500 drunks back on the streets. They were never off the streets. If they were, can you please tell me where you put them. If you had put them somewhere and they were not on the streets, I have not seen any line item in the budget from former governments as to where they had put these drunks. As a consequence of that, you clearly squirrelled away some money somewhere which has been able to house 2500 people off the streets. We did not see them at all during the operation of the Banned Drinker Register. Of course, everyone knows those 2500 people were never off the streets.
In that 2500, because the government was so anxious to demonstrate the success of their failing program at the time, they started to include all sorts of people such as drink-drivers, rather than the core problem drunks who infest our parks and gardens. Those core problem drunks who infest our parks and gardens were never off the streets, and they were only 800 in number.
I remind honourable members that during the last year of operation of the protective custody legislation in the Northern Territory, a little over 20 000 people were apprehended. The following year, with the operation of the BDR, it was down to about 19 900. There was a difference of 300, which is not statistically significant. In truth, the former government continues to be misleading in this area.
What Mr Coates had to say was not supported by the assault rates. The assault rates had gone up over the period of the operation of the BDR. That is supported by the statistical measures put in place by the former government. It was not a deterrent in any fashion, and the data/models put together by the former government did not support it.
We get on to the issue of consultation. I appreciate the Labor Party is utterly beholden to the unions, but when you advertise in a newspaper, travel the full length of the Stuart Highway in the Northern Territory to have numerous consultations in the process, it is a pretty poor organisation that is not able to read a newspaper, telephone the office or whatever else. Even the communication between the Australian Labor Party and the union movement must be pretty flimsy if they are not able to pick up a telephone and speak to the union movement.
We are not beholden to the union movement. We believe it is full of quite clever people who are capable of organising coming to a public event when it is advertised in the newspaper. What do they want, a gilt-edged invitation to each union member? It is just nonsense.
I thank the member for Nhulunbuy for her kind words about the assault on me; I will pause on this briefly with a couple of things. Even if this legislation had been operational it would not have been applicable in that instance because there was no injury to me at all. I daresay, at the tail end of that series of events, the injured party was probably the assailant.
The police officer legislation is still stronger in the area where serious harm is caused, and so it should be; police officers endanger themselves on a regular basis in protecting us.
I pick up the comments in relation to sex workers. Where a person is engaged in their employ and that conduct is lawful they will be protected. For argument’s sake, if a sex worker is registered with the NT Police - and that is what they do - the legislation will apply to them if the conduct is lawful. It will not apply to a person engaged in unlawful conduct. If a person is engaged in unlawful activity then it will not apply, nor should it because we do not want this legislation protecting a drug dealer who makes his or her largest form of income selling drugs in our community. That is the borderline in relation to that issue.
A political volunteer working for an organisation - so long as that organisation is aware this person is doing volunteer work for them - will in every likelihood, and in normal circumstances, be protected under this legislative instrument. Why should they not be, no matter which political party is involved? We would see and expect that political volunteers would be protected so long as the organisation they were working for was authorising them to do their job. You cannot say a person is a volunteer when the organisation they are volunteering for is unaware they are doing that work for them.
I believe that covers most of the issues, but I also want to touch on the member for Nelson’s contribution in relation …
Ms Walker: Why no consultations in Nhulunbuy? You have not answered that.
Mr ELFERINK: Okay, consultations in Nhulunbuy. It was not on the Stuart Highway. We looked at the expense …
Ms Walker: Oh, so we are second rate. If you are not on the Stuart Highway, you will not get consultation. Shame on you, John.
Mr ELFERINK: I believe that you, the way you have conducted yourself in decisions surrounding …
Ms Walker: Gapuwiyak mob …
Mr ELFERINK: All right, forget it!
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Nhulunbuy, allow the minister to continue.
Mr ELFERINK: We looked at the expense of having a consultation there. People still had every opportunity to make contact with my office or the Attorney-General’s department. I believe the Northern Territory News goes to Nhulunbuy. Does it? Yes, it does. Okay, so it was advertised in Nhulunbuy.
Ms Walker: You could not afford to get out there but Gove residents have to get on a plane to come in. Good on you!
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order! Member for Nhulunbuy!
Mr ELFERINK: Now we have gotten over the sensitivities of the member for Nhulunbuy …
Ms Walker: The people of Nhulunbuy, let me be clear.
Mr ELFERINK: The member for Nhulunbuy ...
Ms Walker: The people of Nhulunbuy ...
Mr ELFERINK: Oh, goodness gracious …
Mr McCarthy: Semantics, minister, you are big on semantics - Stuart Highway semantics.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr ELFERINK: For goodness sake, what is wrong with you people? What is wrong with the Labor Party in the Northern Territory? You are so angry, it is incredible ...
Mr McCarthy: You used to sit here not so long ago.
Mr ELFERINK: At least I knew what I was doing. All I hear is anger. It is seething, dreadful anger coming from you.
The Leader of the Opposition’s office alone, evidenced by what I read in the paper today, demonstrates you guys have completely lost it ...
Mr McCarthy: Do you have a glass jaw, man? You can’t take it? You dished it out for four years when I was over that side.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! The minister has the call.
Mr ELFERINK: So angry, Madam Speaker. That is the one thing I said the Labor Party always does so much better than people on the conservative side of politics; they are much better haters. Gosh, they can hate in a way incomprehensible to me. It drives them; it is the fire in their furnace. I cannot imagine how you can sustain any form of happiness when your sole motivator is such a deep-seated contempt for all that is not of your opinion. However, I digress.
I pick up on the comments of the member for Nelson in relation to sporting contests. The member for Nelson mentioned he was an umpire and, should he get struck in the role of an umpire …
Mr Vowles: Big chance, Gerry, big chance.
Mr ELFERINK: I am not going to reflect on the potential for that. If he is a volunteer for an organisation, or being paid for that service, and the person is found guilty of an assault which injures you and causes you harm, yes, this will apply. You are a volunteer in that structure of serving an organisation, namely the - is it AFL you umpire for? There you go. Yes.
In regard to the sporting contest, the issue was raised in relation to professional sportsmen as well as people who are paid for doing it and that type of thing. I draw honourable members’ attention to Graham Blockland, Criminal Laws: Northern Territory, Federation Press, page 233 where the comments were made as follows:
It, basically, says when I run onto the Rugby field I accept that, from time to time, I will suffer some type of conduct against me which is outside the rules of the game. However, that does not automatically follow it amounts to a criminal act. To test that would be a case-to-case issue. For argument’s sake, let us say a high tackle I have on occasions in the past accidentally performed in playing football - not happy about it; it is a reflex action. Somebody is running past you, you throw your hand out and it is a high tackle, you are penalised, the whistle blows. If you read the Criminal Code Act literally that would potentially be dealt with as an assault. However, that assault requires something called mens rea. I draw members’ attention to the Criminal Legislation of New South Wales, page 324, 2001-02 edition, where it says, ‘mens rea of the offence’ talking about assault:
That is Crown v Williams.
The reason I read that is that for an assault to actually be an assault, there has to be an intention, more than just a reflex action. If someone breaches the rules in a game of football, you blow the whistle, it is outside the rules, but it was a reflex action, it was part of the rough horseplay outside of the rules of the game, but does not qualify as an assault. But there comes a point ...
Mr STYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Mr ELFERINK: I thank honourable members. If there is evidence to demonstrate a person had stepped outside of the rules of the game to such a degree as to become criminal in their conduct, then you would have a criminal assault, at which point, if it was a professional footballer or even a semi-professional footballer, they would be protected by this legislation, as they currently are for any other form of assault. If, by way of example, one player walks up behind another player on the field and starts punching him in the back of the head, the person drops to the ground, he then kicks him a few times - I realise that is a fairly extreme example – clearly, that is not rough horseplay or anywhere near the boundaries of the rules of the game; it has taken on a criminal quality.
To determine what is a criminal quality in those sorts of circumstances is a matter for the courts to determine. Evidence will be adduced from witness statements and any other forms of evidence that are available, and a court will determine whether or not we are talking about the rough horseplay contemplated in the case I cited earlier, or if there was some form of criminal conduct that amounted to something more than a mere breach of the rules of the game. I hope that satisfies the inquiry from the member for Nelson.
I want to also touch quickly on remote workers. Yes, it applies to them if they are engaged in the course of their duties. If a remote health worker, for argument’s sake, is mowing their front lawn and somebody jumps the fence and belts them because they do not like the sound of the lawn mower, that is an assault. But if somebody stubs their toe on the other side of the fence and the health worker assists that person - essentially in their duties as a health worker - basically, we would call it a call-out in the old vernacular. I am sure you have been in remote communities where police officers, nurses, and even chalkies have been called out for different reasons. If it is in the course of their employ then, yes, it will protect them. That is the idea.
I want to finish with some observations about the comments of the member for Nelson, which were observations on the appropriateness of drunkenness. This is probably one of the stark differences between me and the member for Nelson. The member for Nelson would, essentially, create a moral code by which the consumption of alcohol is in some way wrong; that we should not do it as something we do in the course of our daily activity ...
Mr Wood: No, no.
Mr ELFERINK: Well, he is sitting there saying no now, but he was starting to talk about the way we drink alcohol publicly and all those sorts of things, and the message is all wrong ...
Mr Wood: The word was ‘drunkenness’.
Mr ELFERINK: It was drunkenness. Okay, well, drunkenness. I do not care if people get drunk; it does not bother me in the least. I am not going to moralise about it. It is their conduct whilst they are drunk that I am interested in. If a person sits in their lounge room and drinks a bottle of tequila every night, that is their business; it is not for the state to walk into their home and dictate terms to them in what is considered to be a generally acceptable social product. They have health outcomes that come from that; they are answerable and should be responsible for those health outcomes.
We regulate liquor to a degree in the community, and different governments around the world respond in different ways. We respond differently to the way the former government responded. We also believe there is room for the regulation of sale and supply of liquor in our community because we have a Liquor Act. What we will refrain from doing is moralising about people because that, ultimately, leads to the experiment that was tried in the 1920s in the United States. All that really achieved was the establishment of organised crime in a way it had never been established before ...
Mr Wood: Are you saying I am promoting prohibition?
Mr ELFERINK: You can explain yourself if you like, but the point is, that is where you end up going. Either that or you have to be a lot clearer about the things you say, member for Nelson.
Getting back to the substance of this bill, I have dealt with each of the points made, I hope, by members opposite. I realise they will not be satisfied with that.
Madam Speaker, I return to the start point that this was a commitment we made to the people of the Northern Territory. It was a commitment which, when articulated, was welcomed. When the bill was brought into this place it continued to be welcomed, particularly by those in the taxi industry, but also more broadly. I believe it will continue to be welcomed by workers throughout the Northern Territory. I remain somewhat surprised and disappointed that the party which is supposed to protect workers’ interests is walking away from this for no other reason than they have to find a point of difference, no matter what that is.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I know there are rules about speaking to the third reading, but there were issues raised during the debate which required some response, especially the issue of drunkenness which has now somehow moved from me not liking people drinking alcohol, to me supporting prohibition. Nothing could be further from the truth and there was no intention of that being the case.
What I said is that governments seem to be too scared to say to the community that drunkenness is not something we need to support as a society for health reasons; there may be moral reasons as well. Also, as a society, do we condone drunkenness as something that is of great value in our community? I have nothing against people drinking, but you have to look around and see the problems we have in our society today. Are they based on just having a couple of beers? No, they are not. They are based on people generally being drunk.
This issue goes back to the very reason we are here today; that someone was bashed in a taxi. The minister has not come into this parliament with details of the case. I have to presume the reason this person was bashed was because someone was either drunk or under the influence of drugs.
We have so many people before the courts for violent offences because they commit them when they are drunk. When people are sober, they can generally restrain themselves. However, when drunk they bash police, and smash doors and shop windows. Sometimes young people get into all sorts of trouble - unwanted pregnancies. Often, these sorts of things relate to an overuse of alcohol.
I have never said people should not be able to drink. My daughters would be into me straightaway. They love a bit of red wine, but they do not get drunk. It is a matter of balance in this debate.
It is like whether you like gambling or not. I like a gamble. I go to the pub and put a couple of dollars on the dogs on Friday nights. However, I do not have a gambling problem. It is the same with alcohol; it is a matter of keeping things in perspective. That is what I am saying. No one seems to take it seriously. Part of the problem is governments are scared of vested interests which believe having some restrictions or putting forward ideas that will say that certain ways of behaviour such as being drunk in public are not what we should be promoting.
I have been to Mitchell Street; I have had the tour. I said before, tell me what the vodka room is all about. It is all done up in purple, it has boom, boom, boom, boofy music going. It is about selling grog. I do not even think there was any food in the place. Let us get real instead of just pretending; it is about selling grog and making profits, and that is what the big companies and the Australian Hotel Association are all about.
Who cares? They do not really care about drunkenness. They might make some statements every now and then about responsible drinking. However, the point is we have a problem and that is reflected in the number of people in our prisons. It has been said many times that 80% of people in prison are Indigenous and most of those people are in there for violent offences caused by alcohol.
It is not something we should just pass off as me saying I do not want people to drink. I am saying we need to promote balance and responsible drinking. We used to have a campaign in the Northern Territory which pushed responsible drinking, and that seems to have faded away in the past.
I have to race upstairs because I do these things by myself these days, but the bill in 2005 the minister was referring to was passed, and I did make some comments about it. Regardless, that was eight years ago and, hopefully, one of the things I do working in parliament, reading about various things and talking to other learned people, is learn; I am not static in my views.
I am just reading the front page of this book by Dean Mildren. There is a foreword in there from Hon Robert French, Chief Justice of the High Court. He refers to a Justice of our Supreme Court, Justice Martin Kriewaldt. There was a Professor Geoffrey Sawyer who described Justice Martin Kriewaldt, after he died, as ‘possessing the virtues traditionally in the Anglo-Australian judiciary: learning, wisdom, uprightness, fair-mindedness and a profound sense of public duty’.
I thought learning as you go along allowed you some latitude when it comes to your views on something you might have done or said 10 or 20 years ago. This book - I will probably raise it tomorrow - talks about mandatory sentencing in 1933. Well, it was scrapped in 1939. Someone changed their mind. How terrible!
I hope what I am doing while I am working in this parliament is learning and trying to bring a bit of wisdom. I am certainly not proud enough to say I do not make mistakes. Sometimes, I might have made bad decisions. I am not saying this was a bad decision, by the way. I am just saying if people are challenging something I did years ago that might appear to be different now - and I will have to go and study this matter because I only heard it from the Attorney-General just now - then I will be regarded as a lump of concrete with no ability to move outside the square.
This is an important debate. It is about the way we sentence people and the way we look after workers. I agree that workers should be looked after. All I asked is if the workers can be looked after under the existing law, and if people have been bashed or assaulted on the job, have the offenders been sentenced properly? I have not heard of any major appeals by the DPP, the independent arbiter, on whether some of these sentences are adequate.
The legislation sounds fine and I understand why the government has brought it forward. However, that is not a good reason for legislation which duplicates what we already have. I understand where it is coming from and am not knocking the concept of what has been put forward. I find it difficult to believe that saying there is too much drunkenness in our society and that we need to bring things back to a level where you say to people, ‘By all means enjoy yourself, but do not go too far because when you go too far we see what is happening’, is wrong. This legislation reflects that.
It is unfair of the Attorney-General to put that spin to it. It is not what I was about. Other people can decide what they thought I said, but it certainly was not that. As I said, we will have more to debate on the other bill and I will reserve some of my comments until then.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I believe we are debating my motion to seek leave, but for the purpose of this, it is fine.
To fill in a blank - and I ask the indulgence of the House in a third reading speech - the member for Nelson asked some questions about matters which had drawn some public attention.
I can report to the member for Nelson, regarding the article published on 8 July about incidents involving taxi drivers, that no charges have yet been laid but I believe the police are still in pursuit of a suspect in that matter.
In the article from 13 August about a taxi being stolen, there was no conviction of assault. If there was a complaint, there was not enough evidence to sustain a complaint of assault. However, the person in that instance was convicted of unlawful use of a motor vehicle, failing to pay a taxi fare, and behaving in a disorderly manner in a public place and was fined a total of $600. There was $120 in victims assistance levy.
The article published on 18 December, where a taxi driver was bashed and robbed, allegedly, in Nightcliff - we have been advised three individuals were charged with robbery in company, a very serious crime, and that matter is currently proceeding through the courts. Of course, we expect the courts to deal with the matter thoroughly and professionally, as they do. I hope that gives some information to the member for Nelson ...
Ms WALKER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I have a few procedural matters. The first is that during the debate following the second reading there was no opportunity, either in yesterday’s bill or today, to ask whether it is the will of the House to go to committee stage. We have missed that opportunity to speak. I was going to speak in the third reading debate but, obviously, the Attorney-General jumped quickly and deliberately, such that he got the call ahead of me. I have missed that opportunity to make comment and I see that as a very deliberate attempt on the part of the Attorney-General to gag debate.
Mr Elferink: If you cannot get off your backside that is not my problem.
Mr WOOD: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I believe the member for Nhulunbuy stood at the same time as the Attorney-General and the Attorney-General was giving an explanation rather than a third reading speech.
Madam SPEAKER: Attorney-General, was it an explanation?
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, I am more than happy to allow the opportunity for the member for Nhulunbuy to speak. She can put away the victim mentality. I jumped to my feet because I had some information to give to the House. I have no problem with the member for Nhulunbuy contributing to this debate. There is no villainy on my part as far as the member for Nhulunbuy is concerned.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nhulunbuy, do you wish to provide further comment?
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I wanted to say a couple of things. The first is the abuse and misuse of alcohol has a very important part in this debate. I do not accept the wrist slap from the Attorney-General that it does not. He knows only too well it does. I am flabbergasted by his dismissal of the remarks of the retiring Director of Public Prosecutions on alcohol, whom I quoted from the Northern Territory News interview he did. I am very surprised by his comments.
I also want to make it very clear that the principle of this bill is supported on this side of the House, from the party that has always stood up for workers’ rights and legislated for workplace health and safety and many other things that have supported workers that benefit everybody, not just those who are union members. We were very clear that what we did not support was a rushed bill that had not been thoroughly consulted on. We support the principle, of course, as anybody would, about supporting workers in their line of duty to be protected against assault.
On the subject of consultation, I am very disappointed and quite angry about the response about why the electorate of Nhulunbuy is not entitled. We are talking about the third biggest community in the Northern Territory, home to more than 4000 people. But, we are not on the Stuart Highway so we should just read the NT News. I can tell the member for Port Darwin that many people in Nhulunbuy do not read the NT News. They do, however, read the weekly newspaper, The Arafura Times. The Chief Minister has just discovered it, with a letter sent to our editor last week which was a very good use of local media to communicate directly with people. So, do not lecture me about people reading the NT News and seeing the ad and, presumably, Gove people have to book a fare and get on a plane to Darwin to attend the consultations.
Member for Port Darwin, a return air fare to Gove is approximately $600. For two to three officers from your agency I would say that is affordable in the interest of a government which says it is representing all Territorians, not just those on the Stuart Highway, and looking after those who are in larger centres, and even in centres where there happens to be a Labor member of parliament. Do not do this! It is offensive to the people of Nhulunbuy that you have ruled out their opportunity and their right to be consulted. I suggest to you next time there is a round of consultation, if you can get to Tennant Creek and Katherine, you can get to Nhulunbuy.
Madam Speaker, our position on the bill remains the same: we oppose it. The consultation has been poor and it has been put together poorly.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I will participate in this debate. We have to really deconstruct what is going on here. It is the government’s process to get their legislation through, and we all appreciate that. The new Attorney-General has brought to this House five bills that headline that the CLP is tough on crime: ‘Listen to us, we have a conservative vote behind us and we are tough on crime’. That legislative process is going through.
As I have said in this House many times, I consider myself still a new parliamentarian, and I learn off those experiences. I am not going to lean on this chair and swing the glasses around, because I did not like that part. However, I did like the member for Port Darwin’s contributions in opposition, whether they were intellectual, vindictive or deceitful. Whatever came, I learnt from it.
Therefore, it is rather alarming to see the Attorney-General so precious now, and trying to twist the semantics around, when he has an opposition which is demanding answers to questions and taking on board the legislation, pulling it apart, and deconstructing it for other Territorians who are interested in this. It is a bit precious, and I am a little disappointed in the member for Port Darwin after having learnt so many lessons over four years in this House.
This legislation is vastly different to Labor values. As the Territory knows, the CLP, in its DNA, has a very punitive approach. However, other jurisdictions globally are shifting and moving away from a purely punitive approach. I could sing a couple of versus of Botany Bay and how this nation, under its white contact, was established. Globally, people are moving away from a punitive approach. The member for Nelson researched in the United States different models of corrective services. He has outlined those to me on many occasions. I am very interested in alternative sentencing and alternative approaches to corrective services.
However, the CLP is going down this punitive road with these bills rolling out one after another. I am looking forward to the debate tomorrow on minimum mandatory sentencing. I encourage the new Indigenous members of parliament to take an interest on the journey they are going on with CLP punitive policy. It stands to account that 82% of the prison population is Aboriginal and 60% of those offences relate to alcohol and assaults. If you do not continue to fight for contemporary, innovative, alternative sentencing, then we will continue to gaol Aboriginal people, particularly, in the Northern Territory. You are going down this road with your Attorney-General.
We are being preached at from the other side that, ‘The Northern Territory voted and they threw you out and put you over there’. Actually, there were four seats in the bush that changed hands. Now, we have the new Aboriginal liberals and they are going down the road with the new Attorney-General.
I remember the new Aboriginal liberals from the Country Liberal Party saying in this House in the debate around alcohol, ‘We have brothers and sisters and we feel the pain’. Well that is right. I have had family members locked up too and we feel the pain.
You are going on a journey that will be quite revealing and confronting because you are signing up to a punitive policy which will clog the courts, fill the gaols, and deliver a lot of pain and hurt to Aboriginal families. I ask you to start really questioning what you are doing in this judicial area. I am going to ask you to question a lot of policy delivery from the Country Liberal Party over the term of this parliament, particularly in this judicial area.
I go into the Barkly and I try to deliver a good discourse, get people talking, to discern between the policies - what is different about the policies. There are alternatives. It does not have to be about, ‘We will solve crime because we are going to bang them up’, because, from a global perspective, we know that it does not always work.
If we look at one innovation that alternative sentencing brings, it is the new orders that were developed under this previous government. However, the violent offences were not captured in that; they were still outside of that legislation. It was a real attempt by government to look at keeping people out of gaol. The violent offences were very challenging, and the Aboriginal justice agencies were one of the loudest groups to lobby me, when I was minister for Corrections, to incorporate the assaults into the community custody order and the community work order.
I did not have success in that debate and, as a government, we decided we would continue to look at it. We wanted to go in a methodical, systematic way, to look at the new era in corrections rolling out, to start to get empirical evidence around it, which the Attorney-General demands with his statistical analysis of issues in the Northern Territory, and we were going to prove it.
However, we are spinning back the other way. We are going to the right, ‘We are going to bang them up. Let us just gaol them and they will learn their lesson.’
If we talk about a minimum sentence of three months, ask yourself, people who have been in the custodial system, and the prison officers, ‘What can you do with a person in three months other than isolate them in a cell, alienate them, and then talk about what we are going to do with them after that?’ The policy is preaching to the conservatives, ‘We are the good guys, we are the sheriffs on the white horse, we are going to lock everyone up who looks sideways at us, then we will deal with it later’.
This is the minimum mandatory sentencing aspect to the legislation ...
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! There is nothing in this bill about minimum mandatory sentencing. I draw your attention to House of Representatives Practice page 374 to 375 where, in a third reading debate the scope of the debate is more restricted than the second reading stage - which the member was welcome to engage in, but did not - being limited to the contents of the bill; that is, matters contained in the clauses and schedules of the bill.
Mandatory sentencing is not mentioned in this bill or any manifestation of it. I remind the honourable member he is restricted to the bill in his third reading.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Barkly, could you please restrict your comments to the bill and the technical aspects of the bill.
Mr McCARTHY: Madam Speaker, I thank the Attorney-General for his advice in parliamentary debate. Do you see what I mean? Always learning, whether it be intellectual, whether it be informative, or just pure vindictive and insightful, or a new level of trying to gag debate, because I believe I am hitting a nerve. I believe – and this is directly plagiarising the member for Port Darwin because he uses this psychology regularly in opposition where he tries to really get in your head and start to really twist it around - I am hitting a nerve. He does not want me talking to the Indigenous members like this. He really is concerned, ‘Do not think too deep about this’. Let us talk about this again tomorrow, Attorney-General. Let us talk about this philosophically. Let us talk about the difference in policy.
I am talking about legislation and I am trying to outline the differences that policy brings to this House and your very determined effort, as was mentioned in the media release on the eve of the first parliamentary sittings for 2013 which, basically, says the CLP will have a significant focus on law and order with five pieces of legislation to be passed, and it is all about making the Territory a safer place. Well, as parliamentary members, we have to question that. I ask all members of this House to participate in that process, particularly the new members of the CLP. The Aboriginal liberal members of the CLP need to start really questioning, ‘Where is this taking us? Have there been examples of this before in the Territory?’
I go back a long way in the Territory, I can talk about the CLP of the 1980s and 1990s. Are there global issues? There are many examples where we can look at alternative sentencing and we can look at alternative approaches, particularly around Indigenous people.
Madam Speaker, it has been an opportunity to participate in the debate, and I thank everyone for the opportunity.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Mr MILLS (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Madam Speaker, I wish to make an important ministerial statement on policing in the Northern Territory - to serve and protect. The Territory’s finest are, without doubt, the men and women of our police force. It is not possible to adequately describe the dedication, professionalism and ability Territory policemen and women bring to the job, but I will give it a go.
They are counsellors, psychiatrists, referees, protectors, educators, listeners, teachers and disciplinarians. They are prepared to put their lives on the line for us. They will go to extraordinary lengths to ensure our safety and if you have been involved in an accident, in most cases, your police will be there first to help until the paramedics arrive. They are, truly, very special Territorians. Forgive me if I repeat some of the historical information from the official police website.
The Northern Territory has had a permanent police history dating back to 1870 when Paul Foelsche and six other police officers arrived in the Territory. It was a small rural constabulary or part-time force that had existed earlier that was disbanded. The Territory was then under South Australian control, just as the Northern Territory Labor Party is now under the control of Canberra. The town of Palmerston, which is now the city of Darwin, was founded by William George Goyder, Surveyor-General of South Australia. In December 1869, the Governor commissioned Paul Foelsche, a corporal in the South Australian mounted police stationed at Strathalbyn, to be the first sub-inspector of police at Palmerston. He sailed for Port Darwin soon afterwards.
Like their predecessors, the rural constabulary at Escape Cliffs, the first detachment of police at Palmerston, had, as their first responsibility, the maintenance of law and order in the community known as The Camp. The main settlement area was on the harbour waterfront near what is today Stokes Hill Wharf.
With the discovery of gold near Pine Creek in 1872, the police found themselves with never a dull moment. Stations were established at Adelaide River, Yam Creek, Pine Creek, Roper River and later at Daly River. The first police fatality occurred in 1872 when Mounted Constable Davis, a noted swimmer, disobeyed a local standing order and had a swim in the sea and was eaten by a crocodile.
Since 1955, when 80 police officers were employed, the size of the Northern Territory Police Force had grown significantly in line with the population. Today, the establishment is more than 1200 sworn police, auxiliaries and Aboriginal Community Police Officers.
In April 1961, five women were sworn into the Northern Territory Police Force. This was the first time women were permitted to become Northern Territory police officers. The five women paved the way for many other women who have also contributed significantly to the policing profession since that time. At that time, their duties were limited but, by 1978, women were being employed with equal opportunity to male officers.
The landscape of policing has changed significantly over the years due to the considerable efforts of women and men within Northern Territory police since 1961.
This government is putting an extra 120 police on the beat: 20 in Alice Springs and 100 in the Top End. The 20 frontline police positions allocated to Alice Springs have already been created. These police will not be sitting behind desks, they will be on the front line where they are needed. Territorians can work out for themselves whether crime rates are falling or rising.
My government trusts the people of the Territory so we have started releasing the crime statistics as promised. This is in contrast to the Labor Party, which kept secret the rising crime statistics. Still, that is perhaps no surprise since they select their candidates in secret as well.
However, let us get back to the crime stats. The next quarterly release for the December 2012 quarter will occur in the third week of this month. Of note, we have seen a significant reduction in the number of assault offences in the December 2012 quarter compared to the December 2011 quarter: a reduction of 4.5%. Take note, Prime Minister Gillard and Leader of the Opposition, that reflects a quarter when the Banned Drinker Register was scrapped.
Let me ask the obvious question. Why? It is clear to all reasonable and intelligent people that the Banned Drinker Register did not work. The same people were drunk whenever they wanted to be. If they were on the register they simply got others to buy the grog for them. Other desperate drunks committed crimes to get the alcohol, but that is only part of the story.
The Northern Territory Police Force remains committed to reducing crime and to a target of 10% reduction in victim-based crime. Our police place a strong emphasis on repeat offender management. Recidivist offenders are the bulk of the workload being 80% of those arrested in recent operations.
For the current financial year to date, July 2012 to the end of January 2013, the majority of crime types are tracking slightly under the 2011-12 levels based on preliminary data as at the end of January 2013.
Total offences against a person have reduced by 0.2%; acts intended to cause injury, which include the range of assault and related offences, have reduced by 0.5%; offences against property have reduced by 3.1%; property damages have reduced by 5.6%; and illicit drug offences have reduced by 11.2%. In addition, antisocial incidents and alcohol-related events have reduced in the current financial year to date compared to 2011-12 by 7.1% and 8.8% respectively.
As mentioned previously, the Northern Territory police continue to place a strong emphasis on managing repeat offenders - the recidivists. Recidivist offenders are the bulk of the workload which requires effective management and targeted operations to reduce offending behaviour as much as possible.
The Northern Territory Police have increased the targeted operational focus on recidivist criminals. Operation Lahinch in Alice Springs and Strike Force Trident in Darwin have demonstrated the extent of repeat offending. Operation Lahinch has been operating since November 2012. Operation Lahinch uses an intelligence-led approach to identifying recidivist property offenders and targeting those offenders in order to achieve reductions in crime rates. To date, Operation Lahinch has made 46 arrests. Of the 46 arrests, 36 - which is 78% - were recidivist offenders. Of the 36 recidivist offenders arrested, 34 were granted bail. The government does not find this acceptable and, as we have promised, new legislation will, hopefully, make it much more difficult for these criminals to be released back on to the streets of the Territory.
Strike Force Trident is similar in operation to Operation Lahinch in that it focuses on targeting drug traffickers and recidivist property offenders. Strike Force Trident commenced in September 2012. To date, Strike Force Trident has made 256 arrests. Of the 165 arrests for property crime offences, 135 - that is 82% of those arrests - were of recidivist property offenders. Of the 91 arrests for other offences that are not property-related, 73 - which is 80% of those arrests – were of recidivist offenders. There is clear and undeniable evidence that supports the fact that recidivist criminals will offend while on bail. During Operation Lahinch, of the 34 persons who were given bail after being arrested, 25 of those people committed further offences while on bail. I find that astonishing.
Academic research reveals that 27% of people who have been incarcerated for the first time reoffended within two years after release from prison, and 53% of people who had been incarcerated for their second or subsequent time, reoffended within two years of their release from prison.
Domestic violence victimisation continues to be a major focus of the Northern Territory Police under Project Respect. The police take a zero tolerance pro-arrest stance against domestic violence in order to break the cycle of violence and bring those responsible to account. Project Respect involves a three-dimensional strategy - enforce, engage, and empower – and, when the three dimensions are combined, will reduce the incidence of domestic and family violence and hold perpetrators to account.
Project Respect recently highlighted the rates of recidivism regarding domestic violence offenders. The current data suggests that of the 3910 people who were recorded as being domestic violence offenders between 1 January 2012 and 7 December 2012, 1095 were recorded as the offender on the second or more occasions, 416 recorded as the offender on three or more occasions, and 169 recorded as the offender on four or more occasions.
The implementation of the Family Safety Network in Alice Springs has seen an increased capacity to provide a multi-agency case management approach to assisting with domestic violent crime. The Family Safety Network pulls together local government and non-government service providers in an effort to manage the high-risk families who are the subject of repeated domestic violent crime. The Family Safety Network meets on a fortnightly basis and has conducted 16 meetings since its inception. It has managed 44 referrals and has 19 open cases.
There has been much discussion around the Banned Drinker Register since the recent misinformation from Labor’s Prime Minister Gillard. What everyone is failing to talk about is that it did not work; it only inconvenienced the average Territorian when they went legitimately to purchase alcohol at a takeaway outlet. The Banned Drinker Register was in operation from July 2011 to August 2012, and across the Territory there were 6% more assaults during 2011-12 than in the previous year, and 3% more assaults during the September quarter of 2012 than during the September quarter of 2011. There were 2.9% more alcohol-related assault offences during 2011-12 than in 2010-11, despite the Banned Drinker Register being in place throughout 2011-12. The 2010-11 figures for alcohol-related assaults were 3.1% higher than in 2009-10. This shows a consistent rise in alcohol-related assaults over the past few years, with no apparent impact on statistics during the period of operation of the Banned Drinker Register from July 2011 to August 2012.
On a regional basis, the statistics are more variable but do not show evidence of a consistent drop during the operation of the Banned Drinker Register. Specifically in Alice Springs, the number of alcohol-related assault offences remained on par between 2010-11 and 2011-12 with a 0.3% increase. Since the abolition of the Banned Drinker Register in August 2012, the number of alcohol-related assault offences per month has remained on par with the 2011–12 monthly figures and below the 2009–10 figures. The statistics do not support assertions that the Banned Drinker Register significantly reduced the number of alcohol-related assault offences or that, since its abolition, statistics have risen.
A Darwin City Council meeting was held on 29 January 2013 where the council questioned what the government is doing to crack down on antisocial behaviour. The comparison between recorded antisocial behaviour-related incidents in the Darwin metropolitan area over the past three financial years are as follows: 2009-10, 49 662 incidents; 2010-11, 41 154 incidents; 2011-12, 30 586 incidents. In the six months of the current financial year, 2012–13, there have been 13 000 incidents. These data sets show a decreasing number of incidents each year.
The Northern Territory Police Force has undertaken the following strategies to deal with antisocial behaviour that can be attributed to these decreases in antisocial behaviour-related incidents.
Public order units have been established at Darwin and Casuarina Police Stations with a staff of nine and seven respectively. Each unit has a sergeant in charge. Dedicated police patrols have been assigned to the Nightcliff area. Problem areas are identified by complaints from the public and police intelligence. When a specific problem location is identified it is listed as a hot spot through the tasking coordination group process. This ensures these areas receive a targeted response by police.
Short operations targeting specific areas are conducted utilising dedicated personnel on a regular basis.
Effective use of the available legislation, including the Summary Offences Act and the Liquor Act, to assist police in their duties.
Recent Operation Csilla targeted antisocial behaviour in the Darwin area. This operation commenced on 18 January 2013 and has produced very good results to date - excellent, in fact.
Stakeholders from other agencies such as Public Housing Safety Officers, Transport Safety Officers and Licensing Inspectors are engaged to assist with joint operations in relation to areas of concern.
Liaison occurs between the police and the City of Darwin staff in relation to sharing of information and targeting areas of concern.
Liquor outlets are monitored in relation to the type and volume of takeaway liquor that is sold.
Operation City Safe has been reviewed and, whilst primarily instigated for high-visibility foot patrols of the Mitchell Street entertainment area, it now includes dedicated foot patrols during daylight hours.
Bicycle patrols have been reintroduced with the ability to respond quickly and quietly to incidents.
Mounted police patrols occur on a regular basis and have the ability to reach otherwise difficult to access areas.
Areas identified as camps are patrolled and dismantled.
The Metropolitan Patrol Group has been established and has commenced patrols in conjunction with the already established units in Darwin, Casuarina and Nightcliff.
The use of closed circuit television has proved to be beneficial through proactive monitoring of hot spots. Through proactive monitoring, police have been directed to particular areas which has prevented the escalation or occurrence of violent and antisocial behaviour. In addition, the CCTV footage is an effective investigative and evidentiary tool.
Continued excessive consumption of alcohol and its associated harm within the Katherine community is leading to violent domestic assaults, antisocial behaviour, property offences and other general disturbances within the community. This is unacceptable and will not be tolerated by this government.
Katherine police have been conducting targeted operations in and around all takeaway licensed premises to reduce the harm associated with excessive consumption of alcohol and, in particular, consumption of alcohol in alcohol-restricted areas. However, it requires intensive staffing to deliver this service. The initiative is widely supported amongst the general public, although licensees have highlighted the negative effect of this program on their businesses which, ironically, may be the best testament to their effectiveness. Incidents of antisocial behaviour linked to alcohol remain subject to intensive management within the Tennant Creek and Barkly Division.
Effective rostering of patrol officers during peak periods and in hot spots is utilised effectively to target, educate and prosecute offenders. A zero tolerance approach to antisocial behaviour is adopted on the basis that this behaviour often escalates to more serious offending. Tactics such as seizing and destroying alcohol from dry areas, prosecuting offenders, educating the community, liaising with businesses and licensed premises, combined with an intelligence-led roster, reduce antisocial behaviour and serious-type offending. Intensive patrolling of licensed premises, public parks, streets and community living areas provides a high-profile, visible police presence to minimise this type of offending.
These operations have included Operation Jawa and Operation Kawana which have provided large quantities of seized alcohol, people arrested on warrants and other offences, and people placed under protective custody for their care during intoxication.
Continued excessive consumption of alcohol and its associated harm within the Alice Springs community is leading to violent domestic assaults, antisocial behaviour, property offences, and other general disturbances within the community. The Alice Springs Public Order Unit is in operation and conducting lock downs of all takeaway licensed premises to reduce the harm associated with the excessive consumption of alcohol. However, it requires intensive staffing to deliver this service. The initiative is widely supported amongst the general public although, as in other areas, licensees have highlighted the negative effect of this program upon their businesses, and that is noted.
Could we suggest the Leader of the Opposition refers these tactics to her boss, the Labor Party Prime Minister, Ms Gillard? Ms Gillard might be able to impose them on Kings Cross in Sydney and St Kilda Road in Melbourne if they think they are so good here.
As you can see, our police are seizing the initiative in the fight on crime. They have the backing of a government that has spine: a government with the community’s best interests in mind that will support police to enforce the law.
I have recently asked the Commissioner of Police to investigate the use of GPS tracking of people on bail and, consequently, I can report that the NT Police Force is exploring options to support the legislative ability to electronically track offenders when they are on bail. Studies indicate that the success of electronic tracking of offenders who are the subject of patrol office orders also suggests a greater than 90% compliance rate and between 11% and 18% recidivism rate. As you can see from the previous statistics, this would make a significant difference. This is a very substantial improvement in our current figures. The research suggests that the ability to electronically track offenders who are on the pre-trial orders - bail - is similarly effective as posting incarceration orders - parole.
The Northern Territory Police Force and the Department of Correctional Services are working in partnership to establish an offender tracking system for law enforcement and Corrections to locate and track offenders in Darwin and Alice Springs. The introduction of an offender tracking system will allow the Department of Correctional Services and the Northern Territory Police Force to locate and track the movements of adult and youth offenders subject to court mandated bail and supervision orders outside their home, while also serving as a deterrent against further crime.
An offender tracking system consists of hardware and software segments designed to determine and report, at programmed intervals, the geographic location of a person who is subject to criminal justice supervision. The available technologies and equipment configuration to achieve this are varied. The Department of Correctional Services and the Northern Territory Police Force intend to invite potential offender tracking system providers to the Northern Territory to participate in a four-week pre-tender trial to be conducted in Alice Springs and Darwin by June 2013.
The men and women of our police force are impressive and we are grateful for their contribution in building a more cohesive community. We can probably never thank them enough for the job they do, but perhaps the next time you see a copper, simply go up and say to him or her, ‘Thank you’.
Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Madam Speaker, it is a great pleasure to speak on this statement on policing. I am pretty sure if you say to a copper, ‘Thank you very much for what you are doing’, you will get a smile and a friendly gesture. However, if you go to a drunk and say, ‘Stop drinking’, you will probably get a punch.
I will start with two quotes. The first is from Assistant Police Commissioner Grahame Kelly in September 2011 talking about the Banned Drinker Register:
The second one is from the Chief Minister, who. several weeks ago, spoke to Darwin City Council about scrapping the BDR and said people should just ask drunks to stop drinking. Good luck. I hope you have private health insurance; you will need it.
This is a statement about police, and most of it was justifying why the CLP canned the Banned Drinker Register. We knew about recidivism - repeat offenders - and took action. The Police Commissioner had been on the record many times and had operations in place to check on people on bail - people who committed an offence who were left in their houses - and he did it very successfully. Tracking of offenders was a proposal he had put to our government, and we applaud and support it because this is a way to keep our community safe.
However, what people are really angry about is not that the BDR has been scrapped, but (1) it was replaced with nothing, and (2) the CLP is trying to tell people the BDR did not work and nothing is bad now, everything is good. Even the Darwin City Council called the Chief Minister to an urgent meeting to discuss the issue of antisocial behaviour and drunks. That was where he made this memorable quote, ‘If you see people drinking, just go and tell the drunks to stop drinking’. It is a wonderful policy, but it will not be very successful. If I was the Minister for Health I would be worried because if people decided to do that my emergency department would be clogged with people who had copped a hiding from drunks.
The CLP has broken many promises. The most important is they promised to cut the cost of living. I received my bill from Power and Water recently and my cost of living has gone up. I bet every other Territorian’s has gone up as well, especially when you are asked to pay a 30% increase for power, 40% for water, and 25% for sewerage.
The other promise is about law and order. Before the election, the Chief Minister said, ‘We will remove drunks from the streets’. After the election he said, ‘Well, go and talk to them and ask them politely to stop drinking’. He lives in cuckoo land. The promise to remove the drunks from the streets was on the front page of the action plan he presented to the public before the election. In ‘Action on law and order’, in the third sentence, it said, ‘Remove drunks from our streets’. We have more drunks on our streets now than we had 12 months ago.
If you want to come with me I will take you to Casuarina and show you how many of them drink port at 11 am under the eaves of the Casuarina Plaza Building. I will take you to Nightcliff and show you how many people are hanging around the liquor outlets buying alcohol and drinking.
As for the inconvenience of a few people, I was never inconvenienced showing my ID at the liquor store when I bought a bottle of wine. As a matter of fact, when I was queuing up in Woolworths Nightcliff to buy a bottle of wine, none of the customers in front of me turned around to tell me off because I had the audacity, as part of government, to introduce a card system other states found was useful and considered introducing into places like central Melbourne or Kings Cross. It was a card system which was dismantled by the CLP but has now been purchased, I believe, by the north Western Australia group of licensees for them to implement because they saw how effective it was in the Northern Territory.
Is it the only promise he broke within regard to policing? Let us look at it. They talked about police call centres and promised people calling police in Alice Springs and Katherine would be answered locally. Has it happened? No. Will it happen? I do not think so.
The alcohol plans are in tatters. Nobody knows what is going to happen. Tollner said rehab is the solution. Elferink said, ‘Put them into prison’, and Terry Mills said, ‘Just ask them nicely’. I do not know if they talk to each other or they know what they are talking about. I agree, in some areas, with David Tollner, the Minister for Health: ‘Health-based support, through rehabilitation, for problem drinkers who commit crime is the preferred approach’. My problem is whether health-based rehabilitation for people who commit crime works. Will it work? I can understand rehabilitation for drunks, but for people who commit crimes the courts should have the final say. I do not think a health-based approach for people who commit crime will work. In order for it to work, the government has to work as a team. At the moment we have three people telling us three different things. One talks about health rehabilitation, another is telling us to put them into prison and leave them there, and the third is saying just be nice to them and ask them to stop drinking and they will. Yes, I bet they will! You will be screaming, under doctor’s orders, while you recover in Royal Darwin Hospital.
The CLP has also made a number of promises and not kept them. They removed funding from Balunu. Where are the boot camps? They are six months into government and we have not seen any plans or anything to show for these boot camps. Where is the model of treatment? Is anything in place? Is legislation in place? Have they started doing something? They are still thinking about it.
They talk about the BDR and blame Gillard for interfering with the affairs of the Territory. I was watching television and the Leader of the Opposition, Abbott, tried to claim the BDR as their initiative. He said it was working and it was wrong of the Territory government to remove it. Despite the efforts of the Deputy Chief Minister to say that Abbott was misquoted or misunderstood, I saw him with my own eyes and heard him with my own ears claim the BDR as their own.
They promised an extra 120 police. I really appreciate that but I would like to have some explanation. Will these 120 police include the 94 police officers who are funded by the Commonwealth, which was our initiative at the time. I would be very happy to hear there will be 120 plus the 94 rather than putting the 94 police officers in that 120. I will never forget the graduation ceremony where the graduates had to go back to school because they had not finished their schooling. It took place at the Darwin Convention Centre. There were two classes; one had graduated truly; the other had not graduated. But, it looked really good on television to have people graduating - while they are still going through school and had to go back.
I looked at the safe street audits. I applaud it, but has it been finished? Can we look at the report? It would be really good if we could find out what the report said and if there were any recommendations. The other thing is, will they implement the recommendations because they keep breaking promises. I remember the noise they made about the board of inquiry recommendations on child protection. Just after they got into government, not only did they destroy the department with the amalgamation with the Education department, the Deputy Chief Minister - the social worker who used to make a lot of noise before the election about child protection - with a straight face, announced that the government would not be bound by the recommendations of the board of inquiry.
As a final straw, she sacked the CEO of the Department, Clare Gardiner-Barnes, who did a tremendous job under very difficult circumstances in a very difficult department. Clare Gardiner-Barnes started changing the culture of the department and promised to bring down ...
Ms ANDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! This is a statement on policing, not child protection.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
Mr VATSKALIS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. There is no point of order and she knows that, but she does not like it.
To change the culture of the department she brought down the number of cases that were to be looked after, and she did a tremendous job, which was recognised by everybody, including the implementation committee which the Deputy Chief Minister also dismantled.
Where are the nurses in the watch-houses? What are they doing about the overcrowded watch-houses and supporting police with the health safety management of people who are drunk and put back on the streets? Where are the Coroner recommendations regarding the Briscoe affair? Are there safe homes for victims of violence?
Crime statistics are really interesting. Let me have a look at the crime statistics. The Chief Minister said the number of assaults in the Territory is going up. What he did not say is that the way the statistics are now recorded has changed from a year-and-a-half ago. He knows very well because the Department of Justice advised him of that, so did the police. Before, if a person was a victim of assault and the police charged the person who assaulted the victim with three or four assaults, all these charges were considered as one against the victim.
Now, the police have changed the methodology to comply with a reporting mechanism for the Australian Bureau of Statistics in other jurisdictions, and every charge is counted as a separate assault. So, before, if you had two charges they would be counted as one assault, now they will be counted as two. As a result, the number of assaults has increased and is reported by the police as increased numbers.
The other thing I find very interesting is the Chief Minister said:
First of all, I cannot find any reference to December 2012 on the police website because it has not been released yet. Obviously, the Chief Minister has inside information. The other thing it says is that the number of assault offences in the December 2012 quarter, compared to the December 2011 quarter, has gone down: a reduction of 4.5%.
That is great news but he forgot to mention we had a whole eight months in 2012 of the BDR being in operation in the Northern Territory. He insists the BDR did not work. Really? Let us see if it worked or not. Going back to the police and looking at their statistics, I did some very interesting reading and did my calculations. I believe there is a famous saying, ‘Lies, damn lies and statistics’. Sometimes statistics can be worked to present your case as right.
Usually what we do is look at the statistics, analyse them and ask whether these things are working or not. The CLP decided the Banned Drinker Register did not work, so they went back to work the statistics to show that it did not work. Is it true? Let us have a look.
The BDR was introduced in July 2011, and we had the first report in September for the quarter that included July, August and September 2011. We had three months of the BDR in place where the numbers of people placed on the BDR started to appear and build up.
The total number of assaults in September 2011 was 1566. As time passed, more and more people found themselves on the BDR and, at the same time, we found the number of assaults increased to 1870, as recorded in the December quarter. But then, guess what? In the March quarter there was a small change; the general assaults were decreasing. In the June quarter 2012, the assaults decreased further and, in September 2012 they decreased even further ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: Does that include the domestic violence-related crime?
Mr VATSKALIS: I will get to that. This is the total number of assaults as recorded in the police statistics. While the number of assaults in December 2011 was 1870, by September 2012, when the BDR was operating, it went down to 1611. We had a reduction of 13.8%.
Let us now talk about domestic violence, since the member opposite asked for it. The number of assaults associated with alcohol in the first quarter of 2011, after the BDR was implemented in September, was 939. As the BDR started to take effect, the number of assaults in December increased to 1100. Then, in September 2012, after the BDR had operated for nearly a year, it went down to 963, which means a reduction of 13%. Assaults associated with alcohol in a year of operation of the BDR decreased 13% ...
Ms Anderson: Increased percentage of alcohol-related violence.
Mr VATSKALIS: I know you are not interested in that but other people are. That shows exactly how statistics are used by the CLP to justify their reasoning that the BDR did not work. When you look at the statistics - and I will ensure these statistics go on Facebook and everywhere else - people will realise that when you have a reduction of 13%, especially in assaults associated with alcohol, then you have something that is working. Something was working with the tool we put in place, the Banned Drinker Register. Of course, assaults associated with domestic violence, which we usually associate with alcohol, in the same period, went down by 16.9%.
We heard before that the BDR did not work. Well, the statistics as presented by the police on their website – as everyone can see - show there was a reduction of assaults from the time we put the BDR in place to the time the CLP removed it. That reduction must be associated with something, and the something that made the difference was the Banned Drinker Register.
I welcome the statement today because it is a statement for the police, and we all support the police. We are the only ones who increased the number of police after the freeze the CLP put on police recruitment. We are the first ones who ...
Members interjecting.
Mr VATSKALIS: We know very well that this is historical, it was referred to in parliament; it was tabled in parliament. We know very well we were the first ones to have a police review after many years. We implemented the recommendations of the review at an enormous cost. As the firemen said yesterday, with your cost cuttings you might save dollars but you will not save lives. We believe investment in policing is a good investment because, even if one less property is not broken into, if one woman feels safe at home and is not assaulted, if one person is not assaulted in the street, this is money well spent.
The number of police under the Labor government had increased and we welcome further increases to police numbers. Despite the fact it will make the Northern Territory the jurisdiction with the highest number of police officers per capita in Australia, we welcome that. At the same time, we are prepared to support any initiative that will improve the safety of the community and make people feel safe at home or in the streets, and will reduce the danger to the community.
We will support the allocation of money for putting nurses in watch-houses. I believe that is very important. We have seen how important it is after the recent case of the Briscoe affair in Alice Springs. We also support any initiative to support our police. What I find unacceptable is professionals like the police, well-paid, well-educated and well-trained professionals, doing a job someone else can do. For example, I find it objectionable for the police to walk around taking drunks from the parks and streets to the spin dryers, as they call them, the houses where they can stay the night safely, when this was done effectively by the Larrakia Nation people, and the non-government organisations people like the Night Patrol in Darwin and other cities.
The most important difference between us and the CLP is we believe that taking measures to reduce the consumption of alcohol not only will provide a circuit breaker for these people - as the Indigenous health services admitted in the recent meeting they had – but will increase the safety of the community. For the CLP to tell us the BDR inconvenienced a few - well, it might have inconvenienced a few but we now have many more people being inconvenienced by the drunks, the antisocial behaviour, the occupation of our parks by people who only go there to drink and, when they drink, become violent. That is more inconvenient than showing your card or having to record your name when you buy a two-litre cask or bigger.
I notice the CLP has not removed that requirement yet because I heard the head of the alcohol agency the other day on the radio saying this requirement to present your card when you buy a two-litre cask of port, a four-litre cask of wine, or a large quantity of wine still remains.
Madam Speaker, the CLP has not removed all elements of the BDR. However, for them to tell us the BDR did not work and that nothing shows the BDR worked - well, the statistics speak for themselves. Just a cursory look at the statistics, as presented by the police on their website, will show you the BDR was working, and was good for the Territory.
Ms ANDERSON (Regional Development): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on policing. As the Chief Minister said, the police are the Territory’s finest men and women across the Northern Territory.
I want to speak specifically on those Territory police officers, men and women in my electorate of Namatjira, before I go on to congratulating all Northern Territory police officers for doing such a wonderful job of keeping us all safe.
I bring to the attention of the Chamber the ACPOs - Aboriginal Community Police Officers - and congratulate young Farah at Santa Teresa, a young Aboriginal woman who has been working with the Territory police now for five or six years and does a fantastic job. Through all the circumstances of her little boy, who has leukaemia, she has had the support of her family, specifically her mum, who has kept that foundation and base and given the opportunity to young Farah to continue her dream of being an Aboriginal Community Police Officer.
It is fantastic that these opportunities and chances are given to Aboriginal people. I would like, one day in the not too distant future, hopefully in the next four years, the word ‘Aboriginal’ to disappear and everybody who serves in the Northern Territory Police to be called Northern Territory police officers. Also, that Aboriginal police officers be entitled to houses on remote Aboriginal communities and have the same benefits and rights as non-Indigenous police officers. I would like to see that happen in the next four years with the Country Liberal Party.
We, as politicians on this side, will be talking to the Chief Minister and, hopefully, can start working on a way forward to get Aboriginal police officers recognised, because they do the same work as non-Indigenous police officers on communities, and sometimes more. They go to all the sports weekends, they do all the after-hours, they do the paybacks. They are recognised in all these areas but are not recognised by having houses in communities or taking the word ‘Aboriginal’ off their title.
I have spoken on many occasions in this Chamber over many years about there not being a black or a white way to do anything - whether it is education or policing - there is a right way to do things. In this journey of moving the Territory forward, if we remove these titles we become one Northern Territory or one Australia.
We should not recognise ourselves as Aboriginal politicians sitting on this side, we are just politicians. It is quite insulting that sometimes in this Chamber we are held accountable, when there are bills in this House, and are told we should stand up as Indigenous politicians. Were we not elected by everybody in our electorate, black and white? Did Aboriginal people vote for us exclusively? That is very wrong. Are we not educated as much as you to have the title of politician rather than just be branded an Aboriginal politician? My colleagues take great offence to that as well. We would like to see that change in this Chamber.
I spoke about Farah, and I want to speak about my Nuntlang, Mr Ellis at Santa Teresa. He has been an Aboriginal Community Police Officer at Santa Teresa for many years. He is now on renal dialysis but is still serving as an Aboriginal police officer at Santa Teresa. Every second day he goes into Alice Springs, is dialysed, but he is still committed to the Northern Territory Police. He does the runs with Farah to Titjikala and Finke, and they do all the community sports weekends. I take this opportunity to congratulate my Nuntlang and tell him he has done a wonderful job across Alice Springs and all the remote Aboriginal communities.
Of course, my cousin at Kintore, Andrew Spencer, has been a long life friend of the member for Port Darwin who was the member for Macdonnell. I think you nominated him for one of the awards ...
Mr Elferink: A bravery award.
Ms ANDERSON: A bravery award, yes, exactly.
Mr Elferink: He was at the scene of an accident where he lost three of his family members and continued to show such strength of character that I remain astonished.
Ms ANDERSON: That is right, yes. He is a fantastic man and has worked across the border. The Kintore station is a Themus station which is a cross-border station between Western Australia and the Northern Territory. We have the same language, so he crosses the border into Warakurna and comes back and works at Kintore. He is one of ours, a Warlpiri/Luritja/Pintubi man, and absolutely fantastic. These are the great people who have made the Territory, and they are really great friends with all the police officers everywhere.
I take this opportunity to talk about Peter, who is the sergeant in charge of the Kintore station. He is a wonderful man who commits so much time not just into policing Kintore, Warakurna and Mount Liebig, but also has after-school programs where he takes the kids and plays basketball and rides around on bikes with them. These are the after-hours programs that police run that are not on their duty statements. His wife is fantastic because if Peter is doing that, then she goes and plays with the mums with their little bubs, and talks to them about raising healthy children. He has such a wonderful relationship with that community; it is really lovely.
You go there and all the kids are singing out, ‘Peter, Peter,’ and everybody loves him. Peter told me last year he was thinking about going. While I was overnighting there I mentioned it to a group of people I was staying with. They went to him in the morning and said, ‘Sergeant, you cannot go. You are here to stay.’ That is the attachment Peter has at Kintore. When the time comes, it will be very hard for Peter and his family to leave Kintore, because he has built that relationship with the people there.
Of course, our Jack at Papunya was nominated Policeman of the Year last year. I ran into him at the airport a week or two ago, and he is having twins. Congratulations, Jack, it is wonderful. These are police officers who do not go there just to arrest people; that is secondary. They go there to build relationships and live in the community for a long time with these people. They know their kids, they know each other’s families. Police officers’ children are born in remote Aboriginal communities and they see the remote Aboriginal children growing up with their children. That is the fantastic relationship police officers have.
Of course, we have wonderful police officers in our town of Alice Springs. You cannot say anything about the police officers in Alice Springs; they are fantastic. A friend of my son’s, whose family lives in Queensland, is a police officer in Alice Springs. It is fantastic for young kids to join the Northern Territory Police Force. There is so much encouragement, by this government, of having real employment.
I also pick up on some of the things the member for Casuarina said earlier about the BDR. The BDR did not work. One person was arrested over 117 times. Is that a system that works? It is just something that you, as a Labor Party, had set up. It was your baby and you were not going to let it fail. Regardless of all the statistics that came in to tell you, and the people who told you it was not working, you were not going to let it go because you gave birth to this child that did not work - that did not go to school and was the biggest failure in all aspects of life. It was yours, you gave birth to it, reared it, were going to hold on to it, and there was no way in the world you were going to let go of it as it was the best baby Labor gave birth to. I am afraid it was the worst baby you gave birth to because it did not work.
There are houses in Alice Springs now which are open seven days a week, 24 hours a day, selling alcohol to Aboriginal people. Police officers will tell you this as well; they were picking up drunks at 8.30 am when the bottle-Os were opening at 2 pm. Where were they getting the grog? Tell me! Prohibition has never worked because prohibition and the black market go together. They are like a husband and wife - sly grog. These people have houses all over Alice Springs that are selling grog. They are Aboriginal people selling to Aboriginal people.
You cannot have a floor price on the black market, can you? No, of course not. Can the BDR work when there is so much of this black market going on? Absolutely not.
In relation to child protection, I remember two years ago at Estimates Committee, the minister for Child Protection and Health, the former member for Johnston, was saying, ‘Child protection is going to be fixed up under Labor. We are going to grow our own.’ Where is your growing of your own now? You imported them all from Ireland, England, and New Zealand. That is who is here. You did not put anyone who is traditional in these jobs. You did not even have the money to pay the 90 people in those positions. What a shame!
Madam Speaker, I am so glad the last Territory election put Labor across the other side. They did not deserve to be in government because they were never governing for the whole Territory. You governed for yourselves, and you deserve to be there.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I also thank the Chief Minister for bringing on this statement. It is always good to have an opportunity to thank the police for the hard work they do: the long hours and the difficult situations. They have extraordinary challenges in the Northern Territory with huge distances, dense population centres in some spots, and quite sparse areas in others. They do a very good job at bringing law and order into hard places.
We have all witnessed that, I am sure, as local members. I am sure we all, as local members, have good relationships with the police who work in our local areas or, for new members, we are developing good relationships with the police who work in those areas because they are critical to what we do. You need to work with them through the challenges that arise in your areas. Everyone has slightly different challenges in the spaces they have to deal with as a local member. I have an excellent relationship with the police who come through the Fannie Bay area. I am sure other members have excellent relationships with their police as well.
Police have a difficult job. We all talk to constituents, whether it is on the doors, in our office, at the markets or other places. When you talk to constituents there are often stories you hear that you, as a local member, need to work on with the police to try to resolve those situations. The police are exemplary in how they take that on and their willingness to try to fix those issues. That is not always about arresting people; sometimes it is about providing a presence, good community policing, developing relationships, and networking. There are many aspects to policing beyond the conventional image of what a police officer does. There is no doubt, as a local member, we see that.
Growing up in Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and Darwin, I saw the police in a range of different environments. There will be members in this Chamber who have seen them in desert communities, in Top End communities, and many other places doing essentially the same job: developing good relationships with the community, making sure people are safe and laws are enforced. We have an excellent police force in the Territory.
I have some mates in the local police force and I hear stories from them which are sometimes funny, sometimes serious, but which always highlight the work the police do in the Territory. Sometimes, they have to face challenges that are - I use this word rarely - unique to the Territory. We all support our police and I welcome the Chief Minister’s statement so we have the opportunity to say thank you. I say thank you as the member for Fannie Bay.
However, the statement also went into an area where we do have an argument with the government around alcohol. Of the major concerns people have in the Territory at the moment, there are probably two that dominate most people’s minds. One is the cost of living, in including the cost of power and water charges, and the other is dealing with problem drunks. It is at the point where Darwin City Council asked the Chief Minister to come to a crisis meeting to discuss the increasing levels of antisocial behaviour and drunkenness in Darwin. The Chief Minister attended that meeting and, I believe what was a shock to most people, was that his advice was:
In response, the Lord Mayor, Katrina Fong Lim said:
It was very good that the Lord Mayor responded promptly, directly, and quite honestly to the Chief Minister about how she felt on receiving that advice. That advice was given within six months into the term of the new government. That advice was given after the CLP went into the last election promising on the front page of their 100-day plan to immediately remove drunks from the street.
Six months into government, their response to their election commitment to immediately remove all drunks from the streets is that you should ask them nicely to stop drinking. That is where we have come so far in this term of government in how we deal with the problems of drunkenness in the Northern Territory.
You can understand the reaction of thousands of people through Facebook, online comments, talkback radio, Letters to the Editor, or just coming up to us in the street in response to that advice from the Chief Minister, promptly rebutted by the Lord Mayor. It is not something people feel is sensible advice, or feel safe doing. The better dictum is first do no harm.
Everyone has stories of when they had been involved with problem drunks. You certainly hear the anecdotes as local members. I remember as a young kid in Tennant Creek, at one of my uncle’s places, a brawl erupted on the front lawn between some people who were intoxicated who were pulling out the star pickets and having a go at each other. At that stage, you call the police. You do not nicely ask them to stop. There is one reason we thank our police, and one reason we understand the hard work they do. There are times you call the police; you do not ask them nicely to stop drinking.
We had a lady came to our house needing shelter, being chased by a drunk man whom I assumed was her partner - I was quite young at the time but I could still work that out - we called the police, and they said, ‘Do not go out and tell that bloke out the front to go away. Stay inside the house, we will come around.’ That is what the police do, and we thank them for it.
The reaction of the community at large to the advice that you just tell them to stop drinking was that you had to be joking, Chief Minister! It was not taken seriously. For the Sunday Territorian journalist, Kylie Stevenson, who often writes satirical or opinion pieces, but often takes the mickey, this was obviously a prime target. To quote Kylie:
That was the reaction from most people on hearing this advice. I quote her again because it is just stating the obvious:
That was the reaction of many to the advice. Underscoring all this was discontent that the CLP had promised, coming into office, they would immediately remove all drunks from the streets, but instead, we have seen them scrap the Banned Drinker Register, Night Patrol, the alcohol courts, Return to Country, and put nothing in their place.
They promised to immediately remove all problem drunks from the street - front page of the 100-day action plan. They wrote it, they promised it, and they have not delivered on it. People are really frustrated with a government which has made a promise and not delivered on it. When you say you are going to immediately remove problem drunks from the street, people want to believe you are telling them the truth. They want to believe that when you make that promise and come into office you will actually do it. That is what you have promised and, now it is six months into a term and we still have not seen the details of your policy on how to remove drunks from our streets. When people hear the Chief Minister say, ‘Go up politely to some problem drunks and tell them to stop drinking’, they think it is stupid. Separate to that, they are wondering where your policy is.
I received a text message earlier this afternoon from a local constituent who lives in a hot spot area on Parap Road. He said, ‘Hi Michael, just a quick note as you are probably in sittings. I read the comments Mills made to you yesterday. You should have challenged him to speak to the drunks at Parap at 11 pm without the police, his minders or his mates, just himself. Let us see who the real hero is. His comments just frustrate me.’
I will not challenge the Chief Minister to do it because it would be stupid. He should not do that. I do not wish the Chief Minister any harm. That is why we have a dedicated, professional police force which is often at the hot spots in Parap, Fannie Bay, or around my electorate doing that job. People should not take the advice of the Chief Minister and put themselves in danger by talking to people who are drunk. People complain about drunks in our streets when they are concerned for their personal safety in that public space. To tell them they should put their personal safety at further risk by walking up to a drunk and saying, ‘Would you mind stopping’, is not good advice.
What is their policy? We are still waiting on the details. We are six months in. We had a rough outline prior to the last election; we still have a rough outline now. We have seen different comments from the Health minister and the Attorney-General about their approach. They can be interpreted as differing, but can also be interpreted as complementary, depending on which spin you take on it. The Health minister is saying there should be a health-based approach to helping alcoholics rather than sending them to gaol, and the Attorney-General is saying there should be punishment in sentencing. On the surface it seems like a direct conflict.
However, I have no doubt - in the joint media release they issued they said these two things can be complementary – that in some ways the CLP believes they can be complementary. That is why we have seen no detail yet, because they are trying to make two contradictory things come together and work.
The rough outline we have of the CLP policy is they want to lock up problem drunks and provide them with mandatory rehabilitation. We do not know how this will work yet because the CLP has not provided the detail. It is becoming increasingly obvious they do not know how it will work either. They are struggling to work out how this policy will work. They have a rough outline; they had a great theory in opposition; they are now six months into government and cannot work out how they will make this plan work - a plan experts say will not work even if they can pull out all the inconsistencies and put it in place; it has no evidence base.
We saw the Attorney-General admit to that during interviews. He has no evidence base; it is based on his personal experience. While we recognise the Attorney-General has some important personal experience in this area, personal experience does not quite cut it in developing a policy this complicated. There should be an evidence base and the experts are saying this will not work. How do you lock up problem drunks and provide them with mandatory rehabilitation? You have to create a facility where these people cannot just walk out. They are people with a problem: an addiction to alcohol. If you put them in a facility where they can just walk out, they will. You have to create a correctional facility. You have to spend the money on a prison to ensure they cannot leave but, at the same time, provide rehabilitation. You have to put in hospital beds, hospice beds, or a medical facility to provide the rehabilitation services. You are crossing a prison with a hospital and, to staff that, you will need guards and nurses. You will have this incredibly expensive proposition the CLP is floating, which the experts are saying will not work, of a prison and hospital with guards and nurses to provide mandatory rehabilitation.
The CLP is struggling to pull the detail together for a policy that will cost a lot of money and will not work. That is what we have already heard from the experts. We have heard comment from the Health minister and the Attorney-General that it will have a health-based approach and a corrections-based approach. We would love to hear more detail. We can only comment on the rough outlines we have heard so far. It is going to be a fascinating debate when they finally bring this forward. However, it is becoming increasingly obvious the government is struggling to work out the detail of this plan, despite going into the last election, on the front page of their 100-day plan, promising to immediately remove the drunks from the streets. Six months in, still no detail, still struggling to work out how they will build a facility for 2500 problem drunks. It will not work.
We have also heard from doctors who say this will kill, which is not something I imagine a doctor says lightly. Dr Boffa has said he thinks this will cost people their lives. I have read that quote before in the debate. I have it here somewhere. I would love to read it again, but I have read it before to the House where Dr Boffa said people will die as a result of these policies.
We have a problem with the fact the CLP has a policy with no detail; they are struggling to put the detail together. From what we know, there is no evidence base. They have admitted there is no evidence base to this policy. Experts say it will not work and they are breaking their election promise to immediately remove all problem drunks from the streets.
What they have done in the six months while they are trying to work out the detail to the policy they have a pipe dream of is scrap the Banned Drinker Register, Night Patrols, alcohol courts and the Return to Country program and put nothing in their place. They are ignoring the experts, business, and Territorians who are extremely concerned about antisocial behaviour and problem drunks in our communities, and the escalating problem we have with them.
Obviously, we have an argument in this House about statistics. The CLP has statistics they quote from. The member for Casuarina quoted from some statistics before, ‘Lies, damn lies and statistics’, to use a quote attributed to Disraeli. We have an argument about statistics. To quote Andrew Lang: ‘They use statistics as a drunk man uses a lamp post - for support rather than illumination’.
We believe, as many Territorians believe, the Banned Drinker Register worked. When an argument comes forward where there is a difference of opinion in the statistics, and people use different statistics, people often, in those instances, rely on their personal experience. The experience of many was the Banned Drinker Register was working and hot spots were improving. We were hearing that. It is on the record. I have said it before.
Some Fannie Bay traders, for example - people with 20 years of experience at the Fannie Bay shops, which is known as a hot spot area - have said the Banned Drinker Register worked and when it was scrapped things got worse. I have heard that from other places such as Parap shops and Stuart Park shops. The member for Casuarina has spoken about his personal experience as the local member. There is no doubt, from people’s personal experience, the Banned Drinker Register worked. They saw it with their own eyes and, when it was scrapped, things became worse. That was their direct personal experience, and they get frustrated when the CLP try to use stats to justify their scrapping of a program they saw was working.
Not all these people were immediate supporters of the Banned Drinker Register. I had traders in my area who were not convinced it would work. However, after it was in place and they saw the impact of it and after they saw it scrapped, they were converts.
It would be foolish to say the Banned Drinker Register was a complete solution. It was not. It was about making a difference, and it did make a difference. That was what the Banned Drinker Register was for. I have never said it was going to be a perfect solution. There is no one thing that will fix these issues; it is a mistake to think that. You have to look at a number of things to make a difference, and the Banned Drinker Register was making a difference.
Government promised to immediately remove all drunks from the street. They have broken that promise and, in the interim, have scrapped programs we believe made a difference. One of the great frustrations for many people is that you scrapped something only to do nothing. If you do not believe the Banned Drinker Register will work - and we know the CLP does not like it; that was obvious. They have never backed away from that, we knew that. However, the frustration of many causes them to ask why they could not wait until they got their own stuff sorted out and leave it in place until then.
Part of the problem is the CLP does not have their stuff sorted out. We do not know, and I do not think they know, when they will get it sorted out. There is a lot of detail missing from their plan to immediately remove all problem drunks from the streets. We will be fascinated to see the detail of that. I believe there will be some quite lengthy debate in this House around that policy when it finally comes forward, and we are looking forward to seeing it. There is no doubt from our side and from many Territorians that there is a frustration with the Country Liberal Party doing nothing, scrapping programs that many people believed were working, and breaking their promise to remove all problem drunks from our streets. That is my say today around the alcohol issue. I am sure I will have plenty of opportunity in this Chamber to talk more about alcohol.
Madam Speaker, referring back to the initial comments from the Chief Minister about the police, I close by saying we thank the police. I thank the police for the work they do. They do a fantastic job in my local area where there are some distinctive challenging spots. I know other members would have a similar appreciation of the work the police do. I thank the Chief Minister for allowing us the opportunity to thank the police. However, I disagree with his approach on alcohol and his current position - until they bring forward their policy documents - which is that the best way of dealing with problem drunks on our streets is to ask them politely to stop drinking.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Deputy Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I take pleasure this afternoon in responding to the Chief Minister’s statement on policing in the Northern Territory - indeed, to serve and protect. That is what we see the police in the Northern Territory doing, thankfully, throughout the Northern Territory. They are an essential part of our community and we on this side of the room honour them and give them the respect they deserve.
As the member for Araluen, a resident of Alice Springs for many years, I know first-hand the critical role the police play in my town and throughout Central Australia. Without the police force maintaining law and order and trying to ensure the safety of the people of Central Australia, we would be in a bad way. The role they play in Alice Springs is critical to our survival in so many ways - not just our personal survival and safety, but our whole livelihood and economy is heavily dependent on the police responding to and preventing crime and lawlessness in the town.
I listened with great interest to the speech just delivered by the member for Fannie Bay. I did snicker to myself when I heard him talk about the ‘distinctly challenging spots’ within his electorate. In Alice Springs, thanks to the former Labor government, it is hard to distinguish where there are not distinctly challenging spots.
We were left literally in the desert by the former Labor government throughout the last decade or so. Thanks to the police, there has remained some sensibility around trying to keep matters in order, trying to stop matters from getting out of control. However, over the last decade, all residents of Alice Springs will remember times when there was a sense of great lawlessness and great concern throughout the town of Alice Springs and the region of Central Australia because of the lack of attention from the former Labor government.
The police are at the whim of the government of the day, and that can no better be demonstrated than when we look back at the last 10 years of Labor and Alice Springs. The former Labor government made no secret of having little interest in Alice Springs. We were the poor cousins down the road, the embarrassment, probably, of the Northern Territory. It was all too hard to get there, and it was all too hard to put decent policies and resources in place to address the very serious problems that escalated, at times out of control, in the town of Alice Springs and the region of Central Australia.
When I think back, probably one of the worst years was only a few years ago in the summer of 2010-11. Everyone will recall with great sadness and regret that summer in which lawlessness prevailed. There were many kids on the street running around out of control, unsupervised. There was a great problem with antisocial behaviour, public drunkenness, and crime. The people of Alice Springs were absolutely beside themselves, desperate, unhappy, wondering about the future of their town. We had some extremely bad publicity nationally about the problem of antisocial behaviour and crime in Alice Springs. It was a dreadful summer.
The former Labor government presided over this decline in law and order in Alice Springs over many years which culminated in that dreadful summer of 2010-11. The police were doing their best with limited resources, probably no real support from the former Labor government because, as I said, they just were not interested.
They made no bones about it. The police were desperately trying to address a problem that even they admitted was out of control.
At that point in time, it was clear the people of Alice Springs were at the mercy of criminals, of people who were doing the wrong thing, and causing great heartache and discontent throughout the town. We had innocent people being assaulted, being subjected to violence, having their houses broken into, their property damaged. That was the worst we have seen in recent history, just two years ago.
The response from the former Labor government, with great reluctance, was to say, ‘Yes, we do have a problem. We have taken our eye off the ball and we have not supported our police force.’ They went about rectifying it, thankfully - dragged screaming and kicking into the arena of trying to resolve the dreadful law and order issues in Alice Springs. The police, as I said, were at the whim of the former Labor government at that time. They were able to do what they do best with proper resourcing, proper policy, and proper direction from the government of the day. Over the last two years we have seen a marked improvement in the social problems in Alice Springs.
That is just one example of how important the police are in my town of Alice Springs. They are critically important to how we go about our lives because, in Central Australia - I believe it is widely known; it is no secret - we have very serious problems that the police are at the forefront of trying to address. They alone cannot solve the problems in Alice Springs or in Central Australia, but they play a critical role.
Of course, one of those problems which is probably the root of all evil, the key to many of the problems in Alice Springs, is the very high rate of alcohol consumption. We all know about it, whether we experience the problems of alcohol in people’s lives, in our lives first-hand, or we are subjected to people who are out of control because of their dependence on alcohol. Alcohol has shaped the town of Alice Springs and it certainly shapes the role of the police force in Alice Springs.
Most of the crime throughout the Northern Territory can be attributed to alcohol abuse or dependence. Whether it is petty crime, very serious crime, crime against women and children, domestic and family violence, most of it can be clearly and undeniably attributed to alcohol consumption.
In Alice Springs we have a big story to tell. Alice Springs has had the strictest alcohol restrictions in the country. It is undeniable; there is nowhere in the country that has been subjected to the alcohol restrictions Alice Springs has. The police have been at the forefront of ensuring these alcohol restrictions have been upheld, enforcing the laws and the policy of the government of the day. Over the last 11 years, the government of the day has been the Labor government, and its policy has been to restrict the supply of alcohol in Alice Springs for the best part of - it is over 10 years now. The alcohol restrictions dribbled in before 2002, but they really started to ramp up around 2002. We saw restrictions on the supply of alcohol coming through the takeaway outlets, the hotels, and licensed liquor outlets well over 10 years ago.
I spent four years on the Alice Springs Town Council and, during that time, we saw some incredible changes to the alcohol policy the former Labor government brought in. One of them was the IDI system, the predecessor to the Banned Drinker Register. Alice Springs was the first centre in the Northern Territory to have the IDI identification system introduced. We trialled it, we were used, as usual, as the guinea pigs for what went on to become the Banned Drinker Register.
The IDI system was, essentially, the same as the Banned Drinker Register. When you purchased alcohol you had to provide identification and tell the retailer where you intended to drink the alcohol, which was not a requirement of the Banned Drinker Register. That would not have been very well-received by people in Darwin, but in Alice Springs we had to say, ‘Well, I might sit in the creek and drink my carton of grog, or I might go home and sip my chardonnay in front of the TV’. It was an interesting time in the history of alcohol restrictions in the Northern Territory. As I said, the IDI system went on to become the Banned Drinker Register. They used us as the guinea pigs and tweaked us and changed us according to their whim at the time.
The Alice Springs Town Council, around 2004 or 2005, reintroduced a different form of alcohol restrictions, a restricted area in Alice Springs called the Dry Town Policy. The Dry Town Policy said you could not drink within a 2 km radius of the CBD.
The reason I am talking about them this afternoon is they all relied on the police supporting the policy of the day, implementing and enforcing the laws. I look back over the last 11 years of Labor and the alcohol restrictions in Alice Springs and what they required of the police, and it was a tough period. I am sure any police officer in the Northern Territory who spent time in Alice Springs would look back on those years as being very difficult. It was a government that could not give a stuff, to put it bluntly, about the town or the people, and subjected us all to a series of failing, failed, and not-so-successful alcohol restrictions. The police were loyal, very professional; there is no doubt they would never criticise the government of the day for what they were required to do. It is clearly a part of their role to support, publicly and freely, the policies and laws they are required to implement.
However, the local people of Alice Springs stood back and watched these things unroll. There are certainly factions within the Alice Springs community that say all these alcohol restrictions and reforms have been a resounding success. However, I challenge those views because I know better. I mix very broadly in Alice Springs and I know most people in Alice Springs would say the alcohol restrictions have been a resounding flop.
The statistics speak for themselves. There has been no significant decline in alcohol-related crime and antisocial behaviour in the town over the last decade. Some would say the health status of Aboriginal people has not improved. There might have been some minor improvements in certain areas but most of those are due to advances in technology; for example, renal failure and renal disease in the last 10 years has come forward in leaps and bounds. The prognosis for those poor people has improved mainly due to the medicine and the technology around renal dialysis.
What have these alcohol restrictions the police have been required to enforce achieved? Very little. I do not say that with any joy because if there is one town in Australia that would love alcohol restrictions to work, it is Alice Springs. We are desperate to see changes and improvements in how alcohol reform could improve our town and make all of our lives better. At some point, every person in Alice Springs experiences the misery associated with alcohol abuse.
Alcohol policy is just one area in which I absolutely commend the police force of the Northern Territory for trying to adhere to the requirements of the government of the day. What I am saying is the police are only as good as the government that directs them. For the police in the Northern Territory, the last decade has been extremely tough trying to implement policies that have limited success, if not no success at all. The police have done their jobs with great diligence; you cannot fault them. I have rarely heard of any Alice Springs resident criticising the police for the effort and commitment by police officers, individually and collectively as a force. We cannot live in Alice Springs without them. It is just unbearable to think about a world without our police in Alice Springs.
That is one reason why the Chief Minister, during the election campaign for the general election that was held on 25 August last year, made a commitment to substantially increase the number of police in Alice Springs. He knows it is not restricting supply of alcohol that will make a difference in Alice Springs, it is about ensuring law and order is maintained. The best way to do that is through a good, strong, committed police force. We, as a new government, are right behind the police force throughout the Territory, particularly in places like Alice Springs where there are some serious law and order problems. Other places such as Tennant Creek and Katherine - regional centres - are experiencing the same sort of misery we are.
This new government has turned the page on that lack of commitment to upholding law and order in the regions. We have turned the page in providing minimal resources and trying to pretend the problems of the regions do not exist. We were elected into government based on the belief of the regions of the Northern Territory, in particular that we had the solutions, and we aim to deliver. We are not going to continue the failed policies and agendas of the former Labor government. Why keep flogging a dead horse when things do not work? Why continue to pour money into something that has failed? I stand by the decision of this government to drop the Banned Drinker Register very promptly, as we did four days after the election. I stand by that because it was, indeed, a waste of money ...
A member interjecting.
Mrs LAMBLEY: The people on the other side of the Chamber can start yelling me down, but as a person who has lived in Alice Springs for almost 20 years, I am sorry, I and the people of Alice Springs know better. No amount of screaming and yelling from the other side will convince anyone.
The police in Alice Springs play a critical role in all sorts of business and events in Alice Springs. There was a spectacular event in Alice Springs just last weekend, the AFL match between Richmond and the Indigenous All Stars. I am not a football enthusiast but I did attend that match with my family. I had the pleasure of sitting next to the former Administrator ...
Mr CHANDLER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I move that the member for Araluen be given an extension of time, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mrs LAMBLEY: Madam Speaker, I attended the football match at Traeger Park on Friday night and had the pleasure of sitting next to the former Administrator, Ted Egan, and his lovely wife Nerys, surrounded by some magnificent local people. The former member for Stuart’s mother-in-law was sitting behind me, with her family. The current member for Stuart’s daughter was sitting close to us. It was a great occasion and a thoroughly enjoyable night looking across the grounds of Traeger Park.
The point of me mentioning this is this event was planned months ahead. We had a Summer in Alice planning group from the word go. Within the first couple of weeks of coming to government I called a meeting of the Summer in Alice group of government agencies, and the police played a leadership role in that. We planned to ensure Friday night was an absolute success in all respects, and it was. It was one of the greatest nights I have ever had in Alice Springs. There was no trouble. People came from right across the region of central Australia and beyond. I did not witness any misbehaviour or drunkenness. It was a spectacular evening. The report I received from the Police Commissioner a few days later was that nothing extraordinary happened that evening.
One of the reasons why it was a success is the local licensees, the publicans and holders of liquor licences, came together and voluntarily agreed to put restrictions in place. There was no compulsion put on them by government or anyone. They agreed to ensure on that night there were limitations on the supply of alcohol. That worked well.
In addition to that, the police were everywhere, right down Gap Road, right down the highway, on horseback, in cars. It was so well managed, it was incredible. I extend my deepest thanks to the police force in Alice Springs for doing such a spectacular job. It is something to be proud of that they, as individuals, feel a great deal of love and respect for the town and the people in it, and we could all come together on such a great night and have next to no problems.
There are other issues in the town of Alice Springs that just do not go away. The police are at the forefront of trying to manage those. One of the most appalling problems in our town is the very high rate of domestic and family violence. This problem continues at a rate beyond anywhere else in Australia. No other area or jurisdiction in Australia has the rate of family and domestic violence - violence against women - as we do in the Northern Territory. Sadly, in Alice Springs we certainly have our fair share of the problem.
The police are required and expected to step in and try to work with these very difficult, potentially disastrous, tragic situations on a daily basis. It is something that none of us can be proud of. It is deeply shameful that it continues to be the problem it is in Alice Springs and the Northern Territory. However, I commend police for putting their lives at risk in trying to intervene and save lives, of women and children particularly. I know some men are also victims of family and domestic violence.
The people of Alice Springs have been subject to so many highs and lows in the poor policy of the former Labor government. The policies - or should I say lack of policies - have meant they have been subjected to crime waves, to different things that have gone on in the town that should never have happened.
As a member of the new government, as the member for Araluen, and a committed resident of Alice Springs, I hope we can give the police force of the Northern Territory the direction and resources they need to do their job as best they can.
We did not see that under Labor. We did not see the police force functioning at a level that was required, and that met the demands of the Northern Territory. We have made many commitments around policing in the Northern Territory: to provide more police throughout the Northern Territory, including Alice Springs, to try to reduce the level of crime across the Northern Territory by 10%. We will do it. We have not failed in any of our election commitments so far. We are committed to providing the people of the Northern Territory with a safe and orderly environment in which to raise their children, to live their lives comfortably, and to invest in the Northern Territory.
To serve and protect, Madam Speaker. I highly commend the police force of the Northern Territory. I am a proud Territorian and I deeply thank them for their hard work.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for bringing this statement before the House. He opened his statement with the words ‘to serve and protect’. I saw those words everywhere yesterday. They were on the back of blue baseball caps, embroidered in yellow. The people wearing those caps are employees of the fire service. I know this ministerial statement is about policing, but I want to put on the record as well the incredible work our firies do in the Northern Territory.
I mention them because during Question Time today the member for Greatorex, who is known to shoot from the hip and shoot off his mouth, described the protestors at yesterday’s rally as ‘grubs’. ‘All Labor supporters and grubs’, is how he described them. That is shameful. He needs to apologise to this House. He needs to apologise to those who work in the fire service - men and women, employees and volunteers - one of the most critical services, right up there with our police, ambulance officers, and those who work in the front line of emergency services day in, day out.
Seeing dozens of those firies at the protest rally yesterday, I thought it was less about their own jobs and more about the community they serve. That is where their concerns are: the threat of compromise to services delivered to Territorians. To hear them described as grubs is absolutely shameful. Our firies and policemen do, indeed, serve and protect.
The Chief Minister’s statement, after the opening words ‘to serve and protect’, continued with great words about the history and character of the Northern Territory Police, the pioneering spirit of those men and women who serve our community. Then, the statement soon moved into a bit of a chest thumping rant about how very tough on crime the CLP see themselves.
Yesterday, we heard our tough new Attorney-General indulge himself with a very shabby attack - a very low point in this House - on the former Chief Minister, Paul Henderson, who has served the Northern Territory for many years: a couple of years in opposition but, beyond that, as a minister of the executive of the government. He was sworn in on the same day as the current Police minister, the member for Blain. Whilst we might all have views about one another, to say what he did about the former Chief Minister on his retirement was shameful, and a step worse than that. He did not allow the Leader of the Opposition to participate in that debate. That will go down in history as one of the low moments, and people will decide for themselves what they think of the Attorney-General.
As shadow Attorney-General, I put on the record my view of the former Chief Minister having been our best Police minister ever. He had a real passion for community safety and a real empathy with the men and the women of the Northern Territory Police Force who are committed to keeping our community safe, rendering first aid to all types of members of our community, no matter how challenging the circumstances or where they live.
Former Chief Minister, Paul Henderson, and his government, consistently supported our police in their dedication to preventing crime and pursuing offenders who were causing harm or threat to our community - offenders violating our sense of family and community wellbeing. We know, like the member for Port Darwin and others here, he is a strong family man. Years of service takes its toll on people, and takes its toll on families. The Attorney-General knew that only too well when there was an episode when he was unable, sadly, to participate in the estimates process. I find it disappointing we had that attack. However, as I said, the former Chief Minister is a strong man, a strong family man, and was a strong Police minister.
The new government has filled its statement with a smorgasbord of statistics, particularly percentages, to support an argument the change of government last year has brought about a brand new day with a spectacular change in focus, supporting our police and improving community safety. They seem to have forgotten - it does not appear in the statement anywhere - how many police have been recruited over the years and, not only police, but nurses and teachers, because those agencies were starved of numbers under years of CLP government. Labor worked hard to build those numbers up again.
Anyone with any knowledge of the application of statistics knows it is the numbers as well as the percentages that matter and, when dealing with low numbers, small changes can result in, apparently, quite impressive changes in percentages. Of course, all things are not equal, so it is certainly disingenuous of the new government to throw around some very broad statistics as if every offence was a violent crime or led to some outrage.
If we are to have a debate about law and order and community safety, let us have a proper and well-informed debate. The always sensible person on the street will know improvements in crime fighting and community safety, particularly with recidivism, do not change overnight with a magical change of government and a magical CLP wand. Improvements are progressive and built on good policy, good law, and the diligent, professional enforcement of the law by our police men and women.
Our former Police minister, Paul Henderson, will be remembered as having strongly supported the growth and development of what we can say is an outstanding Northern Territory Police service - I doubt any member would disagree with that - providing them with the tools and resources they need to do their jobs effectively in the communities spread across the Northern Territory, whether they be major centres on the Stuart Highway or remote Indigenous communities.
Amongst those tools to help police do their job there are several I will talk of. The Banned Drinker Register, which police said was the best tool they ever had to prevent alcohol-related offences, is one. I have said before, but I will say it again, Nhulunbuy, northeast Arnhem, Groote Eylandt - ahead of Nhulunbuy for a number of years now - have had incredibly effective alcohol management plans. They were, essentially, the forerunners for the legislation that was rolled out around the Northern Territory under the Enough is Enough reforms to introduce the Banned Drinker Register to deal with the huge cost associated with alcohol abuse that costs taxpayers more than $600m in running health services, the justice system, the correction system, police, and everybody associated with dealing with the misery associated with alcohol abuse.
That immeasurable cost associated with alcohol abuse is to children and families. As the member for Araluen noted, yes, there are men who are victims of domestic violence, but predominantly it is women and children. Given the massive issues with alcohol in the Northern Territory, the Labor government took strong steps to address it based on alcohol management programs that were working and continue to work in northeast Arnhem Land. Yet, sadly, the CLP government has seen fit to dismantle it - it was an election promise – and, having dismantled it, replaced it with nothing.
I take exception to the comments of the Chief Minister in his statement about the Banned Drinker Register when he said, ‘It is clear to all reasonable people that the Banned Drinker Register did not work’. The Chief Minister is in a world and universe all of his own if he seriously thinks that and can ignore the comments which have been unrelenting in Letters to the Editor, online comments, and talkback radio. I mentioned today a Letter to the Editor yesterday from a Ms Maria Woodgate at Alawa, and her comments about the BDR. From what she has written, I believe this individual is a reasonable person. She wrote:
Well, hear, hear, Ms Woodgate!
In Nhulunbuy and northeast Arnhem Land, we have been showing our driver’s licences for takeaway purchases in exactly the same fashion you hand over a credit card when you are making a purchase, or when you enter certain clubs, such as the Arnhem Club where you have to swipe a card to gain access. Ms Woodgate went on to say:
Of course, the Chief Minister would deny that entirely and dismiss it as absolute rubbish.
Another tool police had at their fingertips that was developed over a period of time under the Labor government was the SMART Court. The SMART Court connected those without employment, but with alcohol problems, to income management so government benefits were not used to fuel alcohol-related humbug and crime. The member for Nelson asked a very valid question today about the proposal by the Attorney-General to dismantle the SMART Court without any evidence or consultation with those who have been a part of it. Its removal, as I understand, can only be done by an introduction of a bill to repeal it through the floor of this House. I guess that is coming along.
I also, at the same time, plead with him to reconsider and not send the Territory backwards, but to give those individuals who are not violent offenders but who have issues with alcohol and/or other drugs and have offended a second chance; to recognise that sending people to the lock-up is not the way we need to go. If there are avenues where we can keep people out of the correction system through a justice reinvestment program, then we need to look at that. Eighteen months is too soon to stop something, throw it out, and just say it was too costly and it did not work without any real evaluation from the experts about the effectiveness and long-term benefits. It costs $20 000 to lock up an offender for around three months and $110 000 per individual for 12 months in a corrections facility. You start to weigh those figures up against what a court like the SMART Court is doing. We know the Chief Magistrate is very much in favour of it and NAAJA is in favour of it. The only body not in favour of it is the new CLP government. I am pleading with them to have a rethink about that.
I appeal especially to the CLP bush members opposite who represent an Indigenous constituency. I ask them to think about whether we want to see our constituents locked up, or do we want to give them a real and second chance?
I want to go on to the other tools we have had in place for Northern Territory police under a Labor government: CCTV, new forensic facilities and state-of-the-art equipment and training for our police to ensure they are always one step ahead in our fight against crime. The investment into CCTV has been incredible. Whilst it has not been a Northern Territory government investment in Nhulunbuy, but under Nhulunbuy Corporation, I know that CCTV - it is the same in Darwin - has captured offences in the act, quite literally, with the opportunity to identify individuals and proceed with an investigation and charges, if that is what it comes to. CCTV, in particular, is a significant tool that has made policing far more efficient.
We look at other tools like our Safer Streets initiative delivering more police patrols in Darwin City, Casuarina, Palmerston, Alice Springs and in Katherine. We look at the development of intelligence-led policing and support for successful targeted actions against youth gangs and property crime. Some of the members on this side have talked about Police Beats in their electorates - on both sides of the House - where Police Beats have been established to give that visibility and presence in places where people need to see them and have access to them, as well as those grassroots police responses in our local hot spots.
Another tool has been successfully negotiating with the Commonwealth government for more police and police stations in remote towns, providing better protection and support for families and children no matter where they live. The intervention is debated amongst different people who hold different views about the value of it. However, all those years ago, it brought recognition of an underspend in our communities. It is from there that police stations in some of our remote communities have rolled out.
One of my early visits, as the new member for Nhulunbuy in March 2009, to Elcho Island was for the opening of the police station. I know there are others opening around the place. I know the one at Gapuwiyak is under construction and due to open soon. People really value these communities and the officers and their families who come to work there, recognising the needs of the residents of the Darwin rural area - that would strike a chord with the member for Nelson and you, Madam Speaker - and establishing a proper police presence in building a police station in Humpty Doo. Let us hope the Chief Minister does not do to Humpty Doo Police Station what he has done to the firies there and expect volunteers to deliver those services.
We have had the introduction of our wonderful and hard-working drug detection dogs, an incredibly efficient means of policing. What an impact they have made on targeting drug traffickers. It is a very costly exercise to train these dogs, but they are a very effective communication tool.
There was a targeted campaign last year. Travelling back home to Nhulunbuy, I quite often take the option to travel home in the evening on the Airnorth flight, which is a smaller plane with about 30 seats. That plane lands in Nhulunbuy and then goes on to Groote Eylandt; so, people who have been in for the day or whatever, will go home on that evening flight. For a couple of weeks, every time I caught that flight, all passengers would go through the check in, go down the stairs, and head out towards the plane. However, at the bottom of the stairs, it became routine that we lined up and put our bags around us. There would be a few police officers there and a sniffer dog would come through and do a very thorough job of sniffing out contraband material. It sent a shiver up your spine when, occasionally - it happened on two occasions - someone was pulled aside by police saying, ‘Can you come this way, please?’ That threat was very real. If you continue to travel with illicit, illegal substances in your baggage you will be caught.
I acknowledge our support cross-border policing initiatives, with those new police stations sharing resources with neighbouring states on our Territory borders in the very remote parts of the Territory.
There are also the major improvements to interagency collaboration around that really critical and important area of child protection and other community safety issues.
Unbelievably, the minister claimed that the establishment of interagency task forces and targeted interventions at crime hot spots is a CLP innovation. They were actually started under Labor. I know for a fact the Interagency Tasking and Coordination Group in Nhulunbuy has had the funding for its secretariat removed. I understand that group has not met for six months. Removing that secretariat’s support is a short-sighted move. That is where we get heads of agencies together. They talk about and gather important information about what is happening in the communities - safety and other related issues – and feed it through to agency heads in Darwin. There has been a very close tracking process to ensure these meetings are not talkfests but are task, outcome and action oriented in flagging community issues. Well, the secretariat position has gone, the group has been left to its own devices …
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move an extension of time for the member for Nhulunbuy.
Motion agreed to.
Ms WALKER: Thank you very much, member for Barkly, and thank you, Madam Speaker.
The Interagency Tasking and Coordination Group at Nhulunbuy has lost the support of the CLP government, having had its secretariat removed.
Anybody with any knowledge of the truth will know these developments were an important part of change developed and implemented under the watch of the previous Labor government. All of us in the Northern Territory share in the responsibility to reduce family and domestic violence. We know this is not just a police issue, and that is why we took the strong step of introducing mandatory reporting of serious family and domestic violence - the first jurisdiction in Australia to do so.
I am sure, like me, the member for Namatjira will recall that debate when that was passed. It was a very emotional debate. I heard stories from my colleagues that made me cry. There were other members on their feet, particularly women, who were able to describe first-hand some of the horrific things they had seen and lived through with their own families. We need to continue to promote that it is mandatory to report domestic violence. We must continue to do anything we can to combat domestic violence.
Knowledge is power, and this has been a very important tool for police and other agencies, ensuring they have the information they need to protect women and children in our community, and to respond to violent assaults that were too often hidden behind closed doors.
Another key matter in the statement from the Chief Minister is around recidivism and concern around repeat offences while offenders are on bail. This is an issue of concern to our community, obviously, and that is why we took firm action in 2008, as the Labor government, to ensure there was no second chance for serious violent offenders. We introduced a very tough approach - it was when Dr Chris Burns was the Attorney-General – so it was presumed serious violent offenders would not be granted bail, rather than a presumption they could have access to bail while they were awaiting a court hearing. That law changed in 2008, so a person who faced a serious assault charge and had committed a similar offence in the previous five years had to prove they deserved bail. It certainly was not an automatic thing. This was a very major change introduced to keep violent people charged with serious assaults off our streets and away from those people they might harm.
We understand community concern about repeat offenders, who are often youths, committing property crime. We well understand the sense of invasion of our private space and abuse of our property when people break, enter, and steal.
We would be very interested to hear of any new initiatives in that regard from the CLP government, but let us see the evidence of what works and what does not. Let us hear the professional view of our police and others in the justice and corrections system. Let us see some new options and approaches beyond immediate gaoling for people charged with property offences. Let us remember mandatory sentencing for property offences - the headline policy of the CLP in the late 1990s - did not work. It was a game changer for them in the lead-up to the 2001 election. If the new government is proposing that people charged with property crime be denied bail then what programs will be employed to change their behaviours?
Labor well understands the impact of crime on families and the right of all of our citizens to go about their lives without fear of assault, humbug and theft. These subjects are very topical at the moment as we have law and order bills before the House and another one coming up tomorrow.
The minister should be talking about recognising and thanking the members of our police service. I add in there, again, the members of our fire service, who also wear those caps which say ‘to serve and protect’. They are not grubs, they are hard-working individuals who provide a critical service and put service above themselves. They deserve our strong and unfailing support in their work.
I agree we should all find the time to thank a copper for their work. I am very mindful of the great history of the Northern Territory Police, particularly their work in the bush. Of course, police themselves would be the first to say how important it is as a bush copper to be part of, and to work with, your local community.
I acknowledge the fantastic work Nhulunbuy police do. In the 23 years I have lived there I have always admired the work they do, being a small and close-knit community. Their families, like my family, are part of the community. I will not name everybody by name because there are too many of them.
However, I acknowledge our current OIC Senior Sergeant Brendon Muldoon. He must be coming up for his second or third year in Nhulunbuy. He takes a very proactive approach to his job. He has led a project for a few months now on an awareness campaign for boating safety. He has worked with our local Rotary Club, the fishing club, I have been involved, and the local newspaper has been involved. They will be delivering very soon, thanks to support from various stakeholders, but Senior Sergeant Muldoon has led the charge.
Big signs with important safety messages will be placed at each of the boat ramps around the Gove area. They will be changing those safety messages so people have uppermost in their minds the checks they need to make before they go out on the water. There will be a letterbox there where people are strongly encouraged to fill out a piece of paper to say what time they have set off, who is with them, and when they are expected back so there is some record as to who is out there. Of course, this is borne out of rescues at sea that have been conducted by Police and Emergency Services. This is an additional channel to make people aware of some of those hazards on the water. I congratulate that initiative.
I also congratulate an initiative which is running for the second year in a row. It generally starts during the school holidays. Again, it has been initiated by police under Senior Sergeant Muldoon. It is to reward kids who are riding their bikes and doing the right thing: helmets on, stopping at roads, and getting off their bikes and walking them across pedestrian crossings. I cannot remember the name for it. Essentially, you get a ticket for being good. Many businesses supply prizes and they had a barbecue on Monday at the police station. Unfortunately, I could not get to that because I was here. I have seen messages on Facebook from proud mums and dads whose kids presented their tickets and received prizes for doing the right thing on their bicycles. That is what good policing is about: working above and beyond, being very much a part of the community and being proactive.
I acknowledge the bush police as well. Within my electorate, at Elcho Island there are four families - if we include Bettina Danganbarr, our incredible ACPO at Elcho Island, and the great work they do – who make sacrifices by going away from urban areas and all the creature comforts and be in the minority on communities. But, for the most part, families I meet there love it, are dedicated to it, work hard, and one of the best parts of their job is becoming a part of the community. They come away with life-changing experiences following their years in the bush and are invariably adopted into family, and come to urban life with new skills and knowledge which can only help to further build the skills that will allow them to continue to serve the people of the Northern Territory, whether they be in urban or remote areas.
I close by remembering the police who have lost their lives in our service and those everyday police officers who work in our interests for our family and community safety, as I have said before, often above and beyond the call of duty. We have a great police service that needs to be supported in its work, not pushed and pulled and dragged into political debates for law and order chest thumping. That is what we always looked to and worked for in government: to give them the tools to do their job in the best way they can. So, let the police get on with what they do best: supporting people in distress, preventing crime, and bringing offenders before the court.
Madam Speaker, I commend the statement to the House.
Ms FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on policing. There is no doubt the scope of the duty of a police officer in the Northern Territory has transformed and evolved since 1870. Certainly, the responsibility and expectation the public has on the role and duty of a police officer has expanded into non-traditional areas of policing. Tremendous respect must be afforded to those who choose to serve and protect our community in all shapes that might take.
The Chief Minister referred in his statement to an extract from the NT Police website which recounts that in 1961 the first female NT police officers were recruited to the force. From these five courageous trailblazing women we now boast a female presence in the police force in 2011-12 of 34.7%. I will refer to some numbers that come out of the Northern Territory Police, Fire and Emergency Services Annual Report for 2011-12. This graph shows the NTPFES staff by group and gender. In the Emergency Services, 47.37% were women; in Fire and Rescue Service, 10.49% were women; in civilian employees 67.26% were women; and in the NT Police, 30.06%. Whilst there is always room for improvement in the area of the advancement of women, some of these numbers in some of these areas are good. At the very least, the NTPFES has a commitment to equal opportunity employment and understands the importance of the contribution a diverse workplace makes to service delivery and the service of our community.
The final graph I will look to - from the same report - shows females by rank of constables and above. For 2011-12, we had 200 constables and a very small portion of females who are commissioned officers. It is encouraging that the large number of female constables at those lower levels will be coming up through the ranks. I hope, over the course of our term, we will start to see an increase in women taking on those more senior ranks and roles in our police force.
I have spoken in adjournment on a number of occasions about crime in Palmerston. It was an election commitment of mine, and of our government, to do everything in our power to ensure people feel safe in their homes, on their streets, and in their community. My constituents are concerned about law and order and are looking to me and this government to take a real stance on these issues. My constituents want to see the wrongdoers lawfully punished so people doing the right thing can live their lives. I will be analysing the December 2012 quarterly crime statistics to watch the trend of crime in my community.
I note the Chief Minister’s praise of closed circuit television in monitoring criminal hot spots. CCTV for Palmerston is an initiative I would like to see delivered for my community in suburban areas. I have been advancing this initiative since mid-last year. I believe the installation of CCTV in key areas, such as known trouble spots in Grey, Driver and Durack, will make an enormous difference on the ability to achieve prosecutions on matters that move through our court system.
I empathise with police officers who work tirelessly to catch criminals in the act, investigate crimes and charge appropriately, only to struggle with the evidentiary issues of identification. CCTV will assist the courts, the police, the prosecutors and, in turn, the victims, the defence lawyers and the defendants in expediting the delivery of justice. The presumption of innocence until proven guilty and the threshold test of beyond reasonable doubt are critical principles of our justice system and our democracy. CCTV goes a long way to providing the evidence that is not only beyond reasonable doubt, but beyond all doubt. CCTV is also a powerful investigative tool that cannot be underestimated.
For the last five-and-a-half months we have been in government we have had to sit here and endure the cries of this opposition about how successful the BDR was. I refute any assertion that the BDR was effective. I cannot count the number of times I have spoken to people who work at bottle shops who have told me the scheme was a nuisance which did not stop problem drunks from drinking. They would come through in minibuses, taxis, friends’ cars, and go to any lengths to get their hands on the grog.
Local shop operators who still continue to be humbugged, childcare operators who still continue to deal with the aftermath of alcohol-fuelled evenings, members of the community who loathe being punished for doing nothing wrong and, importantly, the police, did not see an impact of the BDR. In fact, I can report that crime around the Palmerston Shopping Centre has decreased recently. The issues which were there before the BDR were there during the BDR. Anything Labor says in defence of the BDR is simply laughable.
Minister Tollner, the Minister for Alcohol Policy, has a number of initiatives that will make a real difference to the lives of Territorians who do the right thing and will tackle, at its core, those individuals who continue to do the wrong thing.
I also take this opportunity to thank the NT Police for all of the interactions I have had with them. Even when I was a candidate, I wrote on numerous occasions to the Police Commissioner, and all of my concerns were promptly responded to, even by personal phone calls from the Police Commissioner. I know these timely responses from police meant a lot to those in my electorate who had raised their concerns with me.
More recently, I have had frequent interactions with the team at Palmerston Police Station. OIC Daniel Shean is an inspiring officer whose leadership has transformed the way in which Palmerston police do business. I thank him and his team for their initiatives, passion and commitment. I believe you do your job best when you love your job, and it is clear, whenever I speak to Daniel, that he loves Palmerston and is dedicated to exceptional service and to the protection of Palmerston residents.
The knowledge which Palmerston police have of our area and of our troublemakers never ceases to amaze me. They work collaboratively with council, Mission Australia and other bodies to deliver holistic policing in our community. The member for Brennan and I met with police last week to raise our concerns about Palmerston and we were pleasantly surprised. I was comforted by the quality of police we have patrolling our streets.
Recently, I have been on a graffiti blitz in my electorate and the response and commitment I have had from Palmerston police is exemplary. I am amazed at the level of police intelligence on youth activities, graffiti tag styles, motivating factors, and graffiti deterrence measures. The level of concern and connection to community issues like graffiti is, in my view, community-based policing at its best.
Madam Speaker, in closing, I give my wholehearted thanks to those who choose to serve and protect Territorians, and I thank the Chief Minister for his statement.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, there are a couple of comments I will make in relation to this statement. However, one of the things we should do in this place is lead by example. I invite the Leader of the Opposition to lead by example in good order and orderly matters. Whilst I was not going to enter into a public comment about what I read on page 6 of the paper today, it was the contribution of the member for Nhulunbuy which inspired me to respond.
I am not going to get angry about it or anything like that; I simply ask the Leader of the Opposition to tell this House whether or not she supports the conduct of her staffer in relation to those very unfortunate comments made on Facebook - I presume on a government computer upstairs.
Whilst I do not mind receiving criticism, if such common abuse had been articulated on the street and expressed in those terms it would be an offence which would breach the Summary Offences Act. However, the question I have for the Leader of the Opposition is simply: will you reprimand, or in some way chastise, that staffer for their conduct or will you tacitly support that person’s conduct by doing nothing?
If the answer to that question is the latter then it does not bode well for a government led by a Chief Minister Lawrie into the future. If she cannot contain and restrain people around her and by doing nothing, essentially, support them, then how can she govern and lead police in the Northern Territory? I have nothing more to say about that issue.
I also want to talk about this conversation we are consistently having about the Banned Drinker Register. I do not care about what a person’s opinion is of the Banned Drinker Register one way or the other, in the sense that we can argue until we are blue in the face in this place about statistics and how to read them. I am quite confident the decision we made in opposition to terminate the Banned Drinker Register was reinforced by the numbers that came through.
Putting all of that to one side, I found it intriguing that the Prime Minister of this country said it was the Territory government’s duty to return the Banned Drinker Register, based on information received from the Northern Territory Branch of the Australian Labor Party which was factually incorrect. Moreover, there is a much more fundamental thing on the table here.
I find it incomprehensible that we can continue in the way we have been in the past. I have made comments about passive welfare in this House in the past and will do so again. The Prime Minister and Jenny Macklin in Canberra oversee the single largest financial contribution to the alcohol problem in our community in the Northern Territory, in fact, to many of the remote and even non-remote places around this country. The fact that every fortnight the federal government pours millions and millions of dollars into this jurisdiction which fuels and underwrites financially the consumption of so much liquor in this community - particularly in those areas where the consumption becomes problematic - and somehow thinks she absolves herself by pointing at the Northern Territory government and saying it is our responsibility to fix it, is not an appropriate approach.
This will not be an exercise in Prime Minister bashing, because the approach of giving money away in a passive welfare framework is not historically something just the Australian Labor Party has done. Indeed, no shortage of Australian Liberal governments have done the same thing. However, the time has come for us to reassess it, because after the federal government pours millions of dollars every fortnight into this jurisdiction, which to a large extent - it is not exclusive - inflames the problem here and the Northern Territory government – be it the former Labor government or the current Northern Territory government - spends millions of dollars every fortnight fixing up the resultant mess.
All I am calling for, as the Attorney-General of the Northern Territory, as the member for Port Darwin - goodness gracious me, just as a citizen of the Northern Territory - is some better way to spend those two sums of money. Currently, it is almost like one level of government spends millions of dollars pouring fuel on a fire only to have the second level of government spend millions of taxpayers’ dollars trying to put the fire out. Surely, there must be a better way to deal with this issue in our community.
I do not want to be seen to be bashing any flavour of government in these comments because I would like to have a constructive debate in this country - particularly in regard to the relationship between the Northern Territory government and the federal government - to find a way to make the expenditure of the Northern Territory complement the expenditure of the federal government. That will require, I suspect, a movement in both governments in how you reconcile that spending. I have proposed some ideas and will mention them again because I am going to keep talking about them. I would like to see a system of work for welfare.
Once again, it is not to beat up on the recipients of welfare but, rather, to enable them to gain some dignity and self-worth by having a job. I do not want to see this imposed from on high. I imagine in the community - whether it is Nightcliff or Yuendumu - such programs would be governed by local boards which would have capacity, with the assistance of the government business managers they currently have in these communities, to find worthwhile local projects in which to use local labour.
In many Aboriginal communities, why is there not a committee of locals who can identify projects which need doing that could then be funded with labour through Centrelink projects. That way, vital community work could be done. You would have people who are employed - albeit through a form of CDEP for lack of a better description; however, it would be some form of employment for them - governed by local boards that would say this work needs to happen here, here, and here, and get the money, which, to an extent, has translated, up until now, as a destructive force in our community working as a positive force in our community. Would it not be a wonderful thing, I suggest to members of this House, that, all of sudden, we could tap into a source of labour that would be able to work in all manner of areas to develop our communities so we get better results? I would apply that attitude in Nightcliff, Alice Springs, Kintore or Docker River. God knows, so many of these communities could do with community work. There is a labour force sitting there ready to go, yet we do not do that.
What we, unfortunately, see is so many of the problems we have in the Northern Territory being exacerbated by federal government expenditure. I ask the Prime Minister, if she is serious about alcohol problems in the Northern Territory, that she do her part with the money she currently spends in this jurisdiction so we could get much better results than we are currently. However, that requires negotiation. I have spoken to Simon Crean, a few minutes ago to the new Attorney-General, Mark Dreyfus, and to a number of other people to try to get somebody in Jenny Macklin’s office to contact me so we can talk about these issues. If there is a legacy to be left behind by any minister with carriage of this expenditure - whether it be Jenny Macklin or any of her successors - the legacy of rescuing thousands of people from the curse of idleness would be a wonderful legacy to leave behind, no matter what your political persuasion.
Madam Speaker, it is 5.30 pm.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, it being 5.30 pm, in accordance with Standing Order 93, debate is now suspended and General Business will now have precedence over Government Business until 9 pm.
Debate suspended.
TABLED PAPER
Former Member for Wanguri’s Interstate Travel Report
Madam SPEAKER: Before I call the opposition, honourable members, I table the former member for Wanguri’s interstate travel report pursuant to 3.14 of the Remuneration Tribunal Determination No 1 of 2011.
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I move that this Assembly condemns the government for breaking the promises they made to Territorians at the last election by driving up the cost of living and increasing public drunkenness and antisocial behaviour.
This is an issue which is on the lips of Territorians. They cannot believe such a series of blatant broken promises has occurred. There was no greater demonstration of the public outcry around the behaviour of this government led by the member for Blain, the Chief Minister, than yesterday at the protest.
Shamefully, in Question Time in the Assembly today, members opposite labelled that protest as a Labor Party protest and the protestors as Labor Party political hacks. The member for Greatorex called them grubs. That is incredibly shameful because at that protest were citizens of the Territory who are not card-carrying members of the Labor Party. No doubt there were a few there who were. That protest was organised in conjunction between the unions, which are seeing workers lose their jobs and have grave fears for the privatisation of the port and Power and Water in the manoeuvrings of this government, and the Citizens for Action, which is a non-party political action group of concerned citizens, which has sprung up since ...
Mr Chandler: Driven by lies and hatred.
Ms LAWRIE: I pick up on the interjection, ‘driven by lies and hatred’. Peter Chandler, the member for Brennan, is describing the Citizens for Action as being driven by lies and hatred. You are appalling! They are not. They are normal, everyday Territory citizens who are so disturbed and appalled by the power prices being hiked up by the CLP government, and the impact this is having on their lives, that they have gathered to protest. We live in a democracy where we have always had freedom of speech - to the core and the heart of who we are. Member for Brennan, to hear you describe the Citizens for Action as a group driven by lies and hatred is appalling. There is no doubt you will have some explaining to do when those citizens come to you and ask why you say that about them, because these are Territorians who are absolutely distressed by the CLP breaking the promise on the costs of living.
Terry Mills said in the election campaign, ‘If you want to see a reduction in the cost of living, vote for us’. Yes I am paraphrasing him, but he said in the cost of living election campaign, ‘If you want to lower the cost of living, vote for the CLP’. He then stepped in and hiked up power prices by 30%, and hiked up water and sewerage prices.
People are gobsmacked that it was one foul swoop, that it was a direct broken promise on the cost of living. We have heard the excuses, and they have chopped and changed a bit. The themes have been, ‘it is Delia’s debt’, or ‘it is the Labor Party debt’, and, ‘we had to do it; they made us do it’. The next thing that came through was, ‘We need to fund the infrastructure, and it is all about the infrastructure’. As I have said in the past, if you are going to make something up, stick to it. At least be consistent; do not chop and change your reasons around.
The reality is, you did not have to do it. It is completely unnecessary. You have also tried to say, ‘We have done this because Labor did not do anything and it is all their fault’. What a lot of nonsense! The 2009 review of Power and Water reset the tariffs for the first time in 20 years. It took a Labor government to do that for the first time in 20 years: reset the tariffs by 18% one year, and 5% the next year for power; 30% resets in tariffs across three years for water and sewerage.
To pretend, as you have done, it was all about Labor doing nothing, ‘We have had to come and do this terrible thing. We really did not want to do it, but trust us, stay with us, bear with us’ - what a lot of nonsense! You are trying to turn Power and Water into a cash cow. You want to earn money, dividends out of Power and Water like you did for the best part of a decade to put into the consolidated revenue coffers so you can fund your unfunded election commitments in the bush. You went to the Territory campaign with $400m worth of election promises you submitted to Treasury on the eve of the deadline for the costings being submitted to Treasury. In contrast, the Labor Party had $200m in costed election commitments. So, you are spending $200m more on your promises than the Labor Party. You have to roll them out the door. You have to find $400m in election commitments.
On top of that, you had a plethora of promises that were not written down on the costings submitted to Treasury. They are the unfunded promises that exist in the contracts across the bush such as the Borroloola contract and the contracts you made on the Tiwi. You made contracts on all those major regional centres across the bush so people voted you into government. They were not in writing in the election commitments submitted to Treasury. You have a host of problems there. You have to find the money to fund the promises - like the $20m port at Melville - that people made and are remembered out bush. They are promises people talk to us about when we travel out bush. There is a whole host of problems for you there - billions of dollars’ worth of promises. Have a look at the new Katherine Hospital or sealing the road to Wadeye; that is a big stretch of highway hundreds of kilometres. There were promises all over the bush.
We are cataloguing because people are really good at telling us what the promises were and where they were made. We do our own costings on the promises and work out how much you are up for. We quickly figured it out; you are stripping the dollars out of the pockets of hard-working Territorians to fund your unfunded election commitments in the bush. At the same time, if you can fatten Power and Water for sale, would that not be a lovely cash revenue injection?
No doubt, there were many people protesting at the rally who are very concerned about the port. You saw the MUA members out there proudly. They do not want to see the sale of the port. They are worried about it because they are starting to see conditions being squeezed at the port. You have heard the MUA spokespeople talk about how tough things are getting and how they are worried about the safety of their workers there. These were genuine people with genuine issues protesting yesterday about their genuine concerns about how you have driven up the cost of living.
You also heard at the protest yesterday concerns coming directly from the representatives of the nurses, the Australian Nursing Federation. They are not affiliated with the Labor Party. They are not card-carrying members of the Labor Party. You called them political Labor hacks and grubs today in Question Time, but they are not. They were there telling the audience that agency nurses have been cut; agency nurses have lost their contract at our main hospital. They are no longer getting shifts at work and they are being made redundant. These are frontline nurses who, before the election, were caring for Territorians as patients in the hospital. Now, as a result of the CLP cuts, they are no longer there.
I shudder to think what the nurse-to-patient ratio is starting to look like at Royal Darwin Hospital. We know the nurse-to-patient ratio exists for a reason: to save lives. We know the CLP cut the offer on the table from the federal government of a new children’s wing. They pay scant regard to the needs and the demand pressures at Royal Darwin Hospital. We know you have gone on to cut the medi-hostel. The descriptions of it coming from the Health Minister have been alarming. It is disrespectful, to say the least, to call it a hotel for people.
As people heard at the rally yesterday, the medi-hostel is designed for patients in the hospital who need medical care in recovery to be in so they receive appropriate care. They live in the bush and this is the recovery care before they go home. We also know the hostel was designed for our pregnant mums coming in from the bush areas, when they needed obstetric birthing care, to be in there until they go into labour. For the Minister for Health to describe that as a hotel is extraordinary. The point of it all, and the point the nurses were making is, it saves money. It frees up the acute beds that are being occupied by those patients by putting them into a less expensive care model; meaning the person sitting in accident and emergency in Royal Darwin Hospital can more quickly get into a bed and get the care they need.
These are genuine concerns about the broken promises because these jobs that are being lost in the front line directly contradict the promise made by the Chief Minister when he said, ‘Your job is safe. No jobs will be gone. Public servants will not lose their jobs’. We have seen people on contracts across all agencies have their contract ceased. They no longer have a job. They had a job before the August election, they were serving the public in their various agencies and, because they were on contract, their contracts have ceased and they no longer have a job. We are not even talking about the CEOs and the high-level executives. These are not the people who earn more than $110 000, these are the people earning less than $110 000 who the member for Blain, when Leader of the Opposition, said in this Chamber, ‘Your job is safe’. Well, it was not. They have been sacked; they have lost their jobs.
I met them at things like the protest rally yesterday and while doorknocking in Wanguri. I met them at the New Year’s Eve multicultural functions I attended where there were no CLP members. Literally in their droves people are saying, ‘I am one of the ones who lost their job’. They are only just hanging in there because their husband or wife still has a job. They are only just hanging in there and they do not know how on earth they will pay this power bill that has been hiked up.
You can spin all your political spin with your $180 000 a year spin doctor just for Facebook. Are you guys for real? You can spin all you like but people see through it. They get it. They can see what you are doing. They can see that you are fattening up Power and Water for sale, and you are paying your mates, the old boys, $1m for six months just to give you the lame excuses to do whatever you want to do, to cut whatever you want to cut. They can see through it. Why? Because this is a small town. People talk. Public servants are talking. I know they are worried about their jobs but they are starting to chat in the communities to their friends who are not public servants, who then come and have a chat with someone else who has a chat to someone else. What is happening under the CLP government is the talk of the town’s coffee bars, and people do not like it.
They do not like that you have so blatantly broken that promise to reduce the cost of living. They do not like that you have been mean enough to put $1 on bus transport for seniors. They do not like that you are mean enough to say, ‘You have to pay $20 if you front up at the MVR’. They are all adding to the cost of living. They do not like that. Those power and water price hikes flow on to everything. We had a whole Question Time argy-bargy over the cost being passed on at the childcare centres, with, ‘Oh no, it is not, Labor is not telling the truth about that’, when there were letters going to parents from childcare centres pointing it out.
It seems that whenever someone says something to you - and certainly when the opposition says it - it must be wrong. ‘You are wrong; you are making it up’, when it is actually happening. People are actually packing up and leaving because they cannot afford the power price hikes you have imposed. People ask me, ‘Why are they not doing this in increments? Why can they not do this in increments?’ I say, ‘Well, it was a pretty clear answer on the Channel 9 news. I was sitting at home watching it and I was gobsmacked’. When asked on Nine News in the studio by Jonathan Upton, ‘Will you be bringing it in all in one hit because you want people to forget about it in four years’ time when they vote?’, the Treasurer candidly replied, ‘Oh, no. We hope they forget about it in two years’ time’. That was the most incredible piece of footage I have seen because it brought home, starkly and clearly on the TV set through Channel 9 Nine News she is admitting it is petty politics. It is all about the politics of, ‘Let us hit them up, do the money grab at the start, and do not worry, they will forget about it’. That is the plan, ‘Let us grab the money so they forget about it’.
It is not going to happen; people do not forget about it. Their power will not magically be 30% chaper in four years’ time or two years’ time. They still will be running the fridge and, yes, often people have a second fridge in the Territory. Why? It is so hot here. You rely on refrigeration more than in the southern climates. If you have a large family and are trying to run a fridge full of food, where do you put your drink containers? I am not just talking alcohol. I have a large family. I have my stock of juices and milk containers for the kids in a separate fridge. Many people use it to put their beer and wine in. We live in a hot place and our use of refrigeration is greater than down south. Down south they can leave the butter on the bench. Here, if you leave the butter on the bench for five minutes it is melting. We store so much more in our fridges. Our preserves, vegemite and peanut butter are in the fridge. That means we often rely on a second fridge and we are trying our best to make it as economical as possible. You go for the better rated fridges as often as you can save and afford one. The second fridge is not a luxury.
Running air-conditioners is not a luxury. For families trying to get their little ones to sleep at night it is not luxury in the build-up, even in a Wet Season like the one we are currently having where the monsoon cooling rains have not arrived.
People are literally saying, ‘I cannot afford this price hike. I am packing up and leaving’. Often in those families at the moment one person has been sacked by the CLP government; I met one on the weekend. I was looking for a household item for some time, so I looked at the lawn sales on the weekend and went to one which had the item to check it out. The man there had been sacked by the CLP and they could not afford to live here any longer with their two kids. They were devastated. They had raised their kids in the Territory and wanted to continue to live here. With him unemployed, they could not afford to. He was in a specialist field so there was no alternative job here for him. He is taking his family south because he was sacked by the CLP. The broken promise: ‘Your job is safe’. The reality has hit hard in that family.
They are not the only ones I have met. Part of the role as Leader of the Opposition is being out and about in the community; you are accessible with a small community. I have had complete strangers telling me their stories. They will not forget in four years’ time because of the pain. Whilst they move south, their friends and extended families are living here, and they do not like who did it to them. Your own polling will show you Terry Mills is absolutely toxic! He is the one in those election ads, he has broken every promise he made, and people will not forgive.
He can spin all he likes about debt but, at the end of the day, he is increasing debt. The debt is at a serviceable level: 8% of revenue to service the whole of government and the non-financial debt. We have a stable AA+ credit rating. There is no threat to that credit rating.
You can spin it all you like, but people can see through the spin because we are a small community. I guess what is not helping you is your method of operation has been the carbon copy of the Campbell Newman method. They are saying, ‘Hang on a second, we have heard all this before. We have heard it in Queensland. They are spinning the same stuff in Queensland and they are taking the same action in Queensland. Oh, that is right, Labor pointed out in the election campaign that the CLP election material, the five-point plan, was the same as Queensland’s’. They get it; people are not fools. Your Chief Minister might be a fool, but the people are not fools.
On that subject of the chief being a fool, he advised us all what we need to do to deal with the problem of the drunks on the streets – another broken promise by the way; it was on the front page of his 100-day plan that he was going to take the drunks off the streets. That broken promise the people can actually see. At a Darwin City Council meeting which he attended to discuss the problem of the drunks on the streets – this is not the Labor Party saying it, it is not the opposition saying it, the aldermen said it - his great advice was, ‘Well, just tell the drunk you do not like them drinking’.
That is dangerous; that is how people get hurt. That is contrary to the advice a respectable and responsible Chief Minister should be giving. It is stupid and dangerous. People get hurt. My advice is, do not go up to the drunk. Do not put yourself in harm’s way. They are drunk; they are not in their normal senses. Be careful. Contact police; they are trained to deal with drunks.
Not only does he have a litany of broken promises, he is now trying to work his way out of dealing with that broken promise of taking the drunks off the street by putting normal citizens in danger, which goes to another issue.
How do you call firefighters grubs, member for Brennan? How do you call them party hacks when you are sitting there making those accusations about the process vote ...
Mr CHANDLER: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I would like the member to withdraw that. I never called anyone a grub, thank you very much.
Ms LAWRIE: I withdraw, member for Brennan, it was the member for Greatorex who, in Question Time today, called the protestors grubs and party hacks and he was asked to withdraw. How do let your colleague, the member for Greatorex, describe firefighters like that when they turn up to the protest rally because of the cuts the government has made to their budget? They are foolish, dangerous cuts which the firefighters say threaten lives - shutting the Humpty Doo Fire Station and taking away the rescue vehicle from Palmerston, which has the Jaws of Life equipment.
The firefighters stood there, in their numbers, and one of them spoke, pleadingly, about the dangerous situation that exposes everyone to, and asked the government to change its path, to keep the Humpty Doo Fire Station open and to keep the rescue vehicle staffed at Palmerston. We are talking about two firefighters on the rescue vehicle. It is ludicrous that not only is the government taking away two firefighters from the rescue vehicle, they are proposing to decommission the rescue vehicle. When the firefighters said to the government, ‘Do not decommission the vehicle’. The answer was, ‘No, it will be decommissioned’. Unbelievable!
The four firefighters being ripped out of Humpty Doo are the ones trained for structural fires. They are sitting in that growth environment of the urban centre: all the housing going up around Humpty Doo, the INPEX village, the increased traffic out that way; it is a high growth area. There is all the gamba grass out there with its fuel load. On the day shift, those firefighters issue notices to rural landholders saying, ‘Clear that fire break there’. They are keeping it safe. But no, rip them out. For savings? For how much when it is okay to spend $300 000 on the member for Greatorex’s favourite golf course? When you will spend $1m on four people to work here for six months to tell you what you want to be told so you have the excuses to rip the money out of everywhere and spend it on your unfunded bush commitments? Wrong priorities. No wonder you are toxic. No wonder people are hostile.
Blame me all you like. I am not going anywhere; I will stay here and take it because people know you are making that up. No, I was not going to increase power and water prices. You are running around telling people, ‘50%’. What a joke! You guys are unbelievable. You will make anything up. We went to the election with a very clear policy: CPI adjustments. I did the heavy lifting in 2009; I did the increases then. Was I going to work with the Power and Water Corporation? Absolutely, I would have continued to work with them, watching their capital program and going through efficiencies, without a doubt. You have not done that work, you just went straight to, ‘Let us hit the hip pockets of Territorians and break that promise. Let us compound it by sacking people’. As if the cost of living hike was not enough of a problem for them, sack them so they have no livelihood to pay their bills anyway. Then make ridiculous decisions in the mini-budget around cuts to critical services such as the firies at Humpty Doo and the rescue vehicle.
Then, pour more fuel on people’s contempt of your behaviour by scrapping the BDR. Whether you like it or not, you did not have your alternative ready. Whether you agree with it or not, you did not have your alternative ready. Not only did you not have it ready, but it will not be ready for a long time. You still have no legislation coming to the Assembly. You have not built any camps. How far off are you? A year? Two years? Six months? Four months? Any indication? Any time lines? Any model of legislation? How is the drafting going? Any luck with that?
Meanwhile, the drunks are on the streets and the Chief Minister makes a comment that we should just tell them to stop drinking. I called him a fool for that comment. I cannot count the number of people who have said to me, ‘You are spot on’. Irrespective of their political persuasion, they say, ‘You are spot on’. It is dangerous and stupid to approach a drunk. People get hurt doing that.
Increasing drunkenness and antisocial behaviour has seen a real difference to the urban environment in which I have been living. The business operators around the CBD are appalled. They are describing the return of the drunks. They are talking about the return. They are not saying, ‘Oh yes they have been there all the time in large numbers’. They say, ‘They went away; they returned’. You will not hear it and I know you disagree with it. I know you will argue against it; that we are just making it up and they were there all along. But, every time you say that, the business owners of this town say, ‘Well, those guys do not know what they are talking about then. Those guys are obviously not listening to us when we are turning up in forums and saying the drunks have come back. It is a real problem for my business now’. You are doing yourself a further disservice because they are saying, ‘These guys are out of touch. They do not understand’.
You have railed against the booklet, but it was pretty easy to put together. Six hundred public servants will be sacked. That was straight from an interview on the 7.30 Report by the Treasurer …
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request the member be given an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LAWRIE: The Treasurer has railed against the use of the figure 600 when we say 600 public servants will be sacked, and she said it herself. It was in an interview on the 7.30 Report. We lifted it straight out of the Treasurer’s interview on the 7.30 Report and put it on the piece of paper. What? You are telling yourself off for saying it? They are your words. You have not said you got it wrong, that you made it up. ‘I am sorry I got it wrong, I made a mistake’. You have not backtracked on your comments, on your words, on your numbers. Fair dinkum!
Paying them almost $1m for only six months’ work is a fact. It has been in the paper. You have admitted it. You led the information here in the Chamber. And you are paying for their luxury accommodation, or are you pretending you are not? You are not paying for C2? You are not paying for luxury accommodation on the Esplanade for - well, we know there are at least two but I suspect there are four of them. I definitely have confirmed two. I am hearing it is three; I suspect it is four. I am hearing - did not put it in the booklet because we cannot substantiate it - that even their wives have access to NT Fleet cars. How does that happen when you are taking NT Fleet cars off public servants? If I am wrong, by all means in this contribution tell me that their wives are not driving around in NT Fleet cars. I hope I am wrong on that; I really do, because that would be a bridge too far, surely, while you are taking cars off public servants.
You cancelled the Arafura Games. You have put up power prices by $2000 a year - in your own words, in your own media release, Treasurer, you said it was $2000 a year. Oh yes, and the rego. What a coincidence that when we took the information off the MVR website, on 2 January, which shows the registration for a four-wheel drive Land Cruiser will go up by $159 a year. If you go to the website, that information is not there anymore; it has been cleared. It was there on 2 January, but it has gone since the booklet was produced – coincidental, I am sure.
Make our children suffer: slash 10% from the education budget. This gets them really hot under the collar. However, the thing I enjoy the most about it is it was the Treasurer’s own mini-budget media release which talked about the 10% cut in education - in her own words ...
Mrs Lambley: No, savings.
Ms LAWRIE: Oh I see. The Treasurer just said ‘No, savings’. You call it 10% in savings, and I will call it 10% in cuts. Guess what? It means the same thing; it is a 10% reduction in the Education budget.
They hurt seniors by putting their power prices up by 15%, their water prices up by 20%, and buses are no longer free. I mean, seriously guys! I do not know how CLP Bubble Land is going, but in the real world this is the one that really irks people, that you have gone after the seniors. They cannot fathom that. They cannot accept it. Julia Christensen asked the Chief Minister why he put up the bus travel for seniors and people are having quiz nights trying to understand what he said, to unpick it. Was it a bit of dog whistling? There has been that question: ‘Were there certain types of people we do not want travelling?’ Was it a bit of that? Or was it that, as he said in his own words, people were using the public transport, willy-nilly, to get around? What else is it? Julia Christensen was so gobsmacked about it, she said, ‘But that is what public transport is. It is a bus’. That is one of the most extraordinary things we have heard.
Scrapping the Banned Drinker Register, allowing 2500 problem drinkers to have unlimited access to takeaway grog again - fact. Cut funding to our firefighters, putting Territorian’s at risk when fire threatens and even scrapping funding for the Jaws of Life. Are you going to say Labor is making it up? The firefighters stood outside Parliament House yesterday and said it. They have said it in the NT News. One of my personal favourites is dismantling first homebuyer schemes meaning there are now 1000 fewer homes for families to buy - gone. Are you guys for real? You reset your own bizarre schemes and cut people out of the housing market.
I met someone the other day who had got into HOMESTART Extra before you scrapped it. They are battlers. They are a single income family with kids and they have the shared equity scheme. They have a home they can call their own and they got in there just before you scrapped it. They climbed that ladder at work a little and got a pay rise. They would have just been over the eligibility if they had not gone into the scheme. We are hearing people over the eligibility criteria now in public housing are getting letters from the CLP regime saying, ‘You are out. Get out!’ We will find someone to come forward eventually. That is what we are hearing. By all means, if I am wrong let me know. Tell me you are not turfing people out of their public housing if they have scraped over the eligibility criteria. If I am wrong, by all means let me know. Tell me you are not telling pensioners in public housing to get out of a three-bedroom home. By all means, let us know. If that is not true, let us know.
There is a 24% cut for the family and parent support services. It is true. It is in your media releases. You call them non-government agencies, which lead me to the next page: a 5% cut to charities. You did that on Christmas Eve. Cutting charities by 5% - people find that pretty appalling, but to tell them on Christmas Eve! Could you have not held that letter for a week or maybe sent it a week earlier. You know what our government used to do on Christmas Eve? Give the charities an extra $20 000 recognising it was the time of the year where people were doing it the hardest. There were greater expectations on them and the charities needed a small one-off funding increase to deal with the Christmas hampers and toys. No, you cut their funding by 5% and then you make a $4.8m cut to child protection and youth services and pretend you do not. We listed the organisations just in case you had forgotten. We listed the organisations you cut funding from. And you did say, Treasurer, there is more to come so we mentioned there is more to come - your own words.
Line your own pockets - oh, this is a special one. While dishing out financial pain to Territorians the Country Liberal Party members of parliament are working towards giving themselves a pay rise of up to $50 000 a year. By all means, let me know if you are not going to have the RTD do the review of members’ remuneration. By all means, let us know that, Chief Minister, when you are responding.
Dodgy deals in the bush: you are opening up the rivers of grog because grog is before jobs and healthy families. Failing families in the bush: cuts to health, education, youth work and child protection services. But, there are many promises for better bush roads and bridges, but there was no new money in the commitment to Treasury. A telling tale and it is true.
It is your shame, Chief Minister, and that is why you are toxic out there. That is why people are angry you have broken your promises, that you have hiked up the cost of living, that you have literally sacked Territorians, and you have let the drunks back out on to the street. We now have to deal with that, and you are foolish enough to tell people to put themselves at risk and walk up to a drunk and tell them to stop drinking. You have it very wrong.
Mr MILLS (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, this is a serious attempt by the opposition to gain some traction, spinning their wheels on the hatred and feeling from the community to generate a situation where they can, perhaps, score a couple of points.
I acknowledge, coming into government and having to assess the circumstances we have been presented with - take a careful look, understand the situation - and then make decisions which are not made on the basis of trying as much as possible to be popular. It is not about the government, it is about the decisions the government makes. Those decisions have been difficult but they have been necessary.
Believe it or not, yesterday, talking to some of the people prior to them being whipped into some kind of scary frenzy, there were a number of people who said, ‘We understand there is a problem that had to be dealt with by increasing tariffs’. There is a debate over whether it should have been done in one hit or not. Some were surprised to find the increase brings us to a level which is still below, in most cases, the national average and is the cheapest in the country. When you ask people how much they pay for power, most people do not know, they just know it is huge. When you ask them to identify the primary pressure placed on a family, is it a decision to increase the cost of power or is it the 200%-plus increase in the cost of rent and mortgages, that is it.
For five-and-a-half months you have had a government that made decisions. We did not make these decisions to be popular, we made them to secure the future of the Northern Territory. For some of the learned folk on the other side who have had a little go at trying to deconstruct this - to use the famous word of the member for Barkly to deconstruct how you lower the cost of living, first you have to deal with the waste and reduce debt. Then you have the capacity to use the money you have saved to reduce the cost of living. You are living in la la land to think you just pluck money out of some place and put it in people’s pockets so everyone cheers and loves you, then we all live in some kind of Nirvana. It is ludicrous. That is not what your community has put their trust in you to do.
I welcome this motion. The clever people upstairs have probably crafted this. ‘I know what we will do. We will bring out our deadly secret weapon, the one that has really hit them hard; that is, the book of lies’. Or the ‘Did you know just after 100 days in power’. They cooked this one up and thought, ‘This is going to be a humdinger; this will blow them out of the water’. You guys seem to forget we are not in a political debate where you can throw anything or say whatever you want to try to score your point. It is being conducted in the presence of grown-ups who are able to assess whether these things are true or false. Surprise, surprise! We welcome this debate. My colleagues will join the fray and respond to you.
We have not much to respond to when the Opposition Leader was given an extension of time - to what? To read from the book and make allegations and assertions - no strong debating points, no strength of argument, nothing compelling whatsoever, just little snide comments here and there and things you may have picked up. I am not 100% sure. ‘You see whether you can verify that or not. Here is another thing I heard when I was at such and such a place. This group of people said he is an idiot. That is what everyone is saying’. That level from an Opposition Leader?
This is a debate about important matters like debt. Debt is real. Debt has to be responded to, because anyone who is managing their own affairs knows they have to deal with it; it just does not go away. If you deal with it, you have a stronger future. But, if you do not have the courage, wisdom, or the care for your community or your circumstances to deal with it today, you store up a far greater problem for yourself in future.
Make no mistake, we welcome this debate because it is time we had proper debates. There are many quiet, good people who are starting to tune in and realise we have a situation in the Northern Territory where there is obvious opportunity, but we are being hampered by the poor situation we have been presented with. But, at last, there is a government which has the courage to deal with these things. We are dealing with these things because I honestly believe, as my Cabinet colleagues and members of the Country Liberals team believe, the best days of the Territory are ahead of us. There are some very exciting days ahead of us, but we have to plan properly. We have to get our house in order; we have to recognise where there is waste. We have to deal with the debt so we can reduce the cost of living. That is the real world, that is the world we operate in, and we are going to make real difference. Watch and see!
You have given us an opportunity to outline the status of our responses to serious issues facing Territorians five-and-a-half months since my government took office. On Friday 20 July 2012, the ABC News announced the following:
Many of us have worked in the real world and we know there are times of difficulty. I am not going to talk about my own experience except to say that living on the land was not easy; there were some dreadfully difficult times, pressures that were borne upon families and decisions that had to be taken, including my own family, which resulted in me having to leave the land. They were real. We responded and we survived. There are families and small business operators in exactly the same circumstances; they know. There are families balancing their budgets, trying to get their kids to understand that truth and doing the right thing is important.
In these first sittings of parliament in 2013, we have exactly the same situation I described halfway through last year in the preparation for the last Territory election. Now, the great important office of Chief Minister resides with me. The responsibility is now with the members of the Country Liberal Party to carry the responsibility of government. I have said on a number of occasions, from that side, I was aware of everything I said in opposition. I carry it with me. You have the capacity and the interest, I am sure, to get all of those words and bring them back. I do not mind because I am aware of the words I have spoken. I know what the nature of this job is, and I am prepared to make the necessary decisions.
We are now faced with a Labor Party in opposition which continues to display more interest in throwing stones across the House and getting into grubby gutter politics than in showing any kind of leadership in addressing real issues that face the Northern Territory. They do not even have the capacity to participate in any bipartisan support for an important nation building project or securing the energy future of the Territory – getting gas to Gove – could not even drag that up. Good on you, Martin Ferguson, I am impressed by men like you who are not so concerned about your political stripe but more motivated by what is right. That is the sort of leadership that will inspire those good families across the Territory and this country. They want to see that. I want to be a part of that and we have a team that wants to take the Territory into that space with that kind of leadership.
As voters in Wanguri go to the polls on Saturday, I am certain what they are looking for is leadership for the Northern Territory based on facts and planning for our future, not the appalling lies and distortions produced by Labor’s spin doctors. The fact is, one of them is contesting the Wanguri election. Indeed, Labor’s Wanguri book of lies, as it must be called, was one of the most disgraceful, cheap, shallow publications I have ever seen. I reckon the saddest part of this is that you guys are actually proud of it. You think you have come up with something really good. It is not! It points right back at you. I would be embarrassed.
The Country Liberals’ five-point action plan, as I emphasised at the time, ‘lays the foundation to end more than a decade of Labor’s mismanagement and neglect’. Territory Labor has ‘given the Territory soaring debt levels’. That is a fact. ‘Diminished key industries like tourism,’ – fact – ‘mining and the pastoral sector’ - fact. Check for yourself. ‘Created a climate of skyrocketing rents and unaffordable house prices’ - fact. Let me remind honourable members of the exact words of the Treasurer in this House on 30 October 2012:
Now Opposition Leader:
They were serious. The Treasurer concluded her remarks with the words,
The words of the now Opposition Leader, untroubled I assume, by such important observations, have to be responded to by real leaders.
The government has made the responsible move to implement tariff increases in line with every other jurisdiction in Australia, not because we want to upset people and hurt people; that is not our intention. That is the impression you got from out the front of parliament yesterday, that we are just cruel people who want to do this because we really like inflicting pain. It is the exact opposite. You have to do this, otherwise the wages workers receive will not be there, they will be swallowed up. On what? Debt repayment, because as debt grows you have to get it under control. I am sure most people have had credit cards that just seem to swell up and almost get out of control. Think about a credit card - a giant credit like that sitting over a government. That is exactly what we have over the Northern Territory so we simply had to be committed to the long-term future of the Northern Territory, not a short-term political strategy, which was the hallmark of the previous government, to hide the severity of the problem under some political rock.
My Cabinet has to make some tough and very unpopular decisions. Many Territorians find it difficult to accept that some of these changes were necessary, but strong leadership is required to deliver what is possible for the Northern Territory. The Country Liberal’s five-point plan not only includes cutting Labor’s waste and reducing the debt, it also creates a three-hub economy which will ensure the Northern Territory is not totally dependent on individual projects just to keep the economy going or keep it strong.
Instead, there is a wide range of career and vocational opportunities that attract people to come here and encourage our children to make their futures here. Sounds like a housing issue that needs to be dealt with. We have land; we need to release it. We need to plan. That is why there is a focus not just on INPEX, for example, which was very nearly the undoing of the people of Gove. Not only did the Labor government of the day not insist on any gas, or ensure there was some set aside for the future of the Northern Territory in whatever mechanism they chose to employ, it was all short term, not looking over the horizon - none made available, none secured for the future. That is the issue we have had to deal with.
I do not know whether the member for Nhulunbuy will recognise that some of the consequences of the short-termism of the Labor government has exacerbated the problems and the anxiety of the good families of Nhulunbuy and the East Arnhem region. I wonder whether the member for Nhulunbuy would ask for an apology from the now Opposition Leader, or the former Chief Minister, for the short-term thinking that resulted in a very serious problem for the people of her own constituency? Unlikely, it is not in the DNA of Labor. It is much better to project outwards and blame somebody else. It makes them feel much better in the short term. It does not do anything though.
The Labor government did not say anything to Pacific Aluminium in January 2012 - that they could have the 10 years of gas requested. The Opposition Leader is saying, ‘He is just dithering. All he has to do is sit at his desk and say, yes, give them the gas’. Really? What did this former Labor government do? It received a letter, sat on it - member for Nhulunbuy, take note of this, you have heard it before, hear it again - it sat on that letter for seven months. It organised a group of people that already existed just to ensure they talked to each other about this. It was not really of the calibre that matched the urgency of the situation. Seven months - alerted heads of departments to ensure they got together and found some kind of strategy, then let it ride for a while to see whether it would sort itself out.
Not only does a government have to be aware of background, it also has to invest in the future. The Country Liberals’ five-point plan includes planning properly for the future. The Planning Commission is already in place and is independent, transparent, and provides certainty. It is a vital component to consider the enormous potential of the region. It includes the commitment to tackle crime at its roots and to be accountable. That is why we went down to the rally yesterday. You asked, member for Barkly, ‘Do you have the courage to go down there?’ Absolutely I have the courage. They are fellow Australians and have the freedom to speak.
I am proud to be an Australian. I was not particularly proud of the behaviour, but the way I was raised was, perhaps, a bit different. It does not matter. I did what I believed was the right thing, as did my colleagues. If you are happy with the way it turned out, if you go away thinking, ‘Wow, we scored a few points there’ - many people are watching. People are trying to raise their kids and wondering what the right thing to do is, how you handle conflict, how you resolve issues, how you try to get your head around it and make hard decisions. It is not a cartoon show we are watching, it is real life.
As of 25 January 2013, paid police staffing totals 113 in Darwin, 107 in Casuarina, 88 in Palmerston, 90 in Regional Operations Northern Command, and 210 in Regional Operations Southern Command. Three police recruit squads are currently in training. New police overnight facilities are planned for Areyonga, Mount Liebig and Robinson River, with design work on identified land developed for the Milikapiti facility.
NT police have an increased capacity to respond to domestic and family violence, pulling together both government and non-government service providers. There are a number of important policing projects which I outlined in an earlier statement to the parliament. We have taken this very seriously. It is going to be difficult for you but you will find your way around it I am sure; where there is a will there is a way. The figures in front of you will indicate that by holding people responsible for their behaviour and putting an emphasis on frontline policing, you change the profile of crime, and the statistics will be evidence of that.
One thing I found disappointing in the contribution by the Opposition Leader in particular - carried on by a couple of other members, one being the member for Nhulunbuy - I am astonished to find those Labor members often speak of tolerance and acceptance of all things; they like to preach these things and expect an attitude of respect. However, when it comes to something which crosses their path, the tolerance brigade turns into a lynch mob. When it comes to the age of people who have made contributions, I cannot believe the disrespectful manner in which you have prosecuted your argument against the Renewal Management Board because of their gender and their age. They are such low-level debating points that speak more about the person making the point than the point being made. It is astonishing!
If you pretend you care and are tolerant and accepting of seniors and those who have amassed life experience, they will see right through it. Time will tell. Do not enjoy your time in the sun too long because there are clouds coming, I reckon.
I want to touch on a matter which was raised this morning. I find it galling that you bring gender and age into question as ways of bringing down people who have contributed to both sides of politics as though it is political issue. They have contributed significantly to public policy and financial management over many years right across the country, and laid some very significant foundations which are enjoyed today, such as the railway, for one. You whip up this point; you get the community really anxious about it. You have a responsibility when you start putting out information. The consequences of the information and the effect that will have on people do not seem to worry you.
Your record of using public funds to fund consultancies is appalling. I honestly do not know how you could go out in the marketplace and run these arguments when you know what you have done. I did not get a chance to finish today, but we talked about Hawker Britton. I wonder whether your book of lies, just to add a bit of balance there, will tell the truth about your Hawker Britton issues. I have already mentioned it, but it bears repeating because it connects to something else. You paid Hawker Britton $300 000 from March 2011 to June 2012: for 15 months for intergovernmental and ministerial relations. It was political. In addition to the $300 000, you provided accommodation at $300 a night. That is $2100 a week. The shocker is that with this arrangement - and you are worried about our mates - your mates were told in their contract they did not ever have to provide you a written report unless you asked for it. They did not have to submit anything; you just sent the money. Heaven knows what this is really about, but that was a real contract.
Deloittes were paid $600 000 for a climate change policy and implementation strategy. This was for 12 months’ work. I am not sure whether they had to provide a written report. Perhaps it was simply $600 000 for climate change hot air. Who knows? But that is real money you spent on a consultancy. But you do not get too anxious about that.
Then, there was $1m paid in consultancies for financial advice on the Marine Supply Base. That does not compare, to be fair, to the quality and the amount of work done by the Renewal Management Board. They are large amounts of money paid for obscure purposes that appear difficult to justify. However, what really troubles me – it does not trouble you – is that you can run these vitriolic arguments and call into question the character of good people who have been asked to do an important job to deal with a real issue, which is the real mess: the debt issue. You get some kind of churlish delight in bringing them down.
Like the unpleasant criticism of a fine man who would be horrified to be brought into public debate, Dr Ted Campbell, and the role he played. Anyone who dealt with him and his negotiations in the best interests of the Northern Territory over this recent gas issue would hold him in high regard, and at least respect him. But not the Opposition Leader. Not a man who has a doctorate of chemical engineering from Cambridge University. Not a man who was the lead agent for the construction of the Mereenie pipeline, which powers the generator right now. He was there at the beginning of that visionary project and loves to serve and make a contribution to the Northern Territory. He is learned and respected around the country, but not by the Opposition Leader. It would be good if we had a contribution from the Opposition Leader that had dug a little deeper and came up with a real argument. All we get is low-level grunge that comes out to try to foul anything around it and to try to, perhaps, make the Opposition Leader look good. It is not working, but keep doing it.
This issue of your 100-day plan and that little document that has been circulating around - I reckon you might stir up a few people but you will stir up many more questions that you will not be able to answer because, ultimately, the question comes back at you. What would you do, given that most people accept - even if they do not want to - that there is a problem? We went through the public service and asked senior public servants. They all knew there was a financial problem. They all knew it had to be responded to. The Opposition Leader knew there was debt problem with Power and Water Corporation and that there had to be tariff increases. So, think it through. If the Opposition Leader were the Chief Minister today, what would she do? Would she roll back all these tariff increases, bring them back down? I do not think so.
Would she reinstate the home affordability scheme that all the experts said was actually feeding demand and increasing the cost of housing, costing a motza and, at the same, driving housing out of reach for anyone who is trying to get into the market? That expensive scheme that made housing more expensive for Territorians? Is that the scheme the Opposition Leader would bring back? I do not think so because we had commentators all around the country saying, ‘Do not go there’. However, the Opposition Leader was happy to go there in an attempt to try to seduce the electorate into thinking this scheme which, on the surface, looked like something that was okay and might serve a political purpose was, in fact, masking a problem enhancer; it was creating an increased problem. Would that be brought back, and what scheme would replace it?
What would the BDR look like? We would just continue on with it, keep these crimes stats hidden from view and hope people would think it is working even if they could not measure it. The only way we can measure it is by the statements that were being made by the government, ‘Trust the government’. That is not a very trustworthy approach; it does not engender trust in the community. But, is that what we would get if we had the person making the accusations and observations and inciting this kind of response in people providing leadership today? Is that what you would get in response to a real problem? I do not believe people, when thinking through it, would think that is an answer.
There are many things I could say, but my colleagues are going to join this fray because you have asked for it. You have brought out a document that is more reflective of you than anything else, and that reflection is a bad one.
Mr Deputy Speaker, there is a real issue out there and most people know it. You have tried and you will not be able to hide because the truth is becoming clear. There is a need for a better response to real issues. I believe he Territory is just about over this. We will wait and see because this book of lies is not really of any substance and it is not, in any way, a foundation to lay any career other than a long career in opposition.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Mr Deputy Speaker, I speak in support of this motion condemning the government for breaking the promise they made to Territorians at the last election, driving up the cost of living and increasing public drunkenness and antisocial behaviour. The Chief Minister’s No 1 promise leading into the election last year was to cut the cost of living. Yet, all he has done since being elected is increase prices, fees and charges.
Each day, residents in my electorate tell me heartbreaking stories about how this new government’s actions are causing them a great deal of stress and anxiety. They are struggling more each day. Each day, it seems there is a new surprise, a new fee or a new charge being levied on them. The government’s ill-thought-out decision to raise power prices by 30%, water by 40%, and sewerage by 25% is hurting greatly. To charge people $20 to visit the MVR does not bring down the cost of living; it causes more annoyance with government. People are near tears as they explain to me they just do not know how they are going to pay these increases. These are genuine people I meet in my everyday life buying milk at the shop or dropping the children at childcare.
They are now starting to get their power and water bills with these increased rates. Only part of their bill is under the new fees. They cannot afford these increases on part of a bill, let alone a full bill. The increase to power by 30%, water by 40%, and sewerage by 25% is hurting greatly. They are greatly stressed about this bill, and already thinking about the next bill. Senior Territorians are trying to use their air conditioners less, people are not watering their gardens, and they are thinking twice about letting children cool off under the hose. These are basic things that people should not have to think about. Your policies are impacting on all Territorians. It is causing stress and changing our way of life. These policies are driving up the cost of everyday living on all Territorians, but are having a particular impact on families and senior Territorians.
Charging senior Territorians to catch the bus - how crazy. Chief Minister, you act like senior Territorians catch the bus for fun. They do not; they use it to go to appointments. Constituents in my electorate have to catch two buses to get to Royal Darwin Hospital for an appointment. Previously, they would catch a bus to Casuarina, possibly have a coffee, then get to the hospital and back comfortably, not rushing. Now, they are trying to turn this trip around in under three hours so they only have to pay once.
There is the flow-on effect, with childcare fees going up, council rates rising, and businesses passing on increased charges. Landlords are putting up rents as leases expire, and will likely soon add a water charge to their rental agreements. Your policies and actions have not reduced the cost of living as you promised, but have dramatically increased the cost to Territorians.
We have seen cuts to government departments, the loss of hundreds of public service jobs, and a culture of fear introduced into our public service. Before the election you promised no jobs would go, but the sackings started in the first week. We have written confirmation that jobs have gone. We have seen frontline services cut. How can removing $4.8m from the NGO sector that works so hard to support Territorians be supportive? That is $4.8m to provide support and services to Territory families. Your mini-budget slashed the funding to NAPCAN, seeing their funding cut by half. Your mini-budget slashed NTCOSS funding by $0.5m. You slashed the funding to SAFE,T and you totally removed funding from the NT Youth Network.
Right before Christmas, you let health NGOs know their funding was cut by 5%. How mean-spirited! Organisations survive off minimal funding and are working so hard to deliver services to our community. Staff give it their all, to cut their funding by 5% is heartbreaking to them. It can mean a huge difference.
How will cutting the funding to frontline child protection and health services support our Territorians? Domestic violence case workers at our hospitals have been cut. I cannot think of a greater demand than supporting Territory families and children, but since being elected this government has cut vital funding, putting pressure on service delivery.
You, Treasurer, have warned there will be more to come. These NGOs that support Territorians are anxious and worried. They cannot plan for their future and they risk losing specialist staff. As a government you have said:
Under Labor, child protection services were expanded to include family and support services, youth services, out-of-home care and the Children’s Commissioner, yet your government is cutting these services back to the most basic value for money. Child protection is not about value for money.
Labor was growing its own child protection staff; in fact, last year I attended a graduation of staff who received their Graduate Certificate in Remote Health Practice through the support of the then Department of Children and Families. All I have seen from your merge of child protection into the mega department of Education is the loss of focus on children and families.
I again remind this House that in the Territory child protection issues are mainly around child neglect. As a society, we are trying to overcome decades of neglect - trying to change behaviours. Removing funding of these support services goes against research from around the world that prevention is the best long-term solution in child protection, which is the exact thing your government is turning its back on.
You have slashed the funding to the only Aboriginal-controlled peak body in the Territory and directed them to change their focus to out-of-home care. These organisations are heartbroken. This framework also committed to strengthening Aboriginal non-government services and the NGO sector as the best way of ensuring these families can access culturally appropriate services to seek the assistance they need. Given the significance of this, and your government’s strength in representing the bush, it comes as a huge surprise your government is turning its back on these policies.
One of the key recommendations of the Board of Inquiry and themes in modern child protection is the dual pathway model involving NGOs to support families and nurture relationships. You have previously stated this is one of your priorities:
Yet, as a government, you have cut the NGO sector; you have slashed their funding.
In relation to Parks and Wildlife, I understand you are reviewing the operations of the remote ranger stations. I urge you, as a government, to ensure this is done openly and with full consideration of any impact of closures for both the environment and local communities. These rangers are often important government representatives in remote areas. They are people others turn to in times of need, for example, crocodile management, firefighting, and helping to locate lost people, whether locals or tourists. They are seen as role models in their community and play a vital role in contributing to the development of their local communities, helping with mentoring and the growth of a fledging community ranger program. I urge caution when you review this program. Tourists also enjoy these rangers interacting with them. As I have mentioned previously, in times of emergency assistance, look to them.
Territorians are still unclear about the cost, human and financial, of relocating the head offices of Parks and Wildlife and Tourism NT to Alice Springs. The Country Liberals are unashamed that these moves were made to suit the personal needs of the minister and his CEOs, but at what cost to the programs?
Mrs Lambley: Regionalisation.
Ms FYLES: The agencies are expected to deliver for Territorians no matter where they live. The Treasurer is shouting at me about regionalisation. We have no problem with well-thought out regionalisation ...
Mrs Lambley: You would not understand.
Ms FYLES: The Treasurer says I do understand regionalisation. I do, I have seen it in many states, but it is well-thought out policy, not policy made to suit a minister or his CEO.
On behalf of concerned Territorians, I ask the new government what steps have been taken to reduce the risk of brain drain from our public service, especially our stand-out staff with intimate knowledge? We are taking about small agencies with specialised staff who understand environmental management issues.
My electorate of Nightcliff has a large amount of open public space; beautiful parks and reserves, stretching along the foreshore from Rapid Creek to Nightcliff and along Coconut Grove. These areas are not only enjoyed by local residents, but by large numbers of visitors from both within Darwin, the Territory and wider.
In the election campaign last year, you promised that problem drunks would be removed immediately from the streets - I still have the material in my office – yet, it has never been worse. In the last few months, my office has had to call the police numerous times after witnessing antisocial behaviour in front our office, in front of the coffee shop and next to the children’s playground. There has been so much antisocial behaviour it has become a daily occurrence. In fact, my staff have been confronted a few times and we have had to take unprecedented safety measures. We are still waiting to see your government’s policy around this. Residents are frustrated. They are experiencing this behaviour daily and contacting me to express their unease and distress in the dramatic increase in the antisocial behaviour in the area as a result of your government reducing the Police Beat, and removing the Banned Drinker Register and the Night Patrol. These actions have a direct consequence; if it is not witnessing their behaviour it is cleaning up broken glass from bottles.
Chief Minister, in the election campaign last year, you claimed you would open the Nightcliff Police Station 24/7. In parliament, when questioned, you said you would honour this commitment. But, all evidence suggests the exact opposite has taken place with the Police Beat being removed. Police have spoken to me. They are frustrated they now have to travel from Casuarina to do their patrol. They are trying to do their best but the tools they need to be supported have been removed. The antisocial behaviour is worsening and the support has been removed.
You talk of the BDR as an inconvenience. Chief Minister, I did no find it inconvenient showing ID to purchase alcohol. However, I certainly find the increase in antisocial behaviour in Nightcliff inconvenient and threatening, as do local residents. One resident told me of having to carry their dog as sections of footpath are covered in broken glass. That is inconvenient! Local traders have said the Banned Drinker Register worked; it made a difference.
You mentioned in your police statement earlier today, Chief Minister, that Nightcliff was considered a hot spot and this would indicate a targeted response from police. However, this is not preventing antisocial behaviour, it is getting worse. I urge you to have a look.
Mr Deputy Speaker, in supporting this motion, I condemn the government. If you are really conscious of how your decisions are hurting Territorians, you would reconsider many of the policies you have bought into place - or lack of policies.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Deputy Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I respond to the motion brought forward by the Leader of the Opposition condemning our government for breaking the promises we made to Territorians at the last election, driving up the cost of living, and increasing public drunkenness and antisocial behaviour.
Some people in this Chamber certainly have a very short memory. Five-and-a-half months ago, the former Labor government had racked up the government credit card. They had been on a spending spree for years, willy-nilly spending on things that were probably not particularly necessary at the time, racking up the deficit. Lo and behold, five-and-a-half months later, it is all our fault. The long-term memory has gone down the drain and the former Treasurer bears absolutely no responsibility for the current state of our fiscal problems, the debt, and the deficit. It has all been erased from her memory, very conveniently. All the damage she has done through her fiscal mismanagement seems to be not there at all. Now, it is apparently the full responsibility and fault of this new Country Liberal government.
Well, most of us do have a long memory. Territorians are not stupid; they remember how the last decade has unfolded and have an understanding of the fiscal issues of the Northern Territory. No matter what the Leader of the Opposition and her very ordinary team will present here tonight, they will not be duped or fooled, nor will they take the word of this very poor opposition, the former government, that led us into the financial doldrums we are trying to get ourselves out of at the moment.
I patiently listened to the words of the former Treasurer, now Opposition Leader - the worst Treasurer in the history of the Northern Territory. She claims she did work with the Power and Water Corporation. She said she tried to identify efficiencies, and claimed she was committed to keeping the Power and Water Corporation in a reasonable state of financial viability. Well, that is not what we found over the last five-and-a-half months.
The increase in tariffs can be directly attributed to the very poor performance of the former Treasurer, now Opposition Leader. It is her fault we had to raise tariffs - undeniably so. This is a fact. She was lacking the ability, judgment, management skills and commitment to make the necessary decisions to increase tariffs as she was advised to do by the Chair of the Power and Water Corporation in April last year. These documents have already been tabled. The Chief Minister briefly referred to them earlier.
In April last year, the former Chair of the Power and Water Corporation, Judith King, wrote to the former Treasurer and implored her to increase the revenue of the Power and Water Corporation. The only way to do that is to increase the utilities tariff: to increase the tariffs of water, sewerage and electricity of the Power and Water Corporation to try to make Power and Water Corporation financially sustainable. To be financially sustainable really means you are just asking to break even. You are asking that your revenue covers your expenses. Not commercially sustainable - that was so far out of reach it was not funny. Commercial sustainability is when there is a decent profit on the horizon, and that was simply out of the question with the way the former Treasurer was managing the affairs of the Power and Water Corporation. Judith King, the former Chair, implored the former Treasurer to increase tariffs because she realised that without increasing the tariffs, the Power and Water Corporation was facing insolvency; there is no other way to put it.
The former Treasurer responded to Judith King’s correspondence on 30 April 2012 by saying:
What does that say? It says the former Treasurer confirmed to the Chair of the Power and Water Corporation in April last year that she would increase electricity, sewerage, and water tariffs. Not only that, the most intriguing part of it all - we know she was going to increase the tariffs, it is in black and white – is she mentioned that the chairman and her board would be indemnified if they were found to not be acting in good faith.
The former Treasurer understood she was placing these people in a situation where the whole of the Power and Water Corporation could have become insolvent, could have crashed and burned, because she was not willing to make the decision necessary to allow the Power and Water Corporation to operate at a level of financial sustainability. She was negligent in her duty as the shareholder minister responsible for Power and Water Corporation. She was the main contributor to the potential demise of the Power and Water Corporation and the inefficient operations of the Power and Water Corporation through her inability to make a good decision and her preference to make politically motivated decisions to allow them to be re-elected.
The reason this government, within weeks and months of coming into power, increased the tariffs for electricity, sewerage and water to the levels we did is because the former Labor government failed to do so. They had to; they were advised to do so. The former Treasurer acknowledged she would, but she would not do it until after the election.
All the people who were outside parliament yesterday protesting against the Terry Mills Country Liberal government were probably not aware that the woman standing at the front, clapping and supporting their cause, is the cause of their problem. That is one way in which the former Treasurer is responsible for the escalating cost of living.
The other way in which she has contributed to the astronomical cost of living in the Northern Territory - and this is the most important one - is through the cost of housing which is the main contributor to the cost of living. The former Treasurer and the former Chief Minister - who is not here today because he could not be bothered extending his tenure until after the election –presided over the cost of housing for the last 11 years. Over the 11 years in which the Labor government was in power, the price of rental accommodation and housing in the Northern Territory increased by 260%. That is outrageous! An increase in the cost of housing of 260% in the Northern Territory because of Labor’s mismanagement, once again: their inability to release land to meet the demand of the growing population of the Northern Territory.
When we talk about whose fault it is that the cost of living in the Northern Territory is so high, we can only look across the room at the former Labor government members who allowed the cost of living to go through the roof and allowed the cost of housing to become the highest in the country. We pay the highest rents in Australia. In Darwin, rent is the highest of any capital city in Australia. That is what Labor gave you. That was their parting gift to the people of the Northern Territory.
However, that has apparently all been erased from their memory: the fact that they, for some reason, were unable to release land to create housing, a basic necessity of life. They could not create and stimulate the housing market to meet the demand. Therefore, we have to pay the hideous cost of housing we have in the Territory now.
It is complete and utter hypocrisy that we even have to even address this hideous motion tonight. The book of lies is a testament to the lack of insight and responsibility that defined the former Labor government of the Northern Territory, now the opposition. One has to make the connection that they are in opposition because they were not responsible. They were very poor financial managers, and were unable to make good decisions. The only thing that motivated them was political opportunism, which is really a sad state of affairs.
The Leader of the Opposition is a very unhappy, belligerent woman who, in her very undignified way, tries to strip people down to her level. She tries to attack people at a very personal level based on their gender, age, and her analysis of what they may or may not have achieved in life. You will not hear that base level of debate from this side of the room; we have bigger fish to fry.
We have a vision; we are getting on with the job. Just five-and-a-half months into government, we have certainly kicked some goals. In Cabinet I look around the room at a highly-motivated, enthusiastic, intelligent group of people who are hard at work.
I listened to the member for Nightcliff talk about her electorate and her perceptions of what we have and have not done in five-and-a-half months since coming to government. She talked about child protection. She is, obviously, quite committed to her new role, but is completely deluded and misinformed.
I urge the opposition to look at this document, which is the 2012-13 mini-budget which contains figures and facts pertaining to the budget. The budget is a set of figures which will give you an indication of just how much money we spend within the different agencies of government. I know this is a basic level of information I am providing, but it is very obvious from this side of the room that the opposition, despite the fact that half of them were in government recently, do not have even a slight comprehension of what a budget paper looks like. This is a mini-budget so, in a couple of months’ time, you will be faced with a full budget which will more than likely confuse you even more.
If you look at this budget paper lo and behold - I am opening it at the Office of Children and Families for the benefit of the member for Nightcliff - you will see there has been an increase in money allocated to the Office of Children and Families of $10m for this financial year. In discussion around the reduction of funding to the Office of Children and Families, I state for the public record and for the benefit of the people of the Northern Territory, it is not true. We have not reduced funding to the Office of Children and Families - to the business of child protection. We have increased funding this financial year by an additional $10m.
Do people over the other side of the room comprehend that? There seems to be some blockage there, some brain snap going on where they cannot seem to get it.
It is the same for Education. I draw your attention to the fact that, in this mini-budget paper, there is a section on Education. You will find in there, Leader of the Opposition and opposition members, we have increased funding for Education. Did you hear that member for Fannie Bay? We have increased the funding. Have a briefing. I am happy to point out for your benefit that in this mini-budget paper we have increased funding for Education by around $10m in this financial year. It is incredible. When you open it up, all will be revealed. It is very simple, with a bit of practice, members for Fannie Bay and Nightcliff. The Opposition Leader, former Treasurer, is welcome to have a briefing too. I can show you how it all works. It is really quite basic and simple.
When you go through these documents you will find we have not reduced the funding for many agencies at all over this financial year. We came to government and found all these promises made by the former government to which they had not allocated funding. The Office of Children and Families is a great example. The former minister for Child Protection told the CE of Child Protection to go ahead and employ 90 extra staff. ‘Do not worry about the money, we will find it somewhere’. Guess who had to work out how to pay for these workers? The new Country Liberal government.
It is quite incredible that a group of people who constituted the former government have no idea how to read a budget paper, understand the budget paper and, then, put it into some coherent form within their brain. They have produced this wonderful book of lies. I do not even give them that much credit. It is a book of miscomprehension. They are so stupid they cannot even understand what is in the budget paper. Calling people liars is not very nice, so let us call it the book of dummies’ comprehension of the mini-budget. They are so stupid they cannot understand what is in black and white for the whole of the Northern Territory to see.
They had all their union Labor followers in front of the parliament yesterday. They have, unfortunately, fed them all these miscomprehensions, and off they went with their flags shouting and carrying on, and everyone got into a frenzy over nothing about cuts to government agencies.
The other thing they were confused about was the public service. Those poor people out there were screaming, ranting, and carrying on about reductions to the public service. Yes, we have made a statement - and the Opposition Leader did read that correctly – that we intend to decrease the level of the public service by 3% over the forward estimates over the next four years, by 570 to 600 workers. She got that right but she did not comprehend it was not in the first five-and-a-half months we intended to decrease the public service by 600; it was over four years. Indeed, the figures provided by the ...
Mr VOWLES: Mr Deputy Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move an extension of time for the fine member, please.
Motion agreed to.
Mrs LAMBLEY: I thank the member for Johnston for providing that extension for me.
The other miscomprehension was of the figures provided by the Commissioner for Public Employment on the last quarter of 2012: the December of 2012 quarter. Those figures showed there had been an increase in the public service over that quarter. That is, obviously, totally beyond the comprehension of the opposition. They still seem to think the public service has been cut by 600 when they can see for themselves there were 19 989 FTE positions in the Northern Territory Public Service during the December 2012 quarter, an increase of 645 from the same time the year before. Over the same period, Executive Officers who earn between $183 000 and $331 000 grew by over 50% from 336 to 581, which amounts to an additional $45m a year.
What that says - I know I have to interpret these facts for the benefit of the opposition and those poor souls who are believing everything they say – is the public service has increased in the last quarter of December. There has been - have you got this? - no reduction in FTE numbers in the public service for that quarter. I am quite happy to give you a briefing on that. I am now the minister responsible for that area and it is very simple to read and understand.
These poor people across the other side of the Chamber are deluded. They just do not understand. We hear more stories of all these bad things we have done, which are simply not true. There has been some mention of the Banned Drinker Register and how 2000 drinkers are back on the grog. Guess what? They were never off the grog. The rivers of grog never stopped flowing; they kept flowing the whole time. The former Labor government willed itself into thinking people had stopped drinking and the rivers of grog had stopped. I heard from the Prime Minister last week in her closing the gap speech that the river had stopped but now it was flowing again. Well, hello! Come down to Alice Springs. I am sure the member for Katherine would love to have you there to talk to the people and find out the real story. We know the member for Barkly did not spend much time in Tennant Creek over the last four years, but you will find the people in Tennant Creek will tell you that the rivers of grog never stopped, they were flowing the whole time, despite the Banned Drinker Register.
The member for Nightcliff talked about the cost of housing going up. There again, she simply does not get it. She was not a member of the former government, so I will not lay too much at her feet. Your former Labor government presided over a 260% increase in the cost of housing in the Northern Territory.
She talked about how we stripped back the non-government organisations within the Office of Children and Families. Yes, we, as a government, came in, we have a different agenda, we reprioritised and decided we wanted to get better bang for buck; we wanted to get value for our money. We changed how we go about doing the business of child protection. You will see more changes come about in the future as we decide what needs to be prioritised. We have taken some money away from some non-government organisations. I can tell you here and now, member for Nightcliff, all that money will be put back into the non-government sector, every cent of it. Stay tuned and watch this space and do not despair because I can assist you in your comprehension of these facts and figures.
In closing, there are some questions that need to be answered. We have had these nasty allegations from the Opposition Leader telling us we are lying and that sort of thing. One question I would like to ask the Leader of the Opposition is: will she be cutting the electricity, water and sewerage tariffs if and when she gets to government? We need to get that on the public record. Perhaps when there is another rally out the front of Parliament House she might like to tell the marauding crowd about her intention when she gets to government - God forbid it is in the next decade – and whether she will be rolling those increases back. I very much doubt it.
The second question I would like to ask the Leader of the Opposition is: what is your plan? Are we in for more water parks? What is the go, Leader of the Opposition? More than anything, the third question is: how would you have addressed your astronomical debt and deficit? Or would you have been deciding to remain in a state of denial? We have Delia, debt, deficit and denial. I believe that the latter is probably more the case; that is, the Leader of the Opposition would have probably continued to be in denial, and that is the most disturbing part of it. If that sad and sorry lot across the Chamber were re-elected five-and-a-half months ago she would have remained in denial. The debt would have increased and the deficit would have escalated. The amount of interest repaid on a daily basis would have gone from $750 000, which is outrageous, to over $1m in a very short period of time. That is $750 000 per day every day of the year we are paying, compliments of the former Treasurer, the Leader of the Opposition.
My final question to the Leader of the Opposition is: what about poor old Trish Crossin? You backed the Prime Minister in getting rid of Trish Crossin. You said you thought it was a good thing getting Nova on board. This Leader of the Opposition, this woman who has been a part of the leadership team of the Northern Territory for years, has turned her back on her colleague. What is all that about? This parliament would enjoy hearing the explanation of the Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Deputy Speaker, what we are seeing here is a woman who is struggling. For all the allegations she makes across the Chamber about leadership challenges she, of any one of us, needs to be watching her back. We are hearing intelligence already that the delightful, very polite member for Fannie Bay is sizing up that chair to replace the belligerent, undignified Leader of the Opposition. It is time you did some self-reflection over there. It is time you started to think about what really matters. What really matters is that we re-establish a strong economic base in the Northern Territory, give Territorians a real future and stop going on about these lies and this nonsense.
Mr VOWLES (Johnston): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this motion. Yesterday, at the rally outside Parliament House, protestors voiced their anger about this government. There was one chant that was bellowed out long and loud after the Chief Minister retreated back to Parliament House. That chant was: ‘CLP cannot be trusted, CLP cannot be trusted’. And rightly so.
Never before have we felt so betrayed by a political party and its leader. The CLP cannot be trusted because, since coming into government, all they have done is break promise after promise.
The people of Johnston were promised by the CLP candidate that her party would ‘fight to drive down the high cost of living’. They said they would, ‘tackle this issue head on’.
Now the CLP is in government, what deceit we have found this promise to be. One of the first decisions this woeful government made was to hurt the most vulnerable people in our society: our senior Territorians, our pensioners. Under Terry Mills and the CLP government, pensioners who have fixed low incomes have been compelled to pay $1 to catch a bus. The former Labor government made bus travel free for seniors, recognising that many senior Territorians were doing it tough and this was one of the measures that could help alleviate the cost of living. Instead of continuing with this good, compassionate policy, the heartless CLP decided seniors were one of the groups on the list they wanted to target to get more money out of them. Absolutely disgraceful! In fact, Terry Mills on the radio on 16 January seemed to imply that he did not want seniors staying on the bus and going around town.
Let us quickly compare our credentials. We, on this side of the House, looked after our senior Territorians with the most generous pensioner scheme in the country: nearly $20m. We care for our senior Territorians.
At my electorate office the other day I had a long-term senior Territorian come into my office who said, ‘Can we ask Terry if he could at least let the fares be free for people over 80 years of age?’ He was in his 80s and was concerned those elderly people who were not driving, or who cannot drive, but needed to frequently catch the bus were being left out.
Another elderly constituent was in my office. We often do a bit of photocopying and helping out where we can by letting them use the phone. He was telling me how he goes to see his wife in the nursing home every day. Every day he visits her and spends most of the day with her. One dollar may not seem like much to us in this House, but it certainly is a lot of money if you are doing it twice a day. It all adds up; that is $28 per fortnight. As I said, that is not much for us in this House, but it means a lot and it will be recognised in a senior’s budget. Terry Mills promised to lower the cost of living and, instead, he came into power and hit Territorians like my constituent, with almost $30 out of their pension a fortnight so he can visit his wife. These are real stories.
I have also heard from concerned mental health non-government service providers. They have told me that since the CLP introduced the $1 charge, their client numbers have dramatically dropped. These clients, who need to access services and support, under the CLP are now isolated and staying at home because they cannot afford the $1 per day to go to these services. Or, if they do decide to access the services, I am told by the service providers they will rush off halfway through the session or program because they want to get home on the same bus ticket. There is no other way this could be understood than Terry Mills hurting Territorians. It almost seems that the more vulnerable and voiceless you are in the community, the harder you will be hit by this CLP government.
I turn to some of the CLP governments’ decisions when it comes to sport. Last month, after being forced by the media release from me, the minister for Sport confessed to the Territory public that despite his spruiking of the Brumbies-Western Force union match, his government was no longer interested in bringing top class rugby to Darwin for the thousands of rugby fans across the Northern Territory. I wonder if the minister has ever made it to a rugby union match in Darwin or even met with Northern Territory Rugby Union to understand the impact of his decision. The people of the Northern Territory are big union fans. Many were disappointed with another disgraceful decision, a decision made despite telling Territorians earlier in January:
A month later, Super 15 Rugby was cancelled. ‘No bang for the buck’, the minister stated in a hurried media release. No bang for the buck for the $300 000 per match to see top class rugby in the Northern Territory, but the minister’s golf club in Alice Springs gets $300 000 in the mini-budget. That is taxpayers getting their bang for buck? I do not think so.
First the Arafura Games, then Super 15 Rugby, what is next? BassintheGrass, the Superbikes, maybe no AFL games? I know the five-year $8m AFL deal this side of the House brought in when we were in government is running out next year. I call on the minister for Sport to guarantee the future of AFL matches in the Northern Territory. Or do I need to put out a media release again so you will answer me?
There are, of course, the sporting vouchers the CLP promised during the election, which I will admit I welcome. However, I am also concerned because I am getting many calls from families that you cannot use the $75 voucher in different organisations. What good is a $75 sports voucher if you are paying an extra $2000 a year on your higher power bills?
I want to go into the sports vouchers a little more because I can see more broken promises coming. Before the election, the Chief Minister assured Northern Territory families the vouchers were not just for sport. His words were, ‘It could be ballet, it could be scouts’. I am getting reports from dance organisations that their students are missing out on the $75 voucher. I do not have a child who participates, but I know from my friends whose children participate in dance that it can be quite costly - the dance lessons, the costumes, travel - but they cannot use the $75 sports voucher for any of it. Why, Chief Minister, did you say one thing before the election and now parents are confused and annoyed as to why they cannot use the sports vouchers to pay fees on many active recreation activities?
There was no mention of the forced move of Tourism staff to Alice Springs before the election. Then there was the minister for Tourism’s strange and confusing media release congratulating Qantas for cutting direct flights from Darwin to Canberra, then congratulating the scrapping of the seven flights from Sydney to Uluru to be replaced by only four flights. It was very strange.
I turn to some specific broken promises in my electorate of Johnston. I have already spoken many times in this House about the plight of residents living along Rapid Creek in Millner. These residents were promised, by Terry Mills and the CLP, a down payment of $1.5m towards the Rapid Creek flooding issue. In the mini-budget last year, the Country Liberal Party broke that promise, allocating only $750 000. In the Chief Minister’s letter dated 5 December following my letter to him, he said:
It is now February and there has been no report, no consultation undertaken, and yet another broken promise is on its way. Many residents feel it is just a continued string of broken promises on this issue and they do not trust you anymore.
Finally, I turn to law and order in Johnston. One of the biggest deceits was Terry Mills’ promise before the election. His five-point plan read:
This is a broken promise if I have ever heard one. Seniors, parents with babies, and bus commuters have contacted my office telling me about the problem drunks in their local neighbourhood, many of them saying things have become worse since the Banned Drinking Register was scrapped. What was the Chief Minister thinking? The evidence is right in front of you wherever you go. The Chief Minister’s bizarre advice to confront drunks has seen my office receive many calls from shocked people on how out of touch he must be with normal people.
The Country Liberal Party has made decision after decision that has directly affected the number of drunks in our streets. They scrapped the BDR with nothing in its place and they cut funding to non-government organisations which help with the problem of antisocial behaviour and drunks.
Madam Speaker, in closing, in any relationship there are key pillars which keep the relationship strong. One is trust. If there is no trust the future of that relationship is uncertain. The Chief Minister’s relationship with Territorians has been built on broken promises. The relationship has no strong foundation and, unfortunately for the Chief Minister, his future is uncertain. Territorians are making their message loud and clear because of these broken promises in this relationship. Like the large crowd at yesterday’s protest, I finish with: the CLP cannot be trusted.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I do not know how often in this House I heard the Labor Party, when in government, slagging off at various organisations and institutions for book-up in the bush. We hear from the Labor Party how bad book-up is. Book-up is a dreadful curse that Aboriginal people had inflicted upon them by these dreadful shopkeepers; it is all over the place and is something that should be managed. We should manage book-up because it is bad, bad, bad for people. Well, guess what? We all book up. I book up from time to time. I booked up to buy my house. I booked up to buy a car. We book up, but the question is how you book up and what responsible book-up is. That is really what all of this is about.
I am going to pause for a second in the book-up conversation, but I will get back to it shortly. I want to reflect on something that was said yesterday. One of the firies went to the microphone at yesterday’s rally - which I went to because I know the decisions we have made as a government have not been particularly popular. I will get back to the reasons for those decisions shortly. It is very hard to argue with the argument I heard from the firie. He was at an accident scene with a young girl who was two years old. He had to hold her hand and put up with her screaming - not ‘put up’, that is the wrong word - suffer through her screaming for two hours. That is a strong and powerful message. I listened to that and I thought, ‘Yes, I know what that feels like’.
I remember an accident on the Kintore road many years ago where a Nissan Patrol end-over-ended. There were about eight people on board and grandmother was dead when I got there. Her daughter died whilst I was taking her pulse. Despite our best effort, we could not save the baby either. There were multiple other injuries and it took a long time for the police to arrive. We managed to get though on the satellite phone to Alice Springs and managed to get a doctor who happened to be in Kintore to come out.
I triaged the scene as best I could. I provided what first aid I could. I was very fortunate to be able to dig a kid out from under the car who is alive to this day, as far as I know - a young fellow called Ambrose, I think. If he is still going he would be about 12, 13 by now. I was very grateful for that at least, that was a blessing. I remember sitting there saying, ‘Gee, I wish the coppers were closer’, because they had to come in from Papunya. That was a trip of about 200 km from Papunya. I thought, ‘It would have been great to have a better way to respond. They could build a police station closer. Kintore was close enough, I suppose. Maybe we can get helicopters with proper range.’ You start to think all of those things when you are in those circumstance because the immediacy of the circumstance means you are thinking, ‘Oh my goodness gracious me, how can we do this better?’
I was compelled by that story from that fire officer the other day. Do I doubt his sincerity? Absolutely not. His sincerity was genuine, heartfelt, decent, upright - all of that. The response from me is I have a duty - we say it every single day when we sit - to the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory. That is what the firie who was speaking yesterday was arguing about: the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory, the true welfare of that two-year-old girl.
The problem, from a government perspective, is it costs money to provide police services. I would like to have a police officer on every street corner in the Northern Territory. Our community would be much safer. I would like to have a full cardiac unit, heart transplants - all that stuff - five radiology oncology units right up and down the Northern Territory. I would like to have renal dialysis in every small community. I would like to have a student teacher ratio of 1:1 and streets paved with gold. I would love to fully subsidise everybody’s power. They are the things I would love to do. We could do it for a while. We could do it because we could book it up.
The former government, the Labor government, understood book-up, in the sense they knew how to use it. However, they did not take their own advice. I heard the Leader of the Opposition say it was all manageable debt. I do not believe it was, and the rationale can be found for that when you compare two documents. The first document I invite honourable members to look at is Budget Paper No 2 for the last Labor budget, which was 2012-13. I draw honourable member’s attention to the non-financial public sector balance sheet, which is the balance sheet which incorporates the Power and Water Corporation and all of those other components other than the general government sector.
The Leader of the Opposition does not want to talk about all of that. When she talks about the debt being manageable she is talking about the general government sector. The fact is, under the Labor government, we were subsidising the operation of Power and Water Corporation to the tune of $30m a year, or something like that. That was what is called the debt for equity swap. It is called a bail out; it is a subsidy. Let us call it what it is. That is $30m a year we would not be spending on things like schools. We will not have schools to the tune of $30m a year, we will not have this, we will not have that, we will not have anything else.
All we have done through the decisions we have made is enable the Power and Water Corporation to charge to deliver the services it delivers. It delivers several services: the generation of power - the process of the network of power - the power lines; the retail component where you pay for your power at the shop fronts; sewerage, the removal of our bodily waste products from our homes; and water.
We asked how much it would cost to make the organisation financially sustainable, and a little better - give us a little extra room so we can be somewhere between financially sustainable and commercially sustainable. The answer came back at 30%. We said, ‘Ugh!’, because we knew it was going to be tough.
That now has been freed up because it costs money to remove waste products, to bring water to the tap, generate power, bring it down to network. It even costs money to send out the bills. By doing that, we have freed up $30m-odd a year which we can spend on other things.
The problem is, with the book-up arrangements we have inherited, much of that money we now have to spend on interest payments we are copping for this. If you look at the forward estimates from the government’s last budget, the interest expense in 2015-16 under the comprehensive operating statement for the non-financial public sector is $405m a year. That is $1.2m a day-ish. I am doing the numbers off the top of my head. That is $1.2 each day!
The Leader of the Opposition consistently says it was affordable. Is $1.2m a day affordable? The budget could probably cope with it, but that is the full amount we raise through all taxation in the Northern Territory. If you look at taxation revenue in that budget paper - I was not incorrect - it is almost the full amount.
I now take you back, quite deliberately, to the firie I was listening to the other day. I was thinking, ‘That is a compelling story’. Here is another compelling story. I would hate to find a future government in 10 years’ time, if we do not show the restrain on this side of the House now - our debt will increase in that time, by the way. If we capped the debt right now the cuts would be much deeper. We cannot do it; we are not going to do it. We knew we were pushing the limits of what people could tolerate already by the decisions we were making. These were not happy Cabinet meetings, as members can well imagine.
I want to cast our minds forward. Let us say we did not cap the debt. Let us say we did not look after the book-up properly. Let us say we said, ‘Oh bugger it. We will just go down the same line the Labor Party had set for us.’ Not much pain in that - yet. Then you come to a point in 10 years’ time when somebody calls for a firie and the government of that day has to make some decisions because the interest bill on the book-up has reached $3m a day. The government in 10 years’ time realises - because the federal government said ‘Enough is enough, you guys have to control your debt’ - it has to make some really deep agonising cuts. It turns out that the firie, had the previous government been more careful with their fiscal management, could respond from a nearby fire station because some prudent fiscal management had been shown carefully over the years leading up to that point.
In this example, of course, the past government had been irresponsible, had not made the tough decisions and, now that the tough decisions - as are being made in Greece - are really cutting deep, that firie was not 10 minutes away or 20 minutes away; that firie was an hour-and-a-half away and had to go to two other jobs on the way.
That two-year-old girl at that scene will not be born for another eight years. It was a compelling story when I heard it yesterday because it tugs at the heart strings. I have two little girls in my home. The very thought of them not having the best of the best bugs me to tears. What about their children? What about the two-year-old girl who has not been born yet for the next eight years? Where is her rescue coming from?
That is what this whole discussion is about. Every conversation I heard from the unions yesterday was about the immediate problem. Our wages now, our issues now, what is happening now, this now. For years and years they have had a Labor government that has satisfied this desire for dealing with the now, now, now. With the rivers of GST money that have flown into the Territory over that time, they could have positioned the Territory for that 10-year period. They could have grown the public service only by half as much as they did over that period and gotten rid of that debt.
In the last couple of years, when times have become fiscally more difficult, our debt in this jurisdiction would only be - even if we borrowed as much as we had to support the government - probably about $1bn.
I draw members’ attention to the debt figure on the bottom of page 105 of the government’s last budget. Rather than a $1bn debt, which is whereabouts it could have been had we shown some fiscal restraint in the way we spent that extra money, it is $3.5bn for the current financial year. After all the work we did and all the pain we caused at the end of the current financial year in the mini-budget, we are only about $180m better off. So, yes, there have been savings in a number of areas.
However, if you forward that out across the forward estimates and go to 2015-16, the debt under the Labor government’s last budget was $5.6bn. Under us, it will still be big but it will be $4.3bn, which means over those forward estimates we will have to rein in what the former government was proposing to spend because we need to control our book-up. We need to be able to not only feed our family today but to be able to look after our family tomorrow, the day after, next week, next year, and in 10 years’ time. If you do not control the book-up now, you will not be able to look after your family because you will be too busy paying off the debt to the man at the shop. That is what this has been about.
The immediacy of having to deal with the problems these people have identified is real. You reckon I do not listen to the people in the union and think to myself, ‘Mate I can feel it; I can feel what their thinking and what they are saying’? When that firie told that story I heard it, it resonated in my core. However, I want to ensure he is there in 10 years’ time and 20 years’ time. I am terrified - and that is what this government has been worried about – that in 10 or 15 years’ time he will not be there because all we are doing is trying to service the book-up. That is at the very core of what we are talking about.
For the responsibility we have shown, we have had criticism from the unions and whoever else. In response to our responsibility - our duty not only to today but to the future - this is what the Labor Party pushes out there.
The Labor Party was great at consultancies. We heard some figures from the Chief Minister today during Question Time about some of the consultancies. The Hawker Britton consultancy was $300 000 for not even having to put in a report. There was another consultancy for Deloitte of $600 000 for some greenhouse policies. Consultancies, consultancies, consultancies. How many of those consultancies saved money or addressed the book-up situation in the Northern Territory? Very few, if any. Even if those consultancies had made suggestions to make savings, the truth of the matter is they were not listened to. They were not listened to in the forward projections.
We have a contest between the immediate and the future and, like any credit card, if you have the credit card you can rack it up and have what you want now. However, it must, at some point, be paid back or at least reined in because, eventually, the bank will say no or, in our case because of the implied underwriting of the Northern Territory by the federal government, the federal government will say, ‘No more’. When it does we will be in diabolical strife.
Are we talking about statehood? It is conceivable that if we rack up too much debt the feds will say, ‘We will not even give you self-government because you are not capable of doing it properly’. That is where this could go. I am, and have been, really concerned about it.
For the short-term political gain the Labor Party sees in attacking that principle, they will do whatever it takes. Why? That is their motto. In The Fixer - Graham Richardson - whatever it takes - you see things like, ‘They have slashed 10% from the Education budget’. No, we have not slashed 10% from the Education budget. There are, however, things called forward estimates and, in those forward estimates, there are upsies and downsies. Some of this 10% slash they go on about is the winding down of federal agreements. We have arrangements inherited from the former Labor government where Education agreements are starting to wind down. In the forward estimates that looks like a reduction in expenditure. There is a reason for that. It is a reduction in expenditure. What the budget books do not capture - they cannot at this stage because they are not finalised arrangements - is the further federal money that will find its way back into the Territory Education budget in the area of agreements surrounding the Gonski review.
I was in Sydney recently putting the final touches on that. We have pretty much reached an accord with the federal government. Some $50m will roll out of that and find its way back into that. We will never get to this point where, in the future forward estimates, you will get a reduction of 10%. We had the scaremongering of the member for Fannie Bay, the shadow Attorney-General saying, ‘Hey, they have cut 10% from the budget’. No, we have not. We have looked at the forward estimates and have done some other things.
We have asked teachers to leave the bureaucracy in Education and go to the coalface. That is not an unreasonable thing. If I said to the parents of the Northern Territory, ‘We had more bureaucrats than chalkies. We asked some of the bureaucrats in teaching ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, your time as expired.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I am proud to contribute to this debate that has been brought to this House by the Leader of the Opposition which deals with the recent election and broken promises. It also talks about driving up the cost of living and increasing public drunkenness and antisocial behaviour, with a lack of any Country Liberal Party policy or delivery around alcohol.
To start my contribution to this debate, I reflect on the Chief Minister’s and the Deputy Chief Minister’s contribution and their continual entry into that victim blame dialogue and discourse where we, the opposition, are the bad guys. The hypocrisy is they come back with exactly the language, sentiment, and vitriol they are accusing the opposing of using. There is some ultimate hypocrisy there.
My psychological reading of it is the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister are an endangered species. They are very nervous. They are nervous politically, but they are nervous on the wider front; they understand they have come in with a wrecking-ball policy to try to address a budget deficit. They are being led by advisors, the Renewal Management Board. They are starting to question that advice. They are hearing it from Territorians who are hurting, and they are showing their nervousness and are reacting with vitriol and vindictive discourse, the discourse they are accusing the opposition of using.
When the Chief Minister says he is about real decisions, we say as an opposition, yes, Chief Minister, but you have unreal and bad priorities. If you want a policy to grow the Territory and return the budget to surplus, then do not try the king hit approach. You do not hurt Territory families in your ambition to return the budget to surplus.
The member for Port Darwin eloquently provided us with his contribution to debate around fiscal strategy. But, he does not fill you in on the before and after. The before was we were in the grips of a global financial crisis. We all believe the Territory is the best place on Earth and has the best future, which is now coming to fruition. Our Labor government, after eight surplus budgets, went into and managed deficit to deliver social infrastructure, to save jobs, and to build the Territory to set it up for when the private sector comes in and continues to turbo-charge the capital of Northern Australia. The member for Port Darwin neglected to tell us all about that part of the fiscal management.
The other thing he neglected to tell us about the fiscal management was the previous Labor government left the books in Treasury with a defined stepped-out fiscal strategy over forward years. He has access to that information. He could use that information, but he is not the Treasurer. So, we will have to ask the Treasurer, the member for Araluen, to show us that information, because the Treasury people - who I had the privilege to work with and are some of the smartest people I have ever worked with - have those plans and that strategy.
It was presented to the electorate. Unfortunately, the Country Liberal Party made many promises and commitments - massive commitments to the bush - that were never put through the Treasury, never costed, never prepared. They have themselves in a spot of bother and, now, they are breaking promises.
If the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister do not believe me and want to continue to slag me off with their vitriol and vindictiveness - and I have to laugh at the Deputy Chief Minister who was having a crack at Labor members on this side talking about the age of members of the Renewal Management Board. How dare we? Hansard testifies to her comment about ‘poor old Trish Crossin’. How dare she? She should apologise to the Labor Senator of the Northern Territory, Trish Crossin. She should withdraw her ageist comments and get real about alleging and sledging Labor members if she wants to continue to use exactly the same discourse that is offensive and hypocritical.
If they do not believe me, as a Labor member, I would like to put on the public record a letter that was sent to me by respected business people from Tennant Creek: Tony and Heather Watson, PO Box 1237, Tennant Creek, NT, 0860. They take a bipartisan approach. It is a very good comment on the wrecking-ball approach of the Country Liberal Party and the effects it has in a regional sense. I especially would like those newly elected Country Liberal Party members born in regional and remote areas to think about the added pressure this wrecking-ball economic strategy is having on regional and remote residents:
Leave granted.
Mr McCARTHY: That brings me to the point Tony makes about small business and losing families. Where I come from in Sydney, if you lose a job or have changes in circumstances you can move within the system and find something else. In Tennant Creek, the Barkly, or the Territory for that matter, if families are squeezed and hurting they leave. They pack up and cross the border. They go interstate. We lose the whole family.
The Deputy Chief Minister talked about education cuts, saying they are not cuts, they are savings. Well, for those members interested - particularly those members born in regional or remote areas of the Northern Territory and who are newly elected Country Liberals - in the Barkly Education office, supporting teaching in a region which is one-and-a-half times the size of Victoria, there were 24 support positions. We expect, when they finally finish their saving cuts, there will be 13 positions. Do you know how many families that equates to who will leave the Barkly? How many professionals? How many people who buy their lunch at Tony and Heather’s business? How many people who book catering jobs and support our local business?
As well as that, the member for Araluen neglected to tells us that her regionalisation policy under the Country Liberal Party is taking positions from Tennant Creek and relocating them to Alice Springs. Not only are we seeing cuts and savings, we are seeing relocation of positions which directly affects small business in our town. For the member of Araluen to quote the politics of economic rationalisation - it cuts both ways. I will quote from a media network brief on Tuesday, 4 December 2012. That was the day the mini-budget the member was quoting from came down. The compere was Danielle Parry and the interviewee was Robyn Lambley, NT Treasurer. A summary says:
The member for Araluen was quoting Mr Abbott the other day, talking about his visionary plan to grow northern Australia. What is the Liberal visionary plan to grow northern Australia? To provide incentives for people to come here. That is what Mr Abbott is proposing, ‘Let us create innovative incentives to get people to come to northern Australia because it is going off’.
We are in a very good space. The Labor government set that up before we lost the lot and people crossed borders. Before we lost our skilled workforce we were releasing land, and that land is still rolling out. There were 2000 units approved in the CBD that I see stepping out of the ground every time I drive into town; the Marine Supply Base; the new correctional services multi-classification facility; the INPEX project; and do not be surprised when Woodside back up next to INPEX - and on the list goes. This is what we did economically to set it up so the private sector could kick in and take over. The Labor government had a planned and calculated fiscal step-out strategy.
You need incentives to get people here. Tony Abbott is right and minister Lambley agrees with Tony Abbott yet, in practice, she puts together a plan with the Chief Minister, being led by the Renewal Management Board, with a wrecking ball to smash everybody, hit them with a big hit and take it all now. ‘We want to solve it in four years because we have to go to an election. We have heaps of roads and bridges and infrastructure to deliver like Labor did, but we do not know where it is coming from because our promises were way bigger than what we can deliver.’
It is interesting to cut them down to another level and talk about what happens in a regional area and a regional town like Tennant Creek.
I am a member of parliament; I have never earned this much money in my life. I used to be a teacher and, traditionally, my lifestyle took the family on a Christmas holiday, invariably, one holiday a year. When we got back we had blown all the dosh on the holiday; we had a great time seeing family.
Then, I got hit with the car registration, the power bill, the other associated expenses. As the member for Port Darwin said, I used to whack them on the credit card. That was the only way I could manage it. I had a fiscal step-out strategy where I used to pay it off during the year so we could go on another holiday. A Wet Season power bill in Tennant Creek, for me in a three-bedroom home, average lifestyle, used to be around $900. Now, I am paying $1200. That is a bit of an increase. The old 1986 Toyota Hilux registration, as I said the other day, has increased by over $100. I get whacked $20 at the counter. I can go on and on about my expenses, but what I would like to tell those …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Mr McCARTHY: Thank you, member for Fannie Bay and members.
The critics allege, in this wrecking-ball approach, I am now in a position as a member of parliament earning a good salary where I can still manage my credit card. However, in the regions and remote, areas the majority of the constituents I represent are on fixed incomes. Nothing has changed for them. I hope one day I have somebody elected from the regional and remote areas of the Barkly to do this job. I will be working towards that. However, at the moment, I am lucky I have a new job and an increased salary. I can cop an increase in charges with rego, power, water and sewerage. All the other local supermarket prices have become very challenging and I am copping lots of heat over that. The small business owners, Tony and Heather, have outlined that model. I am going to absorb that. I am going to squeeze my budget.
However, the majority of my constituents are on fixed incomes. There is a good example here of a constituent who is a pensioner, a retired nurse who served the community outstandingly. Her son comes in and gives me regular advice; we have great political dialogue. He is a very intelligent guy, Gary Sullivan. He brought in a power bill from his mum, and said, ‘Gerry, this is what I want you to know, and this is the hurt for a person on a fixed income’. Normally, her Wet Season bill would be around $650, and the bill that just came in - as mine came in - is $1045.88. That is a big hit. The difference between me and my family and this constituent is she is on a fixed income so she is going to hurt.
It is reverberating in the regions and remote areas where people are starting to talk about the cost of living. I was on the road for a couple of weeks before getting to Darwin. I was particularly interested in the dialogue in the regional and remote areas. It started to kick in around the cost of living, and the first cost is power, water, and sewerage.
The member for Araluen, the Treasurer said, ‘You guys would not roll it back’. She makes all her really immature remarks that are nervous and show stress and tension because she realises she has been led down the garden path by economic rationalists who are really hurting Territory families. The Leader of the Opposition has said - both in government and now in opposition - the plan to tell Territorians is there. We know we have to invest in power, water and sewerage infrastructure.
As a matter of fact, the Treasurer also said in her mini-budget to this House and the Territory that one of the strategies she is going to use is to defer capital works projects. Once again, we have been having a lot of power outages in Tennant Creek. One of the reasons which was explained to me is we have very old transmission gear. We have very old switches and the infrastructure that transmits that electricity is over 30 years old. We can all share a bit of blame there, shall we? Let us go to this bipartisan approach. I have been involved in that town for 33 years. We need to replace it.
How do you replace it? You borrow money to replace it and you pay back the loan. Like the member for Port Darwin outlined with his house. I am paying my house off over 25 years because I cannot afford to do it any other way. It is a managed debt.
We need that infrastructure in Tennant Creek. The big fear is we have a Treasurer who is grappling and struggling and getting more nervous and insecure. I fear she will cut the capital works project at Tennant Creek’s power and water supply, and that will affect everyone. That will affect small business and families. It will also, once again, dish out the killer blow about jobs. It is about building the regions.
I have developed a new mantra for many people who are coming to me – many Liberals are coming to me wanting to discuss what is happening in the Northern Territory. All I can say to them is I will continue to fight in opposition. I will continue to add to this debate and try to rationalise this debate.
We will be okay because we will probably get a gold mine. We will probably get three or four gold mines and they are going to produce copper. Then there will be phosphate. Do not talk about the gas and oil coming out of the Beetaloo Basin and the Georgina Basin. The whole philosophy of a Labor policy is to build the regions, to set them up so when this stuff hits we are back in action. We used to be the power house of the Northern Territory. We produced more gross state product than Darwin in the 1960s and 1970s. We are coming back.
However, the business owners and the contractors are really concerned about this wrecking-ball approach: whack the consumer, destroy the business confidence, destroy consumer confidence, contractors lose work because capital works are deferred, maybe even in a conspiracy targeting a Labor member. We will wait and see if that plan comes to fruition from the Country Liberal Party. However, if we do not support the regions, we will not be ready for when these private sector gold mines, copper mines, and phosphate projects start kicking in.
It is all about being balanced as the member for Port Darwin says. We have to continue to debate and challenge. The Country Liberal Party has the perfect opportunity to drive a bit of balance into what Territory families are saying outside, have been saying through the media, and have been saying over the water coolers at work; that is, Budget Cabinet sits in February and March. The Country Liberal Party will go into that room – and my analogy about the big cake? Well, they are telling me it is only a very small tea cake now. It is only a really little cake. However, they have the opportunity to start to wind back the wrecking-ball approach and to stage a fiscal step-out strategy over forward years that is more real and rational, that does not hurt Territory families as much, that continues to support the regions, and then we will all be fat on the biggest chocolate mud cake coming our way.
Yet, the trouble with the debate from the member for Port Darwin is that this wrecking-ball approach is the only way forward. There is no choice, he told us. There is no choice; this is it, and we are going to cop it sweet. However, there is a choice and you guys over there have that opportunity in the next budget and the budget after, just like Labor had a step-out fiscal strategy over forward years.
You can start this and get the goodwill of Territorians back. You can stop hurting the most disadvantaged and vulnerable people in the Northern Territory, the ones who are on fixed incomes, the lower socioeconomic groups who are struggling with what this is all about. When the power card that used to keep the fridge going with the baby’s milk in it for five days now cuts out in three days they are starting to buy into this debate as well.
Let us take everybody along with us. It is like your mantra on land release. Four years of your failed mantra on land release as the new suburbs are rolling out across the Northern Territory, in Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Tennant Creek, and Alice Springs. You are in charge now. You continue to use this dialogue. Take us along; let us do it sensitively and together. You have one last chance to regain Territory trust so you will be trusted. That will be in your Cabinet room and Budget Cabinet.
There are some real matters which have been mentioned by Labor members here who are voicing this on behalf of their constituents. The $1 bus fare for seniors? Come on! The $20 for me to stand and have a great conversation with a kid I used to teach at a counter? Come on! The Power and Water officer who is gone from Tennant Creek that the Minister for Essential Services, the member for Katherine, still has not had the decency, the honour, or the integrity to reply to me about, as a local member fighting for locals? Come on! You can do things. You can change this. You will engender the trust and support of Territorians, particularly those in regional and remote areas.
Thank you, Madam Speaker, for the opportunity to speak. I tabled that letter because if the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister do not want to believe me and continue to sledge me as a Labor member, they may take it from respected people in Tennant Creek.
Mr CHANDLER (Business): Madam Speaker, I speak not in support of this motion but to paint a slightly different picture to what the opposition has painted over the last few weeks and months. I have listened with interest to the debate on both sides of the Chamber and it has become quite clear to me that there are differences. Has anyone else noticed? There are differences in the way the Labor Party feels about the economy and debt. To his credit, the member for Barkly was probably the only member I have listened to tonight that did not talk down the Territory.
When we were in opposition we were always accused of talking down the Territory. The member for Barkly is right, there is a promising future for the Northern Territory. However, the clear difference is we on this side of the House, a conservative government, recognise what debt can do and debt is a reality, unlike the Labor Party which seems to think debt can be pushed to one side. I listened to some of the mantra yesterday and it was just, ‘Spend the money. Just go out there and spend the money.’ Where does it stop?
I have brought in a credit card statement. On this credit card is an opening balance of $12 298.23. There is a minimum monthly payment of $244. The interest on just this amount of $12 298 is $132 a month. Every four weeks that is $132 that cannot be used for other things spent on one credit card. It would be great if everyone in this country did not have more than one credit card but the fact is many people have many credit cards. The interesting thing about this, though, if you were to only pay the minimum payment to pay off this $12 298, it would take you 34 years and six months. If you only make the minimum monthly payment - this is what the Labor party seems to think when they talk about managed debt - to pay off $12 298 will take 34 years and six months.
My youngest son, who is three, would be about 37 years of age at that time, and probably would have been working for 20 years. How would I feel as a father, as a politician in 2013, to think that he, as a three-year-old, might be working for 20 years after which he can sit down one afternoon and have a beer and say, ‘Hey, Dad, I have paid your debt off. I have been working for 20 years.’ A three-year-old today, when he reaches 37 after 20 years of working, has finally paid off the debt we have in the Northern Territory today. That is a stark reminder of what debt can do and how long it takes to pay off.
Every amount of interest that is paid off a debt is money that cannot be used for other things. That includes paying public servant wages, paying police officers, ambulance officers and firies. The money is not there because it is going to the big banks.
One thing I learnt listening to the crowd yesterday at the rally - and these are real people. Let us not beat around the bush; these are real people with real hearts and feelings. However, their attitude to the money and the here and now is very short-sighted if they do not respect what the debt could do to the Northern Territory if not managed effectively. By ‘managing’ I mean managing the debt and getting rid of the debt. Their jobs are in real doubt into the future if we, as a government, do not have the money to pay them. As the Attorney-General pointed out earlier, this is not about today, but about tomorrow, next year, five years and 10 years from now and, in fact, 37 years from now given it will take that long to pay off a $12 000 credit card.
The Mills government is tackling government’s debt and ensuring the Territory remains an attractive place to invest and create jobs. The Territory is a great performer overall: the second strongest economy in the nation. But, with all that has been said and put out in all these pamphlets and so forth, and the rhetoric that is going on, you would not believe that is true. However, these are actual figures.
We have potential to overtake Western Australia, today’s stand-out performer. The economy is expected to grow 4.4% in the next five years. Business confidence is at the highest level in the country. The most recent Sensis business confidence index shows 35% of business operators surveyed expected strong growth in the immediate future. Why is the Northern Territory a great place to do business? It is a stable place but, clearly, the Ichthys project is pumping investment into our economy. Of course, that brings contracts and jobs. The Territory has an enormous potential in its resources, particularly oil and gas.
This government is directly pumping time and effort in bringing more investment here. Recognising former ministers from the other side, much work was done to bring companies like INPEX to the Northern Territory. That also brings many challenges. For example, I have appointed a specialist in my office who is working on linking potential investors with investment opportunities - not working on spin, looking at real economic opportunities. These investors will feed into our three diversified economy hubs to ensure long-term stability and a thriving economy for the future.
We have been securing work for Territory businesses. Team NT is pursuing manufacturing opportunities with prime contractors. Direct engagement with relevant overseas and Australian head offices has been ramped up. Visits to Perth, Singapore, Thailand and Japan are planned in the near future. Investment needs workers and we are skilling up the workforce and attracting workers. The Territory has the lowest unemployment rate in the country at 3.9%, and a high worker participation rate. All this doom and gloom we hear from the other side is not mirrored in the statistics.
We need more workers as we grow the economy. We continue to hold successful national and international expos for skilled workers. I am pushing to get a worker migration scheme in place. Last week, I had the opportunity to meet up with Hon Chris Bowen, the federal Immigration minister. We both agreed on the way forward for the Northern Territory. I walked away from that meeting with an assurance from the federal government that both of us can work together to ensure we meet those needs and have migration policies and interstate migration policies which suit the growing needs of the Northern Territory. It soon became clear to Hon Chris Bowen, when I used analogies like if INPEX was to come to Sydney it might cause a ripple; because it is coming to Darwin it will cause a tsunami. We have history with the ConocoPhillips plant of what it did for local businesses and how we need to prepare, as a government, to back up those businesses to ensure we have the right mechanisms in place to provide that support.
Apprenticeship training is under way. Incentives help soften the initial cost of having apprentices and trainees. We have developed a list of priority jobs with industry tailoring workers for jobs. These will be the focus of our training activities.
The Territory boasts the lowest level of tax liability on a medium-sized business in the country due, in part, to its lack of land tax and low payroll tax regime. That is an attraction in itself.
We do a great deal to support our businesses. We have a wide range of stimulus programs. There is a suite of business development programs available through the Department of Business. Business management skills, business planning, professional development, and environmental performance programs are all available through the Department of Business. Yes, many of these programs are previous government programs. Unlike some people, it does not matter - as the Attorney-General mentioned earlier - what political stripes one may wear, if it is a good program, it is good, if it is bad, it is bad. You keep the good and throw out the bad.
There are many things the Mills government has done since coming into office. We promised and have appointed the Chair of the independent Planning Commission. We were fast off the blocks on this. Not only did we select an expert, Mr Gary Nairn, to take the role - he has been out and about in the community talking to all stakeholders for months – but we selected all members of the commission and they have had their first meeting. The commission has been looking at new ideas for land release, getting an overview of all current projects all over Darwin, including Wanguri and the regions. Mr Nairn has just had two fruitful days of discussions in Katherine. The commission is quickly identifying the way to use parcels of land - whether it is suitable for housing, commercial interests, agriculture, etcetera.
We have appointed Dr Freeland to our new EPA. Dr Freeland’s skills, knowledge and experience make him eminently suitable. He brings a wealth of experience to the NT EPA, having worked in senior positions with the Northern Territory Parks and Wildlife Commission and as a senior environmental consultant. Dr Freeland will be an excellent Chair of the new Environment Protection Authority.
If we do have this all wrong and Labor has this all right, it would just mean we would be going into debt further and further into the future. As I said before, with this credit card statement I could not bring myself to have to say to a three-year-old that, at the age of 37, after working for 20 years, we have finally paid off the Northern Territory debt. It is not fair for the next generation to have to worry about the debt of today. We should be taking responsibility for that debt today.
At yesterday’s rally, I heard people yelling out things like ‘Just spend the money, just spend the money’, and ‘It is not our debt, it is government’s debt’. That is the simplistic argument many people are using. It shows clearly a difference between the Labor and Liberal sides of politics. We take debt seriously and we understand the harm debt can do. For every dollar you are paying in interest, you are supporting those people Labor does not want to support. Labor does not think you should be supporting business. Labor does not think you should be supporting anything but a very unionised public service. I profess to have been part of a number of unions. I was a member of the ASU. I was a section counsellor for the CPSU. I got far more in those days of being part of the unions by working with the business or the departments than by trying to work against them.
The reality is debt is serious; it needs to be dealt with, and quickly. With this perception that you do not want to support business or the big end of town - one of the biggest ends of town is the banks. Every bit of interest you are paying on this debt you have racked up is supporting the banks. You are supporting the big end of town. All that money that could be spent on firies, police, schools and hospitals is going to the banks …
Mr Tollner: And the shareholders.
Mr CHANDLER: That is right, and the shareholders. However, this money that goes in interest payments could be doing all those things you say you stand up for. You say you want to deliver these services. Well, think of the services that could be delivered if we were not spending over $1m a day in interest.
It would have been beautiful to be able to come into government with no debt whatsoever. That would be the dream of any new administration that comes in. One might imagine how you would get into an administration if there was no debt, because the previous government would have been re-elected for managing so well.
It would be lovely to have been able to roll out all the Country Liberals’ policies with plenty of money in the bank and the ability to be able to do it very quickly. The fact is we have come in and have some damn good policies, but we are restricted. It is like we are sailing on this boat and there are these huge buckets hanging over the end dragging us along so we cannot get up to speed as quickly as we want to.
There were also some interesting tidbits the other night on Facebook. People are spinning these lies and mistruths. I heard the Leader of the Opposition earlier saying that I said all of this action is spurred on the back of hatred and lies. Much of it is. I have had the opportunity over the last few months to sit in my office with people one on one and tell them what the issues are, what the truth is, and why we have had to do what we have done. I have not had a person walk out of the office without a changed point of view because they have been able to see the truth. I have often put in front of them media releases and they have said to me, ‘Why the hell do you not get these media releases out to the people?’ I told them that they go through a filter, which is called our media. Media releases go to the media, the media then do what they do, and then you are presented with a version that is often twisted. We have seen it time and time again. As a government, if we have done something so bad, so wrong, so painful that we should be held to account, well, that is fine. But when it is twisted and the mistruths - as we see in the first 100 days document that has been put out by the Labor Party - you are stirring the pot, twisting the truth. You are putting out inaccurate information and then you wonder why the community is getting angry. They are getting angrier but they are getting angry about mistruths.
I am not angry at the community for being this way because I have read some of the articles in the news and seen articles or presentations on television. If I did not know any better, I would get angry. I would get so frustrated if I did not know what the truth behind that was. I understand the sentiment in the community at the moment, but much of it has been driven by hatred and lies.
My family has met the Opposition Leader at social events and so forth and they always find that she is a nice lady. Yet, I have one son in particular who watches parliament live - probably watching now - watches the nightly news and cannot understand how bitter somebody is. He said to me, ‘Why do these people change so much in this Chamber?’ We are supposed to be the leaders of our society. What do we expect from our children if we act like monkeys in here? We saw a lot of rabble going on yesterday. We talk about democracy, and unions stand for democracy and their right to free speech.
We went out there as a Cabinet. Other members of this side of the government were out there to listen to what the people had to say. Was the same opportunity given to the Chief Minister to speak? No, it was not. There is something to be said about that. My son said, ‘Why do you get on like this? What happens in this place? Do you all seem to change as people?’ I said, ‘Mate, the thing is sometimes we have differing views and it can get heated from time to time’. He said, ‘No, no. There is a bitterness through someone. It is like …’. I will not say what he actually said, but it was along the lines that someone has not got over the fact they have lost and now they are on the losing team.
I thought the best way forward after talking to my son was that there needs to be a blessing or a prayer said to this lady. We have one here; it is an Apache blessing that we found and we thought we might read it out for the Opposition Leader:
Back to some of the matters we have here. The fact is we came into government and found a huge debt that needs to be dealt with. We have already demonstrated today there is a difference between the way this side of the House and the Labor Party views debt. I am all for going into debt to buy a house that will appreciate in value over the years, or building a railway or a bridge that will have long economic benefits for the Territory. But when you are racking up debt on things like water parks and sporting grounds - admittedly, much of this is good infrastructure, particularly the sporting infrastructure - it does not turn a dollar as far as future economic benefit is concerned. If the previous government had put more money into the port facilities in Darwin, think of the opportunities which could have come our way. It is okay to go into debt if it will create some economy, but to spend it on - talk about pork barrelling, and we have been accused of doing some pork barrelling lately. There is a difference between what you spend the money on and how you spend the money.
One of the biggest and highest costs of living ,..
Mr STYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Mr CHANDLER: We know the reality is that had the Labor Party been elected in August 2012, they would have had to do something about the debt. One of the only ways they would have been able to do that, particularly with Power and Water, was to put up power and water costs. The reality is we know - we have seen the letters - what the intent of the Labor Party was. It was to do just that.
No one, at the moment, seems to attribute any blame for the debt we are in - and what we are trying to actually take responsibility for and deal with - to the previous government. It has all been attributed to what we are doing. The reality is, politics is a popular sport. If you do not do the right thing by the community, you are not going to be elected next time. So, I put to you: why in the world in a game like politics would we be doing what we are doing, making some of the decisions we are making, if it was not absolutely necessary? You know what? There is not a person here who wants to lose their job. There is not a person on this side who is a fool. There is not a person on this side who thinks outside the square to the point that they want to throw everything away. This game, as we all know, is a popularity game. I put it to you again. We would not be doing this if it were not absolutely necessary to rein in the debt and to maybe, put all that money in the future that is going into interest rates and into interest, back into our community, which will directly benefit our services. That is what the strategy is.
Lately we have seen much spin from the Labor Party, and we know we are in the lead-up to an election. Let us face it, we are all adults here and we know how it works. But, some of the things in this document put out by the Labor Party are just so wrong. We have heard arguments to say that you are taking bits and pieces out of our information, and then you are putting your own spin on it and you are not reading things in context; you are not reading the whole thing. We understand that. Goodness gracious, when we were in opposition, we probably did the same thing to you guys ...
Members interjecting.
Mr CHANDLER: Well, there might have been a bit of that.
The reality is we know what we are doing here. The reality is there is a serious situation ...
Mr Wood: Remember the puff pieces.
Mr CHANDLER: I know. The puff pieces and all those things, member for out the other way, outer Darwin …
Mr Wood: South Palmerston.
Mr CHANDLER: Yes, south Palmerston.
The reality is, there are things in here that are just wrong. ‘Six hundred public servants sacked’. There it is, guaranteed that 600 public servants will be sacked. If anybody was to read that, they would think straightaway we must have sacked 600 public servants. Have we? No, we have not sacked 600 public servants. No one has been sacked. In fact, figures from the Commissioner of Public Employment say there were 19 989 full-time equivalent public servants in the December quarter:
We have believed in the last four years, we have heard time and time again from the Labor Party which was in government, that our public service is spot on with everything they do. We have not sacked 600 public servants. That is the truth. We have heard the Education minister tonight, talk about schools. There are, in fact, more teachers teaching and greater job security, because many of the teachers who were on contracts before have been moved to permanent employment, which was one of our election promises. I fought for years, when I was shadow Education minister, as I really wanted to know why we had so many teachers on contracts. Again, we have taken more people off contracts and put them onto permanent work.
There have been no sackings at the hospitals where 93% of staff are considered as front line, and are quarantined from the budget measures. We have heard the Minister for Health say as much in the Chamber. Police stations are in the process of putting on 120 additional police officers. This stuff - ‘600 sacked public servants’ - is just so wrong. If I was someone in the community who had nothing to do with politics and I picked that up, I would say, ‘You buggers’. I would be angry too. I would be really angry. But be angry with the truth, do not be angry with the lies and vitriol that has appeared in recent days.
The one here about $1m to employ their mates. I had a look at that and thought, goodness gracious, it was as if you wanted to attack seniors’ wisdom. I hope when I am a little older I will be wiser and someone will be calling on that wisdom. There are many older people in the Northern Territory and across this country who can still provide a valuable contribution to the community. To suggest you should not use that wisdom is astounding.
If you want to play the truth game, how much did Labor spend on consultants and spin doctors over the years? We could bring out some figures if you want to add some real flare and fairness to this argument.
This document is full of lies and it confuses. I heard Francis earlier say the community is confused. You are damn right they are confused because they are getting so much spin, so many lies are being told in the community today they do not know what to believe. You can have a mob mentality when you get so many people upset. I point out again: every time I have had the opportunity to sit down with someone and give them the truth they walk out with a completely different opinion. When I hand them a media release from any one of the ministers of the government they say to me, ‘This is the first I have heard of this. Why is this stuff not getting to the media?’ Of course, the media releases get to the media, but it is what they choose to do with it and how they present it and, of course, how Labor presents it.
The reality is we have a problem and it is debt. The longer you leave, it the bigger the hole - and that is the truth.
More evidence was pointed out by the Minister for Transport earlier. All the figures for registration are wrong. That is misrepresentation and you wonder why people are upset. I am not wondering any longer why people are becoming upset because of misinformation. As the member for Arafura pointed out, people are confused, and rightly so, when you see this kind of information put out.
I become frustrated in what is a difficult job, as did the members of the Labor Party in the previous government. The member for Barkly saw a pile of files on my desk and was thinking he was here a few months ago doing exactly the same thing ...
Mr McCarthy: It made me homesick but I am coming back.
Mr CHANDLER: It made you homesick. It is a difficult job to get through everything you need to as a minister. Everyone on this side would agree; everyone on that side who has sat in the chair before would agree. However, you become very disappointed when you are dealing with people who are angry.
It would not have mattered who was elected in August, power and water prices would have gone up, let us not beat around the bush. No one likes it.
However, the debt needs to be dealt with. We are taking the responsibility and, at the moment, 100% of the blame has been attributed to this side and no portion of that blame is being put to the people who put us in this position in the first place.
Madam Speaker, there is a difference between the Labor Party and the Country Liberal Party; that is, we see debt in a completely different way. Debt can be managed, but managing a $12 298.23 credit card paying the minimum balance every month will take 34 years and six months to pay off. That is not a legacy I am prepared, as a minister of this government, to hand over to my three-year-old.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I will try to get through what I would like to say in the 10 minutes we have before GBD finishes at 9 pm.
Obviously, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for bringing this motion before the House. Members have spoken on many different things in the course of this debate in the last couple of hours. I will focus on one part of what has happened to the cost of living as a result of members opposite driving up power prices by 30%.
The Leader of the Opposition talked about people packing up and leaving the Territory in droves - as we know they are - because they cannot afford to live here. However, there is an element of the community that will not pack up and leave; they will stay. I am talking about the Aboriginal population. I will talk specifically about issues in my electorate around the impact of the cost of living, and the terrible handling of communication to people on communities about the implications of the cost of living increases.
We had a bit of a crisis in Gove. Gas to Gove has been resolved. Around the same time I was dealing with that when the rally was on, I became aware of the fact that the community of Yirrkala and, for that matter, Gunyangara, had no access to power cards. There are a couple of reasons behind that. Let us keep in mind that businesses in Gove have been doing it incredibly tough. There are 140 or so retailers around the Northern Territory who sell these power cards to people who live in homes who have a metered power arrangement, as opposed to getting a quarterly power bill as I do. It is a sensible system which allows people to monitor their power usage.
In Nhulunbuy, the business that retails these cards makes no gain. There is nothing in it for them other than being a good corporate citizen. The local retailer is the owner of the IGA store, who owns stores in Nhulunbuy and Yirrkala, and two homeland stores in more recent times. This retailer has been going through incredibly difficult times with the downturn in business in gas to Gove. Why would he keep thousands of excess dollars of his cash flow tied up in power cards in anticipation of people coming to buy them? He has a very good idea of the volume of power cards he gets through on a weekly basis and orders in from Power and Water on a weekly basis on the strength of that.
Over the Australia Day long weekend, people ran out of power cards. I did not become aware of it until it was raised with me on the Tuesday morning. The owner of the IGA business, Mr Tim Broadbent, became aware of it. As the retailer, of course, he contacted Power and Water on Monday - I do not know what time on Monday of the long weekend - to request additional power cards be issued immediately. If this was in Darwin, Alice Springs, or Katherine - all of those places on the Stuart Highway, I might add - it would have been resolved within a matter of hours. For Yirrkala people, power cards did not become available until the Thursday morning. This is in northeast Arnhem Land where we have a major airport that has two flights in every day and charters coming in and out all of the time.
We had that issue with no power cards. The reason the power cards had ran out is, quite clearly, consumers were getting through them much quicker than they would previously. Had the owner of the business of IGA known that power prices had gone up, he would most certainly have ordered in extra power cards to make sure people did not run out. But, at no point was he told he needed to increase the number of power cards, otherwise he would have.
When I raised the issue through a media release I simply stated the facts around what had happened. The media release was titled ‘CLP drops the ball on essential services’. I highlighted the fact that people were there without power. I will quote a couple of lines:
Yes, true:
Yes, true. As a matter of fact, families without power cards on the Saturday before, on Saturday 26th:
I ended by saying:
For my efforts, I got a very nasty slap back from the minister responsible for Essential Services who dismissed the media release as a cheap shot based on lies and the misfortune of others:
No, they were not:
No, they were not:
It failed to order an adequate amount because Power and Water failed to tell it that it needed to do so:
They were alerted on the Monday afternoon and they became available for purchase on a Thursday morning. I do not think that is good enough and nor do the people of Yirrkala who went without power.
What amazes me in all of this, and what concerns me, is the lack of communication to our remote communities about the fact that power prices have gone up by 30%. I eventually found - because somebody assisted me to locate it - the brochure. This is how people were advised their power prices were going up in communities. Photo of a football player there. For non-English speakers; they are probably thinking, ‘Oh, this is about football’. ‘Use less power and make your power card last longer’, it says, or as someone said to me, ‘Oh, that says useless power’. Too right it does! You open it up, there is a diagram - not bad. There are some illustrations about what people might do to reduce power. However, it is not until you go to the dense English text on the back that it says, ‘Tariff changes, as of 1 January, 30%’. Not only was that message entirely lost, but these did not turn up in Yirrkala. Do you know when they arrived? Last Thursday. The owner of the IGA store received a bunch of these and posters to display in his store to tell people power prices had gone up.
I am not talking about people who are whingers here. This is an e-mail I received. I sent a group e-mail out to as many Yirrkala people as I could think of. I will not say the name of this person as she is a public servant and, like most public servants, is a little fearful about her job. She said to me:
the organisation she works for:
Which was, no, nobody had heard anything. What really disappoints me is the lack of communication. Where is the voice from the bush members on the other side? My phoning around tells me this is the case in every store. They are not necessarily running out of power cards but they are, obviously, chewing through a heap more than they had had previously. How do people make ends meet in this hot weather, without food security, lights or cooling? They are just forgotten.
As far as the member for Katherine is concerned, people are just complaining and I am telling lies. Where is the member for Namatjira who, in 1992, screamed from the rooftops when consumers had to pay for power in Papunya? That was 1992. She put up a stink, supported by Warren Snowdon, under the former CLP government:
The Minister for Indigenous Advancement was happy to be a strong voice 20 years ago about what is wrong with power prices. In the current situation? Nothing; not a word. Where are the voices of the other Indigenous members of this parliament who represent constituents in bush communities? It is an absolute disgrace ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nhulunbuy. The time is 9 pm. Do you wish to adjourn your comments?
Ms WALKER: I believe I have just about finished and, if I need to continue, I will do so in adjournment, Madam Speaker.
Debate adjourned.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I stand to speak on behalf of a constituent of mine who has asked me to pay tribute to a great Territorian. Jim Dorling AO died recently in Queensland and for many years he was a great contributor to Northern Territory life and history.
I speak on behalf of our former Administrator, Ted Egan AO, who supplied the following story.
At this time our thoughts are with his family.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Madam Speaker, the members of this parliament all have their own unique story, which is important to ensure we have a balanced representation of our Territory people. Tonight I would like to speak about two community groups that have provided immense support to the Territory community over a number of years and to me, personally, in fulfilling my role as a mother.
The Childbirth Education Association was formally established in 1983 and provides vital support to Territory families at one of the most important stages in their life journey: the birth of a new baby. It supported my mother and father and now supports me as a parent.
Run by volunteers from the Nightcliff Community Centre, the Childbirth Education Association provides information and support for women and their families, and promotes self-reliance and confidence in pregnancy, birth, and parenting. The education website explains that they offer, and I quote their website:
During the month of March, we will celebrate International Women’s Day. This day, thousands of events are held worldwide to inspire women and celebrate achievements. Childbirth Education Association has a proud history in Darwin of providing education and support in birthing and parenting to women and, as an organisation, CEA has also been growing the ground for women of Darwin as employees and board members with many skills. They will be celebrating International Women’s Day with a special morning tea event, open to the public, on 9 March at the Nightcliff Community Centre. There will be guest speakers and an information display. Everyone is invited to celebrate the strength, resilience and achievements of women worldwide.
CEA receives a small grant from the Office of Women’s Policy for International Women’s Day, for which I know they are most grateful.
The other event the association is hosting this year is a film fundraiser, Birth Story, about birthing rights and the movement in America in the 1970s. The winner of the Audience Award at the Los Angeles Film Festival, this film will take your breath away with its emotion as Ina May Gaskin and the Farm Midwives fight for women centred care and shackle themselves to their husbands to enable them to be present at the birth of their children. This fight for the empowerment of women during the birthing process will be held on 24 March at the Museum Theatrette. I encourage people to support these events and if you wish to attend, or would like more information, please contact the Childbirth Education Centre, or refer to its website.
They also continue to have many new and old favourite activities at the association this year: birth preparation classes, breastfeeding establishment, monthly morning teas, and the ever-popular pregnancy stretch classes at Nightcliff and Palmerston, Bumps and Bibs, aqua aerobics, and the soon to be commencing mothers and babies gentle exercising classes. Again, I refer to their website if you are interested or call into the office Tuesday to Friday between 9 am and 12 pm.
I also acknowledge the Australian Breastfeeding Association, or ABA as it is more commonly known. Its support to our community is also vital and it operates under a small grant from the NT government. A great deal of time from volunteers supports ABA groups across the Northern Territory to ensure accurate breastfeeding information, education and support is available.
The ABA began as the Nursing Mothers’ Association in 1964 to support mothers, and today is Australia’s leading authority on breastfeeding. I now read from their mission statement to further explain their role:
The support of the ABA has been critical to me, as it has to many mothers, and I take the opportunity tonight to highlight its vital work and support to our community with our most precious assets – our children.
Royal Darwin Hospital is a baby-friendly accredited hospital which supports, respects and encourages the mother’s choice of infant feeding with the staff providing practical education and assistance to breastfeeding mothers as well as advice and support with resources. The baby-friendly health initiative was launched in 1991 by UNICEF and the World Health Organisation with the aim to create healthcare environments that promote breastfeeding. The support at RDH was vital to me as a new mother, and many other mothers have found support from the staff at Royal Darwin Hospital and across Territory hospitals essential in their breastfeeding journey.
ABA volunteers staff a 24-hour helpline parents can call for support when things are not going well. This is of immense support. While the Commonwealth government funds the helpline infrastructure, hundreds of women nationally give their time voluntarily to undergo extensive training and then counsel parents in need. They are available 24 hours a day to provide support and advice. As most parents of newborn babies know, it is often late at night when you need this advice and to have it a phone call away is most valued. I acknowledge and thank all these volunteers, particularly in the Territory. ABA also has a large amount of information online for families.
The benefits of breastfeeding are well known and, although it is a natural mother to baby experience, it is a learned skill and can be difficult at times for various reasons. ABA supports all mothers who wish to breastfeed, whether it is through advice, support or the hire of a breast pump. The association is run by a wonderful group of volunteers. In the Territory, ABA has groups in Alice Springs, Darwin, Palmerston and rural, Katherine and Nhulunbuy. These wonderful volunteers give up their time to support Territory mothers and families.
There is a calendar of events which provides support, information and social opportunities to families. Topics range from returning to work, milk supply, safety, and a broad range of mum’s health topics related to breastfeeding. Local groups work closely with other health and community organisations to create a supportive fabric for our Territory families.
Another valued ABA program is its baby care rooms and ‘breastfeeding welcome here’ venues. These programs encourage mothers and ensure they feel comfortable to breastfeed in public places as they are protected by the law to do so without discrimination. These programs are so important in supporting mothers to get out and about. They also ensure that mothers participate in our community and are not isolated once they have a baby.
My office is a ‘breastfeeding welcome here’ venue and I encourage other offices to do the same. I am proud to be able to work as a parliamentarian and continue to be a breastfeeding mother to a nine-month-old baby. I hope my journey encourages others to continue to breastfeed for as long as they can. The support I have received from the ABA has been wonderful. I thank them for their work and encourage other mothers to become involved in this association to support their journey.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I strongly encourage the government to ensure support through ongoing funding in their budgets to organisations such as the Australian Breastfeeding Association and the Childbirth Education Association.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Nightcliff for a very important adjournment.
It is with a genuinely heavy heart that I speak about a wonderful, kind and generous man from Alice Springs, who tragically died on 14 January this year. Wayne Cullinane - or Wild Wayne as he was known around town - was just 50 years old. He was born in Mount Beauty, Victoria, moved to Alice Springs when he was just two years old and spent most of his life there.
Wayne was a butcher by trade and worked as a butcher until 1987 when he started the business Central Plant Hire. He started with one old truck, a bobcat, and a little desk in the corner of his mum’s lounge room. From there, with a little help, he built the business to what it is today: a successful, diverse business that has sponsored many clubs, organisations, and individuals over 25 years of operation, including the Arunga Park Speedway Association, Alice Springs Off-road Racing, and Alice Springs Karting Club.
Wayne lived for motor sport. As his son said to fellow mourners at the service, ‘If he could race it and get it to go, then he was into it’. He was heavily involved in drag and speedway racing and, in his later years, he became more involved in off-road racing and competed in the famous Finke Desert Race numerous times, including in the extreme two-wheel drive section.
Wayne was extremely well known around Alice Springs for his tireless work in the community and his willingness to assist others. He sponsored many events and individuals over the years and never missed an opportunity to help someone. He was a mentor and a role model to many juniors in a variety of sports from cycling through to off-road racing, and always made time to give junior competitors advice and encouragement in their chosen sport.
Wayne was a happy-go-lucky bloke who was a dedicated father and family man and will be sadly missed by the whole community. He is survived by wife, Sarah, and son, Scott, to whom I extend my deepest sympathy on their tragic loss. It was a tragic loss for the whole community of Alice Springs – someone who was a salt of the earth community member.
In Question Time today, the member for Nelson asked for an update on the quarantine waste process after the closure of East Arm Port incinerator. I undertook to provide additional information to parliament.
While the transition to the new process is not yet complete, I can confirm that the old incinerator was shut down on 2 November last year, and has not been used since. Prior to the close of the quarantine waste incinerator at East Arm Wharf, the Darwin Port Corporation provided the infrastructure to dispose of quarantine waste that was generated by ships arriving in Darwin.
Veolia Environment Australia was the contractor responsible for the removal and handling of quarantine waste generated at Darwin Airport and they engaged the Darwin Port Corporation to destroy the waste generated from the airport. With the closure of the waste incinerator, the Darwin Port Corporation has worked with Veolia to provide a suitable and approved facility to hold quarantine waste arriving in Darwin until an alternate facility to destroy the waste was commissioned.
Veolia subsequently invested in establishing a temporary autoclave waste handling facility at its premises in Berrimah. Autoclave is a form of solid waste treatment that utilises heat, steam and pressure to process the waste. After material has been autoclaved it is rendered sterile, and can be safety disposed of by burial or in landfill. It must be remembered that while autoclaves can be approved for processing materials up to biohazard status, the overwhelmingly majority of all waste collected at our port and airport is food scraps and materials left over from in-flight meals and related packaging materials. The Veolia facility has been approved by the federal government’s agencies, and now the independent NT Environmental Protection Authority.
The final commissioning and operation of the autoclave is still under way and, as a result, there are still a number of containers and waste bins at the port’s quarantine storage yard. Once the backlog of quarantine waste held at East Arm wharf has cleared, which is some 25 containers, the commercial arrangement between the waste generators and commercial waste disposal operators will be finalised. DPC will no longer have any role in destroying or storing quarantine waste awaiting processing. It is said that the Darwin Port Corporation, like the Darwin Airport, will enter into a commercial arrangement with Veolia or any other approved commercial operator for the treatment and disposal of any Quarantine waste materials.
The shutting down of the old incinerator at the Darwin Port created some difficulties in setting up an alternative process, but it was the right decision to make after Labor failed to take the necessary decisions to protect the environment. An environmentally safe, long-term waste processing and disposal was essential and it was disappointing that the previous Labor government failed to make the necessary decision and do the hard work in establishing an alternate process.
We are not yet at the final process but we will ensure that all quarantined material is continually handled and disposed of in an appropriate manner and in a timely fashion that presents no potential harm to Territorians, or to the environment.
Subsequent to that, following up on a query the member for Nelson raised, post Question Time, there are no plans to purchase another incinerator. This is the process we will use under commercial arrangements from here on in; and it will be not be the responsibility of the port from that point of view.
Ms PURICK (GOYDER): I wish to commend the people, and the Litchfield Council, who organised the Australia Day citizenship ceremony at Freds Pass Reserve, as well as the flag raising and the other activities that made the morning a very enjoyable time.
My compliments to the mayor, Allan McKay, and to the Litchfield Council staff for putting on the event; to the Rotary Club and to the Lions people for providing morning tea, and to everyone who made the morning a very successful event. We had people who became Australian citizens; we had Citizen of the Year; the Young Citizen of the Year Awards; the Community Event of the Year; and we also had a commendation and a special presentation.
Citizen of the Year was awarded to Rita Ardley. Rita lives in Goode Road, Humpty Doo, with her husband, Brian, and her daughter, Jessica. I know Rita very well; she is a delightful person and a good citizen. It was presented to her after her extraordinary contributions to many in the rural area and the Top End community for the last 15 years. Her volunteer services have benefited the full spectrum of the community from Aboriginal teenagers, students, the aged, to wives and families of soldiers deployed overseas. Her husband is employed in the military, and has been for many years, and also goes overseas on a regular basis.
Her volunteer activities over this period of time, and probably over a greater period of time, have included:
St Vincent de Paul Society in New South Wales, as well as in Palmerston
Caritas Catholic Mission associated with Taminmin College
NT Parks and Wildlife junior rangers
St Francis of Assisi Primary School
a member of the Queensland State Emergency Service, and the Northern Territory Emergency Service in Darwin, Palmerston and the rural areas
aged care volunteer organisation in Darwin
educating Indigenous teenagers at the Don Dale Juvenile Centre
from 2006 until the present time she has provided a reptile educational awareness program
involved with St Francis of Assisi Humpty Doo school, fundraising for the parish and the annual fiesta
a volunteer teacher associated with the church and the school
helped elderly people by visiting them and giving them rides to church on weekends, or on Sundays; and home, and visiting the sick in hospital
she has also donated and provided prayer books and rosary beads for Christian refugees in Darwin.
She is a delightful person and she gives a lot. She works in paid employment but, obviously, she makes a lot of time in her schedule to help many others across a broad spectrum. It was a much deserved award and I wish her well. No doubt I will see her again in the future. Sadly, she was not at that ceremony; she was interstate, but her husband, Brian, was there to collect the award on her behalf.
The Young Citizen of the Year Award went to a young fellow, Ryan Davis. He really is a true achiever and is a terrific sports person. I am sure he will go on to bigger and greater things in whichever sport he chooses to specialise in.
Each week, he juggles his schooling and a part-time job as well as training, umpiring and playing sports. This, for the beginning of this year, might be his first award, but he is no stranger to achievement and last year he was recognised for being:
Referee of the Year
Players’ Player
Most Improved Referee Award
Year 10 Academic Excellence in Physical Education.
In the past, he:
represented Australia overseas in European handball competition
was selected to play in the AIS challenge for the Under 19s
was selected in the 2013 newly established Centre for Excellence Program in Business and Enterprising
obtained Certificate II in Sport and Recreation through Charles Darwin University.
He definitely is a very worthy recipient of the Litchfield Young Citizen of the Year Award. I wish him well and am sure he will do well, not only in his academic studies but also in all the sports he clearly is excelling in, including refereeing the game.
The community event of the year for the Litchfield Council went to the Berry Springs Markets. You, Mr Deputy Speaker, would know these markets. They have grown from very small and humble beginnings to a market today that is closely rivalling the Freds Pass Market. It is a monthly activity which only started four years ago, but has grown into a venue for locals of the greater rural area. Many of the residents living around the area have commitments to work but they also are keen to put back into the community, so we see at the Berry Springs Markets plants, food, activities, crafts, Friends of Taminmin Library with their book stall every time, and I know that it is an award that is well received in recognition of the hard work they do.
So, congratulations to the organisers of the Berry Springs Markets and I hope those markets and the people associated with them go on to bigger and better things.
The other award for the day was a Commendation Award to Lyn Gerdes. Lyn was acknowledged for her contributions over many years to the rural area in the fields of Friends of Taminmin Library and the Darwin Rural Club. She is also a regular participant at the Berry Springs Markets selling second-hand books to whomever wishes to read them. She has been active along the way helping other people enjoy these activities; she is keen to share her knowledge and she, too, was a very worthy recipient being commended for her community service and activity.
At the Australia Day Awards there was a special recognition award given to Olive Frakking for her long-time contribution and commitment to organising the Australia Day activities on behalf of the Litchfield Council, of course, in association with the Freds Pass Management Board. Her expertise and organisation over the years have ensured that the celebrations on Australia Day outshone those in other areas of the Northern Territory, and people enjoyed their time starting with the fun run, which I know the member for Nelson participates in every year …
Mr Wood: Yes, more than the local member.
Ms PURICK: I am not sure whether he finishes the race every year. No, he does finish the race every year, and last year or the year before the Chief Minister came to Freds Pass and participated in the fun run – 7 am or 6.30 am is just a bit too early for this little bush duck, but I do enjoy going there.
I digress from Olive Frakking, who we are talking about. I apologise, Olive, when I send you this transcript, it is really the member for Nelson’s fault for making me digress.
Olive has not only been a great person, she is a delightful woman from a long-term Darwin family, and lives in the rural area with her extended family. Apart from making sure the Australia Day activities and the function of the day goes off very well and successfully, Olive has also been involved with the Freds Pass Show for many years. We know that is a very popular and successful show and that is mostly due to her working contribution. Organising agricultural shows and community shows is no easy task and she has managed, over the years, to pull it together and put on a good show, and she does it with such a smile. She has retired from that position and I wish her well. She is still around, she is not going anywhere. I know she is happy for people to ring and have a chat and seek her advice.
It was definitely a well-deserved special presentation. It was a mirror personally engraved to thank her for her efforts, and I know she will continue to contribute to the rural community. I wish her, and her husband, Harry, all the very best, and wish them well for the year.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand to correct the record on some issues raised in this parliament and, seeing as the member for Nhulunbuy had the gall tonight to stand up and talk about the power cuts situation in Yirrkala, it is time we got to our feet to correct a liberal use of mistruths peddled in this House.
Firstly, there are a couple of things which I agree with that the member for Nhulunbuy said. Yes, on the Australia Day long weekend the IGA stores at Nhulunbuy and Yirrkala did run out of Power and Water prepaid electricity cards. East Arnhem Trading is a Power and Water Corporation agent for power cards and operates the IGA stores at Yirrkala and Nhulunbuy. It is also true to say PWC was notified on the public holiday – Monday, 28 January - that the IGA stores had run out of cards. Households that were unable to purchase prepaid electricity cards, and had exhausted their emergency credit on their meter, were without electricity until the store restocked at 8 am on 31 January.
I should point out a few truths in all this. Firstly, agents for power cards are responsible for the stock holding and ordering of those cards. I heard the member for Nhulunbuy say tonight - I do not know if I have the quote exactly right, but it was something like this, ‘The IGA gets nothing out of it; he does it because he is a good corporate citizen’.
Unless the IGA has some special arrangement, PWC agents who sell these cards receive an 11% commission. Perhaps the member for Nhulunbuy would like to chase that up and come back to the House and advise if there is some special arrangement. Otherwise, she has been grossly misinformed.
East Arnhem Trading has a standing weekly order of 240 $20 power cards to a total value of $4800. This was reduced from a standing order of 300 cards in March 2012 at the request of the East Arnhem Trading Company. On 24 and 25 January 2013, Power and Water adjusted pre-payment electricity meters at Yirrkala and Gunyangara to accommodate the electricity tariff rises introduced on 1 January. At the same time, the emergency credit limit invoked on those meters was increased from $5 to $8 to take into account the increase in the tariff.
I can inform the House that Power and Water staff distributed - I know the member for Nhulunbuy has asserted this did not occur – the ‘Use less power and make your power card last longer’ brochures. Madam Speaker, I seek leave to table a copy of that document.
Leave granted.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: When it was being distributed to households in Yirrkala, residents who were home were spoken to by Power and Water staff, along with an interpreter who was used to explain the tariff increases.
On 28 January, the public holiday, when Power and Water were advised the IGA at Nhulunbuy had run out of these power cards, by 9 am on 29 January the Power and Water Katherine office prepared an order to send immediately to Nhulunbuy. They contacted Australian Air Express to arrange pick-up. Despite making contact with AAE on three separate occasions that day, they failed to pick up the order with AAE advising at 4 pm they had cancelled the pick-up as the driver had been busy.
Following advice of the failed pickup on Tuesday, 29 January, Power and Water organised an emergency package of power cards to be despatched from Darwin on Wednesday 30 January by diverting a charter plane booked by a Power and Water contractor travelling to Maningrida; regrettably, the plane was cancelled just prior to departure. Unfortunately, due to timing and the end of holidays, an alternative charter plane was not available from either Darwin or Katherine at that time; however, PWC arranged for the emergency package of power cards to be transported on the scheduled Airnorth flight from Darwin to Nhulunbuy which arrived at 9 pm on Wednesday 30 January.
Due to the delay in the delivery of power cards, Power and Water made arrangements with the IGA store, and the essential service contract holder, to enable the store to refer customers to the essential service contract holder, who was authorised to replace the meter with a temporary credit meter, restoring power until power cards could be purchased again. This arrangement was in place by midday on Wednesday 30 January. I have been advised no requests were received by the essential services contract holder for that service.
Later, on 29 January, the owner, Mr Broadbent, who has been already referred to by the member for Nhulunbuy in this place, committed to increasing the standing order of power cards by 40%. The increased order was received late on Monday, 4 February, following a conversation between Power and Water and Mr Broadbent.
The member for Nhulunbuy asserts no one in Nhulunbuy and Yirrkala knew about this power price rise. Does she honestly - after all the crowing the opposition has been doing about the increased tariffs - expect anyone in this House, anyone in the Northern Territory, to believe the people of Yirrkala and Nhulunbuy did not know that power prices were increasing on 1 January? You must be kidding me!
The member for Nhulunbuy is asserting that the people of Gove, Nhulunbuy, and Yirrkala are stupid; that is what she is suggesting. She is suggesting they did not get the message about power price increases. No one in their right mind could possibly believe that everyone in the Northern Territory would not have been aware that power prices were going up, especially given the ranting and raving from the other side of the House.
Unless, as I said before, the contractor for cards in Yirrkala and Nhulunbuy is on some special arrangement, they receive 11% for the sale of those cards, as do the 185 or so Power and Water power card contractors. I cannot believe any businessman - and I am not referring specifically to the IGA in Yirrkala - could not have figured out that an increase in tariffs would mean that people would use their electricity cards more quickly and would require more of them to be in stock. That does not make any sense to me. I have run a business myself, and if you are standing to make money - an 11% commission on the sale of something you know will be in demand – you make sure you have sufficient stock on hand.
The assertions the member for Nhulunbuy has made tonight in this House are either misleading or she has been terribly and horribly misinformed. I suggest the member for Nhulunbuy goes back to the people who are providing her with this information and re-check it because, clearly, she is not getting the message very well.
If the member for Nhulunbuy was a good local member she would have told these people that power prices were going up; she would have dealt with it in a proactive way as a good parliamentarian and a good local member.
The member for Nhulunbuy needs to get a briefing when these things occur, rather than leap to conclusions. I stick by the original comment that she is simply politicising this issue off the back of the misfortune of other people.
Ms FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Mr Deputy Speaker, I speak in this adjournment debate about the scaremongering of this Labor Party. I have spoken in adjournment before about this, and I will speak about it again. I find it absolutely and utterly offensive that the Labor Party continues to scare the people of the Northern Territory. My electorate deserves better than that type of behaviour, and their electorates deserve better than that type of behaviour. They need to think about that.
There must come a point when the Labor Party, as adults, as role models, as elected members of this parliament, cease peddling the lies, deception, and manipulation of information for their own political gain. We are here, as elected representatives of the people of the Northern Territory, to represent our constituents impartially and fairly, and in their best interests.
I felt sorry yesterday for the people who stood at that rally outside Parliament House. My colleagues and I stood there for one hour amongst a group of very angry people, and I felt sorry because they believe the lies being forced down their throats by the Labor Party. I do not know how Labor members could stand there, as proud as they were yesterday, and cause the rage, stress, angst and heartache their voters are experiencing.
I felt even sadder for those who attended and listened with great intent to hear the Chief Minister speak about the issues being raised, but he was drowned out by a tirade of abuse. The firemen this Labor Party professes to protect were silent in their protest and waited to hear our Chief Minister speak. Yet, they were robbed of that opportunity. It astounds me that Labor feeds on the fears of Territorians like fodder. It is unconscionable and downright unprofessional.
I am in my electorate every day engaging in as many activities and conversations as I possibly can. I have a deep respect for my electorate and I would not, in my wildest dreams, lead them down the garden path. When I speak to people about the reasons for our decisions they leave understanding the deplorable state of the Northern Territory’s debt crisis, the state of the Power and Water Corporation, and that Gove was abandoned by the former Chief Minister. People genuinely see how we have been left with very little choice but to make tough, excruciating decisions. You have to believe that politicians are heartless and careless if you think for one second my colleagues wanted to increase power and water prices, registration prices or anything else because we get some joy out of it. If you think that, you are wrong.
It is easy for the public to divorce politicians from the real world, but one must always remember that we, too, are Territorians and we have families and children. We have grandchildren whose futures we want to protect. We have friends who want to buy houses, want to have good jobs, want to go on holidays, and want to make savings. This new chapter in the Northern Territory’s history is being walked by us as well, and we are out there and we are listening to you.
The scaremongering by Labor is shameful. Constituents came into my office and blamed our government for the large increase in a gentleman’s power bill. On inspection of that bill, it was for the quarter ending 3 January. When my Electorate Officer explained to the constituent that the $400 increase to his bill could not be attributed to three days of operation of the new prices, he was confused. The fact is, Territorians are confused. It is not because of us, it is because of the opposition. Labor loves to talk about the housing crisis as if we are the cause of it – the hypocrisy!
They chant as if, in five-and-a-half months, we would miraculously be able to fix the endemic failure in the provision of housing - private, public or otherwise - for Territorians. My colleague, the member for Braitling, is on the job with infrastructure development. My colleague, the member for Brennan is on the job with land release, my colleague, the member for Fong Lim is on the job for public housing. But, if Labor thinks we can wave a magic wand to correct 11 years of irresponsible government, poor planning and mismanagement, then they have to be joking. Shame on you!
We have good stories to tell: the action the Chief Minister took with Gove. Labor sat on this for seven months and did nothing. I am yet to see any evidence from the member for Nhulunbuy as to what she did to compel the then Chief Minister to take decisive action.
Member for Katherine: Yes, that is the missing link, isn’t it?
Ms FINOCCHIARO: Absolutely. Our Chief Minister took decisive action and got results. Today, I received an e-mail from a colleague in Gove; I have no idea as to his political preference, but I suspect it is not our way. I quote from his e-mail, unprovoked:
Further, the opposition have gone on to say that industry was screaming at our Chief Minister to hurry up and make a decision. I want to quote from Alice Springs ABC Radio 783 FM, the morning program yesterday with Nadine Maloney interviewing Drew Wagner, who is the Executive Director of the Minerals Council, and the reporter said:
Mr Wagner said:
The reporter said:
Mr Wagner:
My case in point.
Today I received an e-mail from an Electorate Officer talking about power and water prices.
Senior Territorians who I spend much of my time with tell me that they are glad we have put $1 fares on buses. A staunch Labor voter, and union man, told me, pre-election in the street, that we need to give a value to the public bus service by charging a fee, even if only nominal.
I have no doubt that Labor has lost its way and is desperately grasping at any skerrick of hope it can, but you are ruining people’s lives and causing unprecedented trauma to Territorians for selfish and self-serving gains. Instead of debating initiatives that advance the interests of Territorians and the Territory we spent hours this evening responding to the Wanguri book of lies.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): And now for something different, Mr Deputy Speaker
I will also talk about Australia Day. The member for Goyder has taken most of the information I was going to give to parliament so I will be quick. I will not repeat very much of what she said, except to say congratulations to Rita Ardley, Citizen of the Year, and Ryan Davis, who I know very well, Young Citizen of the Year. I have been to the Berry Springs Markets from time to time and it is a great community event. Lyn Gerdes, received a Special Commendation Award, and Olive Frakking, who has worked tirelessly in the community for many years also received a special award.
I thank the council, Rotary and Lions for preparing the breakfast and morning tea; Ken Brody for being the MC; Legs for playing the guitar and the national anthem; Waldo for doing his bush poetry; the member for Goyder for leading the thong clapping, and the Howard Springs Bakery for making the great lamington map of Australia - a big thanks to Rod for doing that.
In the afternoon we also have a free family Australia Day fun day at the Howard Reserve on Whitewood Road. It is a day when quite a few businesses donate food, soft drink, ice creams and that sort of thing. We had a huge turnout this year as usual.
I thank Maxine and the Howard Springs Volunteer Fire Brigade. I note the member for Goyder has mentioned her brother-in-law, Steve Russell, as being an all-round good guy because he is also on the Howard Springs Volunteer Fire Brigade. I thought I would put that in and I hope the other firies do not go crook because they were not mentioned.
Thanks to the Litchfield Council for providing the PA system and covering the insurance for the day. A big thanks to Arthur Hamilton from Shorelands, for donating the meat; St John’s Ambulance, Greg Payne and his crew, for looking after any injuries that might have occurred - thankfully that did not happen; Ralph Kobestein and Mary, who work at the reserve, for making sure everything was ready for the day; LoCastro Ice Cream which donates ice cream each year; Matty and Jenny Zebben from Matty’s Pies for donating the pies for our cold pie eating competition; and Kotch, who helps put up the Australia Day flag on the poles a week before. He borrowed a cherry picker at a certain cost – I believe a liquid donation was required. Thanks to his partner, Kim, my Electorate Officer, for helping organise everything on the day.
My thanks for the ice cups and ice cream which were provided free by Janet in the Howard Springs shaved ice van; to Southern Districts Cricket Club for helping with the cricket competition; Fin Bins for providing all the rubbish bins; Reidy’s Lures for providing prizes. To the Scouts, and all the women involved with the Scouts, for helping out and keeping the scores going, thanks very much. To my sister, Trish, and her helper, Narelle, for doing the speed scrabble; Phil and Di who come every year to help, even though they do not have much to do, it is always good that they turn up and give a hand when needed. Thanks also to Kim, Belinda, Glenys, Lisa, Annie and others I admit I forget; they will go crook at me but they know who they are, and I thank them all very much for making it such a successful day.
The idea is families can come on this day, they do not pay a penny, they get a meal - a good steak or sausages and bacon and eggs - they get soft drinks, ice cream and can play all these games and win prizes. We play boche, corner hole, speed scrabble and cricket, or if you want you can sit in the shade and have a lovely day. The idea is families can come one day of the year, not have to pay and just enjoy themselves.
We also like the day because it puts Australia Day where it should be; it is not a day that some people use it for - I call it the larrikin side, which is unfortunate. It is a day where we celebrate our love for our country by being together. There are no drunks all over the place, no using the flag for the, ‘I am better than you’, approach for which sometimes the flag is used these days; it is just a nice day. Thank you to everyone who helped out that day.
If people have a chance to go to the library at the moment - I love maps – there is an exhibition on between 11 February and 17 March. I was there while some of the debate was a little boring. There is a book called Mapping for the War in the North. The exhibition is brought to you by the Mapping Science Institute of Australia and the Surveying and Spatial Sciences Institute and it commemorates the contribution Australia’s military map makers made to the defence of Australia’s north in World War II. There is a great range of photographs, a great range of maps, and a great range of equipment which surveyors have used over the time going right back to just before World War II. There are a couple of pictures, one of Basil Stahl when he was much younger working with a surveying group, and I gather he was one of the official photographers allowed to take photographs at that time.
This is the first time he will not be able to attend the Bombing of Darwin ceremony. The book says he was expected to be here but, unfortunately, he is not well enough to travel on a plane. His son has come up and, I gather, has brought some very interesting photographs which will be displayed in the library. I recommend the exhibition to people if they like maps and like to look at the history of maps; it is worth seeing. It is on the top floor of the library.
I would like to talk about something which has been mentioned before. I went to the rally yesterday, and I have been to rallies before, and I agree with the Chief Minister in this case. I do not agree with some of the things the government is doing at the present time; however, it disappoints me that when he was asked to go to the rally the people would not give him a chance to speak. They did not have to agree with him, but Australia is supposed to be the land of the fair go and there should be an opportunity for people to be heard. As I said, people do not have to agree - people do not necessarily agree with me - but that would have been the proper thing to do. People asked him to listen to what the people had to say and the people who organised it should have allowed him to be heard as well.
I do not necessarily agree with many things the government has done; however, this is a democratic country, we have an elected government and it would have been fair and reasonable for the Chief Minister to have been given time to say what he thought. I take note that the firies wanted to hear what the Chief Minister said; that is an area that is important for me and for them.
It has been mentioned that Labor never faced a hostile crowd, well, someone has a short memory. Clare Martin faced a very hostile crowd in Alice Springs during one of the sittings there. I remember being at that protest and it was fairly hostile. We all know Alice Springs is CLP country, and the Chief Minister did address the people there. So, it has been done before.
The only other thing I will say is I did not like what the member for Port Darwin did yesterday when the letter said the previous Chief Minister had resigned. To have a dig at the former Chief Minister was not the right thing to do. We are talking about giving the people a chance to reply, but by gagging that debate and adjourning it, you did not give anyone else a chance to say they do not agree with that. In my case, regardless of the politics of the day, the Chief Minister was the Chief Minister, and we should respect that position. The previous Chief Minister is a very good man and I have always enjoyed working with him. That does not mean I always agreed with him, but he was a good man and a good Territorian at heart. He did his best, and that is all you can ask of someone.
You may not agree with the way he did things; obviously, the government of today does not agree with the government getting into deficit. However, we have not had the opportunity to thank the previous Chief Minister for all the good things he has done. I am quite disappointed that statement from the Speaker was used as an opportunity, to some extent, to stick the boot in by calling him ‘a dead man walking’. That was not good. As the member for Drysdale said, it was not professional. There was no opportunity for reply, which is the argument people are saying should have happened with the Chief Minister here. We should be able to debate issues and, at the same time, listen. It makes us a better country if we do it that way and do not just turn our backs on people because we do not like them.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to talk about spin doctors. Being elected in this parliament in 2008, I was thoroughly educated about spin doctors by the then CLP opposition. They used to throw continual abuse across the Chamber at the government; there were no holds barred and they used to attack hard-working Territorians working with government on the fifth floor. One of the regular, abusive lines they used was, ‘all about spin doctors’. I took an interest in what they were saying and learnt how government works and how the media works.
I learnt the only way government could get a clear message and some clean air in communicating with the electorate through the 24-hour media cycle was to learn the language of the media. The way you did that was to work with media advisors, and I worked with some brilliant people on the fifth floor. I love people I learn from, and I learnt heaps from those people; I learnt lots about the media.
Today, we have the Country Liberal Party government with their own spin doctors. I pay their media advisors respect as they are Territorians with real jobs who are doing exactly what they should be; that is, communicating between government and the media for the public.
However, I will be a little critical about some of the spin doctors on the fifth floor or, in this case, I am going to have my chance to respond to one Adrian Renzi. I refer to the member for Greatorex as the special minister for verbal abuse. One of his abusive lines in debate was, ‘Member for Barkly, I wish I got the chance with Renzi to get you on radio. We would have torn you to strips.’ I advise this House I did regular interviews with Adrian Renzi when he was DJ on AHA – a shock jock - he was a wannabe John Laws. He used some very interesting tactics to try to ridicule you and put you down. One he always went for was statistics. He used to try to drag them out, turn them inside out and make the minister look a fool in front of his audience. He had another irritable tactic where he used to cut you off, hang up, and then continue to make comments about you when you had no right of reply. But that was Adrian; he was a shock jock, and now he is a spin doctor.
I want to make a couple of comments on some of Adrian’s work. I was absolutely disgusted with a media release he wrote for the member for Araluen, Hon Robyn Lambley. It is a statement on a death in Alice Springs dated 31 December 2012. The paragraph down the bottom says:
That was absolutely atrocious. Adrian, you are a disgrace for writing that. You need to rise to the occasion and wake up because that attracted a lot of its own media. It was negative media for your minister, which she deserved, and it was a very bad reflection on you as a public servant receiving a good wage to work for the new government in Alice Springs.
I also challenge Mr Renzi’s media release for, once again, the member for Araluen, Hon Robyn Lambley, which states, ‘the best Christmas present is a strong future’, dated 19 December 2012. Your sentence structure, Adrian, is really poor and immature. I recently received some letters from Grade 5 and 6 at Murray Downs Primary School. They were sensational letters requesting a donation of flags for their school. They could give you some really good tips on how to correct your sentence structure, how to get some more meaning into your sentence, and how to use better grammar. For the kids at Murray Downs and, possibly Adrian if you are interested, a sentence like:
I have not the time to correct it here, mate, but if you have the time, come and see me. Better still, go to Murray Downs because Grade 5 and 6 will straighten you out.
Another sentence I will send to them to give you some grammatical advice on is the sentence in this media release:
Adrian, I believe I have got my message through. It is good to be able to have a fair crack at you because you certainly did your thing over many years on the radio and your mate, the member for Greatorex there, anytime, anywhere; I look forward to the opportunity.
Moving on to the media release from the Chief Minister, Hon Terry Mills, and the Minister for Sport and Recreation, Hon Matt Conlon, on the ‘Sport vouchers hit letter boxes’. That is not a bad media release by Danielle Lede. Good work, Danielle, but you guys have not much of an idea about Tennant Creek because, for a start, we do not have letter boxes. If you had spent any time in Tennant Creek or had come and asked me or sought a briefing, I would have given you a briefing and you would have realised our town does not have letterboxes.
More importantly on this media release, it has caused a bit of controversy because it stated that children enrolled in a region with little or no sporting organisations will have their $75 sport voucher allocated directly to their local school. That is very welcome funding for the school; however, we have many junior sports organisations and senior sports organisations in Tennant Creek. You need to be aware, minister. I will name a few sports organisations in Tennant Creek for you that would benefit from receiving the voucher: Little Athletics, the Australian Football League, Camp Draft, cricket, darts, eight ball, jujitsu, judo, netball, softball, and the famous Tennant Creek Swimming Club.
Minister, I ask you to personally contact Mr Wayne Green who is a parent, a great advocate for sport in Tennant Creek, the President of Tennant Creek Athletics and a great guy who does a lot of lobbying. He has taken up the fight to get the balance right so those $75 sports voucher hit the necessary junior sporting organisations in Tennant Creek. That is Wayne Green, minister, and he has been a great advocate for our kids. He has a beautiful family and he works tirelessly for the juniors around our town. Please contact him, get onto him, and make sure you sort it out because he is having a few dramas with the Department of Education and the Department of Sport and Recreation. Get off your high horse, rise to the occasion as a minister, and contact Wayne Green in Tennant Creek, because I am sure you will be able to learn from him.
There is another media release I would like to comment on, which is from the Chief Minister, Hon Terry Mills, on 17 January 2013. It talks about the Territory enjoying a surge in building, the benefits from major projects, the feeder lines to the economy, building Australia, the Territory record - a 47.4% increase in the year to September, according to the latest ABS figures. These are all Labor Party stories. It is well written by a Liberal media advisor and is a great story to keep boosting that confidence in the Territory.
The Territory Regional Weekly on Friday 25 January 2013 picked it up and ran the story:
He has reminded us tirelessly that he has only been in the seat for five months but he is crowing in these media releases about what the Territory is doing, how it is taking off and what we know will benefit Territory families.
Chief Minister, I love the media release but the message is: stop hurting Territory families. You have this month and next month to do it, we will be very much looking forward to Budget Cabinet and how you will start to support Territory families and not continue to hurt them.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of staff from the Department of Infrastructure undertaking a tour of Parliament House. On behalf of honourable members, I welcome you and hope your tour is successful and enjoyable.
Members: Hear, hear!
ABSENCE OF MEMBER FOR NAMATJIRA
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I advise honourable members the Minister for Indigenous Advancement will be away for part of Question Time this morning. Any questions relating to her portfolio areas are to be directed to me.
MOTION
Routine of Business
Routine of Business
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the routine of business for Tuesday, 19 February 2013 commence at 2 pm and be reordered in the following manner:
1. Prayers
2. Notices
3. Petitions
4. Questions
5. Government Business – Notices and Orders of the Day
6. Ministerial Statements
7. Papers
8. Consideration of committee reports and government responses and the Auditor-General’s Reports
9. Discussion pursuant to Standing Order 92 (Matters of Public Importance).
I do not believe I have to be on my feet for a long time to explain this; this is to allow for the acknowledgement of an important component of our history in Darwin, the dreadful and awful bombing by the forces of the Japanese Empire on 19 February 1942. We commemorate that every year as we intend to do on 19 February, which is the day in question. The reordering of business will enable those commemorations to be conducted so all members of this honourable House can participate in those commemorations accordingly.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Port Darwin. Obviously, the Commemoration of the Bombing of Darwin is a very special day in Darwin. This is a very sensible rearrangement of the notices for 19 February, and the opposition welcomes the change in the Order of Business for that day.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): In closing debate, thank you very much for the opposition’s support.
Motion agreed to.
MOTION
Broadcast of Parliamentary Proceedings
Broadcast of Parliamentary Proceedings
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that, unless otherwise ordered, this Assembly authorises the broadcast, rebroadcast and televising of all or portions of the debates or proceedings of the Assembly or a committee for the purposes of section 23 of the Legislative Assembly (Powers and Privileges) Act, in accordance with the following provisions:
1. Recordings and broadcasts may be made only from the Legislative Assembly sound and vision monitoring system, unless otherwise approved by the Speaker or his or her delegate, and in accordance with guidelines determined by the Speaker from time to time.
2. Recording and broadcast of sound and vision of committee proceedings are subject to any conditions or restrictions agreed to by the committee.
3. Broadcasts of excerpts shall be used only for the purposes of fair and accurate reports of proceedings, and shall not be used for:
- (a) political party advertising or election campaigns;
4. Reports of proceedings shall be such as to provide a balanced presentation of differing views.
5. Excerpts of proceedings which are subsequently withdrawn may be broadcast only if the withdrawal is also reported.
6. Excerpts must be placed in context. Commentators should identify members, at least by name.
8. Where excerpts are used on commercial networks, the stations should try to ensure that advertising before and after excerpts is of an appropriate nature.
9. Where the audio excerpts of the proceeding are used on television, their use may be that of audio over still frames or overlay material.
10. Any other conditions determined by the Speaker.
11. Non-compliance with the guidelines listed above may incur penalties imposed by the Speaker.
I shall not be on my feet for long to discuss this. This is part of the government’s commitment to let the public know what is going on in this House. This was discussed by the Standing Orders Committee and unanimously agreed to by all members in the committee. The motion before this House ensures the public are, in a fair and balanced way, able to see what their parliamentarians are doing. This is a good thing.
We live in an age of modern communications, and the electronic media needs to communicate with people beyond the ability of people to attend this House and watch what is happening from the public galleries. As a consequence, this gives a fair and balanced proposition to this House and the media, and we anticipate the media would use any material made available under these rules within the parameters as described.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend this motion to honourable members.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Mr Deputy Speaker, as the member for Port Darwin said, this was brought up through the Standing Orders Committee which the member for Nelson is also a part of. The opposition, Independent and government members all support this motion about ensuring our parliament is broadcast. This is very similar to what is already on the website - the Speaker’s Rules - and it is a slight tidying up of language. We want to ensure parliament is broadcast and people have access to it. It is not always as interesting as Question Time but what happens in this parliament is always important. We will be debating some bills later today, and a ministerial statement, GBD, and it is good that it is broadcast.
Mr Deputy Speaker, we support this motion.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the motion. It is important people know what is happening in this House.
I am disappointed the government has scrapped the broadcasting of Question Time through Territory FM saying it is available through streaming live on the Internet. As one who used to work outside, I still have trouble working out how I stick the computer on my tractor.
It is a mistake because many people listened to Question Time using the radio and will now miss out on that opportunity. It is all good to say these are modern forms of communication, but the reality is wireless - I am not talking about WiFi but the normal wireless people use in their car, their workplace or just sitting in a park - enables people to listen to Question Time. It might sound a bit strange, but many people listened to Question Time on the radio.
The move by the government - I know it was looking at cost cutting for the reasons they have given many times - was a bad step because it will not fulfil the intention of this motion before us today as well as it could have.
Territory FM is broadcast over a fair part of the Northern Territory. It was an opportunity for people who cannot have the benefits of using the Internet or viewing the live streaming as the alternative. People will miss out and that is a downside of one of the changes the government has brought in.
By all means we should be, as far as possible, promoting in the community that people listen to what is going on in this parliament. People need to hear what their local members are saying, what the policies of the government are, and what the policies of the opposition are. For many people who are busy, and live a long way from this Parliament House, the only way they can hear at least some of that debate - that is, during Question Time - is over the radio.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the motion but I am disappointed that Question Time is not being broadcast on Territory FM. That was a backward step by the government.
Mr CONLAN (Tourism and Major Events): Mr Deputy Speaker, I pick up on a couple of comments made by the member for Nelson. I question the viability of broadcasting parliament on Territory FM. The reach and audience it had has been looked at over a number of years.
It did not go into Alice Springs. You talked about it going all over the Northern Territory or large parts of the Territory. I also question that. I just asked my colleague, the member for Katherine, whether it was broadcast into Katherine, and it was not. It was not re-broadcast into Katherine. It was not broadcast into Tennant Creek. I am almost certain you could not pick up Question Time from the Territory FM broadcast into the Barkly region, or Central Australia into Alice Springs. It was a Top End indulgence which came at considerable expense.
I understand your concerns about the rural area, but it is an FM frequency and FM frequencies do not travel very far. You might pick it up about 50-60km away. Once you pass that, it is gone. How you can hear it when you are on the tractor anyway, I am surprised. Maybe you had your headphones on.
I understand what you are talking about. I would love to hear it on radio, as radio is in my heart and my soul. I love the medium and I would love to see a robust radio service throughout the Northern Territory. However, in this case, it had run its course.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this move to cease the broadcast of parliament. We need to move into the best form for all Territorians and capitalise on the best efficiencies, that is, through the Internet.
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank honourable members for their support. I understand what the member for Nelson is saying. From time to time, the reality of government is that it has to balance the value of money spent on a project with the potential outcome. I do not want to be seen to be bashing up radio stations, but even radio today is undergoing a substantial change in the nature of the industry.
The move away from amplitude modulation to frequency modulation in the 1980s caused a stir at the time. Prior to that, of course, there were the old MW frequencies, which are the short wave frequencies, and, prior to that, we were standing around with our crystal sets trying to pick up information.
The nature of communication is changing. Digital radio is changing the industry. The Internet - I think everybody in this room was born before anybody had ever heard of the worldwide web - is now such an intrinsic part of our lives that the iPhone and such technologies are an essential part of our being. Technology moves on and, from time to time as a government, you have to make decisions to support that technological change.
The broadcast that is available to people is available through the Internet. The Internet is now sufficiently well accessed by the community as to be able to rely on it as a broadcast medium. Unfortunately, a decision - I think it was about $50 000 a year - had to be made. Whilst I am sympathetic to your arguments, I am also sympathetic to the position that if we do not move along with the times we will continue to be using chamber pots and buggy whips to this day. It just does not happen.
As I said, I do not want to be having a go, but we, as a government or as a parliament, want to get our debates into the public domain. The idea of broadcast through radio has been pretty much caught up with. For our purposes - and I am not saying other purposes - with the Internet and the various devices people now have access to, if they are interested, with very few exceptions, I suspect we have sufficient broadcast capacity to get what we want, as parliamentarians, into the public domain.
Motion agreed to.
CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT (ASSAULTS ON WORKERS) BILL
(Serial 11)
(Serial 11)
Continued from 4 December 2012.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Deputy Speaker, the opposition understands this bill fulfils an election commitment as part of their proposed stand on law and order matters. Of course, we all want and expect to feel safe in our workplace and to ensure workers can go about their lawful business knowing they have the full protection of the law. Indeed, any government has a duty to do all it can to protect its citizens from violent crime and ensure those who commit crimes are dealt with adequately and appropriately.
Everyone should respect people who are working, in particular workers dedicated to serving the public. Sadly, there are those who do not respect workers, so we need laws which provide strong consequences for those people. We, on this side of the House, have examined this bill thoroughly and have some reservations that, in its haste to meet an election commitment, it has been rushed and not thoroughly or properly tested.
There seems to be a reluctance on the part of the new government and the Attorney-General to use the mechanism which the former Labor government used on occasions, which was to provide, where a change of legislation was significant, an exposure draft so all interested stakeholders could review the legislation and provide feedback to government, with the potential to include drafting amendments to achieve a better result and workable legislation in the best interests of Territory citizens, especially when they are at work.
It is difficult to discuss this bill in isolation knowing the next bill for debate is about amendments to the Sentencing Act and mandatory sentencing. I do not know when that bill is coming forward. I thought it would be today but we have had no word so ...
Mr Elferink: Tomorrow.
Ms WALKER: … perhaps it has been pulled for some amendments. That bill which we will discuss, as the Attorney-General is telling me, tomorrow, is another CLP election commitment.
There are many who believe that adequate laws are already available to the courts to impose appropriate sentences for serious assaults. That is the stand we will be taking, along with defending the competency and capacity of our judiciary to make the call on appropriate sentences with all the facts at hand. Anyway, that will come on tomorrow.
On this side of the Chamber, we are more focused on outcomes. That goes to the heart of prevention of crime occurring in the first place. We are especially mindful that by far the majority of assaults causing harm, on workers in particular, are all too often alcohol- and/or drug-related. That is why the previous Labor government introduced measures to restrict access to alcohol for problem drinkers, and, in 2008, introduced tough penalties and no second chance for serious violent assaults. That is why we worked with police and the hospitality industry to tackle alcohol abuse and assaults by drunks in our nightclub precincts.
It is, sadly, ironic that the new government put drunks back on the streets, opened up the rivers of grog and then introduces mandatory sentencing to lock up offenders after there is a victim who has suffered harm affecting their health and wellbeing.
It is another poorly-thought-through election commitment to promise to dismantle the Banned Drinker Register and replace it with nothing nearly six months after its axing, which is a stark example of a government failing in its duty to protect its citizens by effectively removing a measure which was working and showing results ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: Oh, it was not.
Mrs WALKER: There are a number of people who will attest to that, if not the member for Katherine. The retiring Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Richard Coates, in an interview which appeared in the NT News on 28 January on the subject of alcohol, described Labor’s alcohol reforms as radical and recognised they were one way of curbing violence in Aboriginal families. I quote from his interview:
There were some early signs the reforms were working in Alice and Nhulunbuy.
- I think that was something worth continuing with and it’s a shame it has been ceased. Perhaps this other plan the CLP government has got will address that but I’m not really sure what the nuts and bolts of their idea is.
No one is sure what the nuts and bolts of their idea is for replacing the BDR with whatever measure that might be, other than we know we have many people back on the grog, back out on the streets, fuelled up on alcohol, and committing violent crimes against innocent Territorians, be they workers or otherwise.
It is not only the DPP and members of the legal fraternity the CLP continues to ignore, it is Territorians. There was a brilliant letter in the Letters to the Editor yesterday, which was tagged as the letter of the day from a Ms Maria Woodgate of Alawa who puts in a great case as to why the CLP’s argument is incredibly weak. She said:
- When Robyn Lambley, Dave Tollner, et al. claim that the BDR wasn’t working, what they mean is that it wasn’t a 100% deterrent. That is probably true, it didn’t work 100% of the time.
It did, however, manage to prevent a large number of chronic alcoholics from accessing alcohol as indicated by the NT government’s own data ...
I will not read the whole letter but it reflects the sentiments that have inundated the Letters to the Editor page, talkback radio, and just about every forum I have been a part of.
The Australian Labor Party, more than any other political party, has always held the health, protection and wellbeing of workers as central to our values, in stark contrast to the CLP. That remains a core part of our being, most recently witnessed by our support for workers fighting against draconian industrial relations powers that stripped away workers’ rights, particularly those of young workers and, most recently, reform to national occupational health and safety legislation. It was good to see the many unions and their members and, no doubt, other citizens who were not necessarily union affiliated, rallying to send a message to the new government yesterday. They were described by the member for Greatorex during Question Time as ‘grubs’. Well, is that not a real compliment to Territorians from a member of the CLP government?
That rally was not only about their rights as workers but, more importantly, those people expressed their grave concerns about the slashing of government spending to essential frontline services intended to protect the health, safety and wellbeing of Territorians.
The Labor Party has always worked to send a clear message that workers are entitled to a safe workplace and to go about their lawful business without fear of assault or any other harm. With this history, we would be supportive of legislation that built on previous work to provide a safe workplace. We would be open to that if there was more evidence of broad community consultation and support for the detail of this bill. Unions NT, for instance, has heard nothing of this proposed legislation and how it might protect their members.
I am very interested to hear from the Attorney-General what level of consultation has been taken beyond the consultation sessions conducted in November last year and a general overview of the proposed changes in a paper that was available online through the Department of the Attorney-General and Justice. I note - as I did in debate last year - that these face-to-face sessions were held in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine and Darwin, but not in Nhulunbuy. I would like to hear from the Attorney-General as to why four large communities in the Northern Territory had the opportunity for face-to-face consultation, yet the community of Nhulunbuy, bigger than Tennant Creek, was not privy to this consultation. There may be other consultation channels I am not aware of which I look forward to the Attorney-General sharing with us when he closes the debate.
Basically, the opposition cannot and will not support the bill in its current state. We suggest to the Attorney-General that he withdraw the bill and consult more broadly on what the bill seeks to achieve and how best to meet that end: consultation with workers, employers, unions and community groups affected by this legislation and, importantly, with the legal fraternity to try to understand what exactly are the inadequacies of the existing legislation.
This legislation had its beginnings in the premise that workers in the service of the communities - ambulance officers, nurses, teachers, taxi drivers and the like - deserve a high level of protection. In particular, there is a deterrence factor of strong mandatory minimum sentencing which will follow to help prevent assaults on workers. We know this is coming on tomorrow.
The Attorney-General, in his second reading speech, highlighted assaults on taxi drivers. I well recall, as I am sure we all do, the taxi drivers’ snap strike on 8 July last year in Darwin. It was a protest about the levels of violence invariably inflicted by intoxicated persons. I applaud taxi drivers for taking such a strong stand and sending a very strong message to the community and the government that they would not tolerate violence in the course of their duties, nor should they.
When drivers of commercial passenger vehicles are already singled out within the provision in section 188(2)(fa) is there a perception taxi drivers are not already covered? It says commercial passenger vehicle drivers are already included.
While we can see the legislation brings a strong punitive element to the sentencing of offenders causing physical harm, we do not see that the link with prevention is well-established, especially when alcohol is involved and impairing the judgment of individuals. This was highlighted during the taxi drivers’ strike with commentary around the fact drivers were, rightly, sick and tired of being targeted by drunken hooligans.
We acknowledge, as I said at the outset, that the CLP went to the 2012 election promising to be tough on perpetrators of assaults on people providing a public service. Indeed, the Attorney-General’s second reading speech quoted the Chief Minister directly, promising to:
- ... impose a mandatory minimum prison sentence of three months for anyone convicted of assaulting a person who provides a public service in the Northern Territory and causes them harm.
We understand the argument that this was an election commitment, and you will claim a mandate for this legislation, which I have no doubt will be passed regardless of what I or anybody else has to say.
However, the bill before us goes much further than what was suggested by the Chief Minister in July 2012. The bill seeks to broaden the definition of ‘worker’ to include any worker who is performing their lawful duties, whether they be a butcher, a baker or even a candlestick maker.
I see the inclusion specifically of ‘volunteer’ in the list of workers, so I ask the Attorney-General whether this means, for instance, a volunteer representing a political party has some recourse when assaulted verbally and nastily by a torrent of abuse from another member - let us say at a polling place - who has seen fit to deliver a tirade of abuse. I would like him to address whether it constitutes assault and explain where psychological harm fits into this picture. I know the former member for Araluen, Ms Jodeen Carney, was a proponent of recognition of psychological harm, recognising that this kind of harm can and does manifest in physical suffering which can lead to loss of earnings, quite apart from the psychological damage.
The bill goes further still; it includes contractors, the self-employed, volunteers, apprentices, trainees, and work experience students. I am pleased to see work experience students included in the list. However, are sex workers covered under this bill? I would like to hear from the Attorney-General where sex workers fit into this bill.
What of members of parliament? I note that section 188(2)(e) of the Criminal Code Act includes a member of the Legislative Assembly, the House of Representatives or the Senate and if the assault is committed because of such membership - I guess because it has been in the news very recently about the member of Port Darwin, who was assaulted in the lead-up to the election. I am very sorry he went through that. I can imagine it would have been extremely stressful and distressing, completely out of the blue and, no doubt, a source of stress for his family. I would feel exactly the same. However, I do not know if those two individuals realised who it was they were assaulting. I would like the Attorney-General to provide a little more detail for me on where members of parliament sit in this, and whether politicians are listed as a separate category, given we have others listed there. Maybe not.
The CLP seeks to pass legislation that is much broader in scope than that which they promised, and employers, employees, and the community more generally should have more opportunity to understand and comment on how it will work in practice, as their representative bodies: their unions and the Chamber of Commerce which deals with employer and employee matters.
To give one example around a lack of consultation - I throw this one out from left field - we are not aware of any consultation with the sports sector to discuss the application of this law to cover umpires, whether they be paid or unpaid, and other volunteers who assist with the administration of support who, in the heat of the moment, may find themselves on the receiving end of a blow, for instance. How will these changes affect them and how are they different from the protection that is currently available to them?
I move on to another point. We are very wary of the apparent side effect of diminishing the heavy weight of a higher penalty for assaulting a police officer going about their potentially dangerous work on behalf of the community. On my reading of this legislation, it elevates the maximum penalty for serious assaults on any worker to the same as that for assault causing harm to police. These are listed in section 189A in Part VI, Division 5 of the Criminal Code Act.
In elevating that, it will mean if the victim - this is any worker, not just police - suffers harm and the offender is found guilty on indictment, the penalty is seven years’ imprisonment. If a person is found guilty summarily, the penalty is three years’ imprisonment. If the victim does not suffer harm from an assault and the offender is found guilty on indictment, five years. If the person is found guilty summarily without harm to the victim, imprisonment would be two years.
Community standards might expect the requirement of very strong deterrents for assaults on police higher than for other categories of workers. I would like to hear from the Attorney-General on that front, especially after yesterday’s discussion of the bill before the House around amendments to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act. We both commented on the dollar values which are attached to victims’ injuries, and that those values can be seemingly arbitrary and almost macabre. What price do you place on varying degrees of injury to an individual following an assault? In that same vein I maintain that the current section 189A, specifically for assaults on police, is somehow devalued - noting the exception, however, that there are provisions that remain in section 189A(2)(b), which recognise that should an officer assaulted suffer serious harm the offender is liable to imprisonment for 16 years.
Most people would agree that police, firefighters, ambulance and health workers, and public transport workers deserve a high level of protection through the courts, more so than other occupations, because of the degree of risk and exposure. We call on these workers to provide services on the front line. They are, as we all know, working very frequently with intoxicated or drug-affected people. There is an argument that offenders assaulting them and causing harm should face a higher penalty, but I am not sure your amendments do this.
We are concerned with the linkage to the mandatory minimum sentencing for all of the reasons we will be outlining tomorrow, including the complementary Mandatory Minimum Sentences Bill which will provide for at least three months’ gaol where the victims suffer harm. It is very difficult to talk about this bill without making reference to the bill which will come before the House tomorrow.
I will go to my close now. I had some comments about mandatory sentencing, but it is probably more appropriate that I hold on to those until tomorrow.
In his second reading speech the Attorney-General said all Territorians should be assured that when they go to work they will be protected by the law. They are already. We support that notion. We want to know what evidence from experts - not what evidence from the experiences of the member for Port Darwin as a police officer for many years or somebody with a law degree – there is to the contrary.
We are of the view this is rushed legislation to help make the CLP appear tough on crime to fulfil an election commitment. At the same time, as we know, they have recklessly abolished the Banned Drinker Register, put drunks back on the streets to bash partners, fight amongst themselves, and harass families and workers going about their lawful business.
Labor has always proudly supported a safe environment for workers. We certainly support tough penalties for assault on workers, but we believe there should have been far more consultation and consideration of the very broad application of this bill and how it will work in practice.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I look forward to hearing what other members have to say about this bill. I know the member for Nelson is going to speak on this bill and I am interested to hear what other members from the government benches have to say about it. I can only conclude by saying that the opposition does not support this bill.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, there is no doubt we become concerned when workers are bashed. I certainly support tough sentencing for people in those positions. The first paragraph of the Attorney-General’s second reading relates to an assault on 8 July 2012 when a taxi driver was bashed. He said that the government reacted to that intolerable level of violent behaviour towards them. It became one of the CLP’s promises that they were to introduce an offence into the Criminal Code Act which carries a minimum three-month prison sentence for an assault with circumstances of aggravation against anyone who serves the public.
I cannot support this bill because it is so closely associated with the next bill. Whilst I do not have a problem with the government saying it wishes to protect workers - the definition of workers is a good one - I have some questions about who a worker is. A worker is defined as a person who carries out employment-related activities in any lawful capacity, including an employee, a contractor, a subcontractor, an apprentice or trainee, a student gaining work experience, a volunteer, a self-employed person, and a person appointed under the law in force in the Northern Territory to carry out functions or to hold an office.
In the last paragraph, the Attorney-General said this – I will paraphrase slightly – goes some way to ensuring all workers in the Northern Territory should feel safe and protected when they go to work each day or night. That should be the case. However, I went to some briefings, and I thank the minister for allowing me to have a briefing.
What I believe we need to do if we are to bring in this legislation is to bring in the evidence that, under present laws, people are not being punished sufficiently. We are saying to the magistrates and the judges that they are not sentencing people who committed assault to a reasonable sentence that relates to the seriousness of the crime. That is the question I asked during the briefing, Attorney-General, and that information has not come to me.
In a court case, before you condemn someone or find them not guilty you hope the evidence is there so you can make a rational decision about whether someone should be found guilty or not guilty. In this case, I am asked to support a bill for which I do not have evidence - I only have the second reading - and I did ask for evidence. Some of the evidence I asked for was what the punishment was for the person who assaulted the taxi driver. I do not have that evidence either. That is one of the reasons I cannot support this bill.
The other reason I am concerned about it is I do not know whether real discussions were held with judges and magistrates regarding this law. If they are giving out adequate sentences, then this is a slap in the face to them. If they are giving out adequate penalties, then why are we introducing this? Are we saying if a person who had just assaulted a taxi driver, a bus driver, or the girl behind the counter in a Macca’s store came before that magistrate or judge they would not consider that was a very serious offence and, accordingly, sentence that person to something that recognised the seriousness of that offence? I cannot imagine any judge would be letting someone off for bashing up a taxi driver or a bus driver.
The Attorney-General might say, ‘You are wrong, here is the evidence’. Well, the evidence was not presented to me in the second reading, nor when I asked for it last week. I have not received anything which could give me a belief that present sentencing is not adequate. A number of people in the government have told me ‘we are overregulated’. Well, this seems to be a duplication of existing legislation and, without the evidence, seems to show we are duplicating legislation unnecessarily.
I do not have a problem with the idea of bringing in this new concept of a worker, but I do have a problem with this being associated with the other bill and, to some extent, this bill saying magistrates are not providing adequate sentencing, because that is what people sometimes think. We need to inform the public of what is the actual case.
As I said, I understand where the government is coming from and I make it clear that I support tough sentences for assaults on people who are in the workforce serving the public.
The government is talking about mandatory sentencing - we will get into this debate tomorrow - however, can anyone tell me if anyone under the influence of alcohol and drugs will really care what the sentence is? Maybe when they are sober they might but, unfortunately, people get drunk and forget all the good promises they might have made that they were not going to lose their temper or get into trouble. This is an area that needs debating. Will this make any difference to that person? Will they be back reoffending? I understand we should punish a person, but part of that punishment period is also, hopefully, rehabilitation. A broader approach is not being manifested in this debate about why that person is drunk or on drugs.
I raised the question today about the possibility that the government might scrap the SMART Court. I really hope the government does not scrap it, at least for the time being, until an independent audit of the appropriateness and effectiveness of that SMART Court can be done.
The government has scrapped the BDR. The statistics in relation to the BDR had nothing to do with the scrapping. It was opposed in the Assembly by the opposition, now government, before the statistics came out. When they scrapped it they said, ‘We have found the secret statistics and that is the reason we scrapped the BDR’. They did not support it from Day 1. I do not have a problem with that, but to use the statistics is a latter-day excuse. The fact is they did not agree with it.
I did not believe it would work because of secondary supply, but it should have been allowed to run for an adequate term so an independent assessment could see whether it had some effect. It was never going to be the be-all and end-all of alcohol problems. It was one of a series of approaches any government should try. The problem with the discussion about alcohol in our society is that it is so tied up with party politics. It is a shame because it is such a serious issue for all members of this parliament and for Territorians.
Where, in this debate, are we getting at the underlying causes of why the taxi driver was bashed? I have asked time and time again which government will stand up and say drunkenness is not an appropriate behaviour for people. It seems we support people being drunk as long as they do not stand in front of a car. We do not mind them being picked up. We make all the excuses in the world such as get a Sober Bob. The message means you can get drunk and, as long as you have a Sober Bob, it is all right. There is no question about whether drunkenness is appropriate or is something we say is okay as long as you do not drive. That is something no government wants to tackle because behind all this is big business. It is big business with the Australian Hotels Association and the breweries, and sponsorship of sporting groups.
The underlying issue is Australian society is influenced and used by big business for the sale of alcohol. Go to any party – I am not a drinker and not saying people should not drink – and find the odd person who gives you an orange juice. How many people have a beer or a wine? It is normal today. I do not have a problem with that, but there is no effort to say it is infiltrating our society so much we are not willing to look at where it is heading.
There have been some documentaries on television recently - it is not just in this country, this was in Britain - where people drink at home and are just about at the point of being drunk and then head off to the nightclubs and get well and truly sloshed and cause problems in places like Mitchell Street. I have been to Newcastle and looked at the changes to reduce violence in the CBD of Newcastle. Who opposes those changes the most? It is the AHA and the government, whether it is a Labor or Liberal government.
Those changes have reduced the number of people presenting at Newcastle hospital considerably. You can get on the website and find what that experiment has done. The closing times, things like not having shots after a certain time or saying you cannot leave a pub after 1.30 am - you can stay in a pub until 3.30 am, but you cannot do a pub crawl - all those things have made big changes.
Who puts pressure on the government to turn that around? It is the AHA because they do not accept it. They believe pubs will lose business. There are big players in this game.
When we look at this small bill there does not seem to be much effort in asking why that person was drunk or drugged out of their brain. We know most violent offenders in our prisons have been affected by alcohol. It is still sad that, whilst people jump up and down about the BDR, they do not accept the fact that the government was trying. It was expensive. It went for just over 12 months. If I was a statistician looking at broad trends, there is no way I could believe you could say that experiment either failed or succeeded.
When the now Opposition Leader was discussing this issue when she was in government and she started to use three-monthly figures, I said you cannot use three-monthly figures, it is far too short, and you cannot use 12-monthly figures; you would have to use at least three years’ worth of figures. Statistics need a fair length of time before you can make value judgments as to whether things are effective or not.
That, of course, does not take into account the anecdotal evidence from people in relation to less humbugging around shopping centres. There will not be any statistics for that. You have to rely on what people say. I have some papers on what people have said about less humbugging around Fannie Bay shopping centre. One of the Aboriginal organisations, AMSANT, also said they believed there had been a reduction in that sort of behaviour. They did not have statistical data to prove it, but they said anecdotally, from people they have talked to, there had been changes.
I slightly digress, but, to some extent, this is window dressing. I understand the government made a commitment and it would hate to be seen to not fulfil a promise. However, I want good law. I want law based on statistical analysis that this law is, first of all, needed and, secondly, will be effective. I do not have that evidence today. It is more about fulfilling a political promise rather than showing us that existing laws are not working, and proving this law will be more effective in stopping people from bashing workers.
That is why I have trouble with this legislation. It is not because I do not support tough sentences; they might already be given tough sentences. I do not have the proof to show that is not the case. I will not support a bill that sounds good and looks good but in reality is duplicating something that is already happening.
The other issue, of course, is about who are workers. The member for Nhulunbuy mentioned that. I have raised this question previously with the Attorney-General about the role of someone on a sporting field. In my case, I umpire. You get a few dollars for umpiring so, technically, I am a worker. If someone clobbers me as an umpire, normally they are reported. But, in this case, do they fit into this realm and get three months’ mandatory sentencing for clocking me?
What about another player? What about players in A Grade in the Darwin AFL? They get paid for playing football. If one player assaults another player, is that person liable for three months’ mandatory sentencing? Do they come under clause 188A?
I raised this issue during the briefing; I have been told that a nurse working on a remote community would not be a worker once they left the clinic and went home. The point is, I know from living out bush that nurses - especially if there is only one - are on call 24 hours a day. It is not quite as bad, but when I lived at Daly River the nuns were the nurses. On the weekend, I could bet my bottom dollar they were at the clinic pulling fish hooks out of people who had misguided casts with their fishing line. They should have had the weekend off, but they were in the clinic looking after people.
If someone is assaulted at home and they are a nurse - say a nurse is assaulted on a remote community - are they like a policeman, for instance? Would a policeman at home off duty who is assaulted fall under this regime as well? I use the nurse as a similar proposition, not so much in Darwin but on a remote community where that person would be the only one who would be available if someone was sick or injured. ACPOs would be a good example. Are ACPOs off duty once they go home? These are not meant to be mischievous questions, Attorney-General, but they need some clarification when you are giving your response.
Mr Deputy Speaker, as I said at the beginning, I understand where this legislation is coming from. I support tough sentences, but I have no evidence to prove existing sentencing has not been adequate. I do not believe any judge or magistrate in their right mind would give a lenient sentence to someone who has just bashed a taxi driver doing their job. I believe this is a duplication of legislation. I understand it has this part which pulls together the definition of ‘worker’; I can live with that. However, overall, the legislation is duplicating something. I have no evidence to show it is different to what we have at present.
Debate suspended.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Member for Greatorex
Member for Greatorex
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I seek leave of absence be granted to the Minister for Sport and Recreation, Mr Conlan, for 14 February 2013, which is tomorrow. Mr Conlan will be attending a peak interstate conference in the best interests of Territory sportsmen and women.
Leave granted.
PETITIONS
New Workers Village on Rural Blocks
New Workers Village on Rural Blocks
Mr WOOD (Nelson)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I present a petition not conforming with standing orders from 1212 petitioners relating to the new workers village on rural blocks. I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- We the undersigned, respectfully ask that the Minister for Lands, Planning and the Environment does not approve a workers camp, housing 248 people, on two blocks on Stow Road presently zoned Rural Living (RL) as this is not the appropriate zoning for this type of development and there is other land more suited for this development.
Commercial Crabbing in Bynoe Harbour
Mr HIGGINS (Daly)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I present a petition not conforming with standing orders from 1083 petitioners relating to commercial crabbing in Bynoe Harbour and all its tributaries to Dundee Beach. I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- We the undersigned, amateur fishers and visitors, call on the Northern Territory government to ban commercial crabbing in Bynoe Harbour and all tributaries to Dundee Beach.
CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT (ASSAULTS ON WORKERS) BILL
(Serial 11)
(Serial 11)
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I respond to the debate here today. I thank honourable members for taking the time to do some homework and receive briefings on the bill before the House. It was quite correctly identified by the members for Nhulunbuy and Nelson that this is an election commitment of the Northern Territory government and the Country Liberal Party. Moreover, not only an election commitment, but it was pointed out, I believe by both members but certainly by the member for Nelson, that we will claim a mandate to bring this legislation before this House. Indeed, it would be remiss of us not to because not only do we have the mandate, but we were elected, in part, on the basis we would fulfil our promise to protect workers in the Northern Territory.
I confess to some surprise at the Labor Party’s determination not to support this legislation, considering that a little over 24 hours ago they were standing in front of a group of unionists saying how much they care about workers in the Northern Territory. I am mystified that, within 24 hours, their support for the working people of the Northern Territory evaporated in a puff of cynicism and political opportunism.
We all remember the circumstances that led to the announcement of this policy. However, this policy has certainly been in my mind, and the minds of a number of other members of the government, for a number of years. I harken back to the Northern Territory government when Dr Peter Toyne was the Attorney-General. It was forced into a place where the Criminal Code Act needed to be amended for what Dr Toyne, at that time, called the Good Samaritan bill.
However, Dr Toyne was a decent and upright fellow and he knew he had to respond to pressure from this party, the Country Liberals, because we were trying to force through the parliament legislation which would be protective of certain types of emergency workers and ambulance officers, if my memory of that bill in 2005 holds true; in fact, I believe it was about 2004. At least Dr Toyne had the courtesy to acknowledge his bill was based on the work being done by the Country Liberals - particularly me - in this area. Whilst it was not quite on all fours in what I wanted in protecting emergency workers, it was sufficient to underwrite the need.
The history of this policy dates back the best part of a decade as far as I, and the Country Liberals, are concerned. I draw members’ attention to the debates on Thursday, 15 February 2005, when the government of the day finally capitulated and allowed workers legislation to be changed to protect what they called Good Samaritans.
I walked away satisfied that had been done, but it was always in my mind’s eye, despite those improvements, that legislation could be cast even further. I do not recall exactly when it was, but the amendments to the Criminal Code Act in relation to police officers were also something I was driving in relation to assaults on police officers.
To put this bill into some context is useful for members opposite. I see the world very much through the lens of an economic prism. I am a liberal by disposition - and I mean that philosophically – and a Country Liberal by party allegiance. Seeing the world through an economic prism means one of the greatest things you can do for a person is protect their capacity to generate income for themselves. This, by the way, does not put me at odds with the union movement at all; I expect unions would also believe that was an important principle. The capacity to go to work and labour - they have a party named after it on that side of the House - and labour for the good of your family and yourself, for the shelter of those people who are close to you, and for your economic independence is not only an important place, I would go so far as to say it is a sacred place.
I have used that expression on a number of occasions in support of this legislative instrument, and I continue to use it because it is the place where you provide for yourself, contribute to the community not only through the services you provide as an employee, a self-employed person, a volunteer, or any other definition before the House at the moment, but by your excess productivity being paid to the community of the Northern Territory, as well as the community of Australia, by virtue of the fact your productivity generates wealth for taxable purposes. Of course, that does not apply to volunteers but, generally speaking, that is what the place of work is.
I heard the comments from the member for Nelson that people are already protected. Yes, that is true, they are protected. However, reflecting the philosophy I am trying to describe, the workplace, in particular, is something we should throw a shield around as much as we can. The intent of this legislation is to build a shield around the workplace to make it as safe a place as possible.
I pick up on the comments of the member for Nhulunbuy where she seemed to assert there was no plausible link between punitive responses by the state and prevention of crime. I disagree on that point. Our whole criminal justice system is predicated, in part, on the assumption that if you commit a crime you suffer a punitive response from the state and, hopefully, that would prevent people from committing those crimes. That is why we fine people, put people in goal, why people are brought before the courts - so they can undergo some punitive response from the state. Not only that, but to use them as an example for the rest of the community, to say to that community, ‘If you do these wrong things, there will be a punitive response from the state’.
Thank God the vast majority of people adhere to that principle. In fact, the vast majority of people do not commit crimes because they are just decent and upright people. Nevertheless, there are, doubtlessly, many crimes not committed by virtue of the fact that people are scared of the consequences of committing those crimes.
Therefore, the punitive nature of the penalties described in this bill before the House is aimed at reinforcing a greater resonance amongst the minds of people so that, if they do commit assaults on workers in the workplace, they will face more serious sentences by virtue of the fact that a person has gone into that workplace, has done something that causes harm unlawfully to another person, in circumstances that qualify as an assault and, as a consequence of that, will be held accountable for their actions to a higher level than if their victim was merely a person on the street.
That is not to lighten or in any way diminish the seriousness of assaults generally, but to place a greater emphasis on those assaults of people in the workplace. We have done it for policemen, we have done it for Good Samaritans, and now the Northern Territory government proposes to this House – hopefully, with the support of the majority of the members in this House – to do it for people who provide for themselves, their families, and their loved ones. I do not see why there is a difficulty with that principle in the member for Nelson’s mind.
In rereading the contribution of the member for Nelson in the Good Samaritan legislation in 2005, I note he supported the legislation at the time. He said:
- I support the bill, and thank the member for Macdonnell ...
... for introducing it in the first place.
Something has changed in the member for Nelson’s world view because at that stage he was prepared to accept there was the requirement to fulfil a community expectation in legislation. There was no evidence in that debate provided by Dr Toyne - or by me for that matter - on how people have been dealt with by the courts in the past, and what statistical evidence supported the introduction of this legislation. All he said was, ‘Yes this sounds about right’, because he was a man in touch with his community.
Now the CLP is in government and the member for Nelson makes less of an impression than he did in the past. All of a sudden, governments have to satisfy his need to provide him with voluminous statistical evidence to support the requirement for legislation.
I do not think the member for Nelson has lost that much touch with his electorate and the people of the Northern Territory, at least I hope not. Surely, on the face of it, he would concede that people in the workplace would like to know that workplace is taken extremely seriously by the government of the Northern Territory and, as a consequence of being taken seriously, we pass legislative instruments which support that belief.
I get what the member for Nelson is talking about. I am just surprised he is no longer prepared to accept there is a public expectation. I used the quote yesterday in the condolence motion that sometimes the truth is better than just the bare facts, or words to that effect. That is exactly the sort of thing I am talking about.
I want to deal with issues raised by both members. The first issue raised by the member for Nhulunbuy was in relation to the offences being adequate. I heard and understand the argument, but the former Labor government went down a similar path, specifically in relation to police. If the principle is that all assaults are dealt with in a generic fashion, then her criticism of this bill must resonate as a criticism of singling out police officers or Good Samaritans for special treatment. If that principle does not hold true because she supports singling out police officers or Good Samaritans, then there must be something different about workers in general where she is prepared to make a distinction between the Labor government’s policy in relation to police and workers in general. That, however, does not concur with her assertions that she believes in protecting workers’ rights.
There is a philosophical inconsistency with the approach she has taken. I reject it on the grounds that workers should be protected. Who would ever have thunked that in a parliament of Australia anywhere, it would have been the conservative forces of darkness, from the Labor Party’s perspective, that were championing workers’ rights over and above the party?
The second comment I make is that, because of the lack of critical capacity in attacking the bill, to fill out time I suspect, the member for Nhulunbuy went down a number of different paths which had substantially little to do with the bill.
I believe in a broad range of debates. I listened carefully, and one of the things is this hoary old chestnut about putting drunks back on the streets - that the CLP put 2500 drunks back on the streets. They were never off the streets. If they were, can you please tell me where you put them. If you had put them somewhere and they were not on the streets, I have not seen any line item in the budget from former governments as to where they had put these drunks. As a consequence of that, you clearly squirrelled away some money somewhere which has been able to house 2500 people off the streets. We did not see them at all during the operation of the Banned Drinker Register. Of course, everyone knows those 2500 people were never off the streets.
In that 2500, because the government was so anxious to demonstrate the success of their failing program at the time, they started to include all sorts of people such as drink-drivers, rather than the core problem drunks who infest our parks and gardens. Those core problem drunks who infest our parks and gardens were never off the streets, and they were only 800 in number.
I remind honourable members that during the last year of operation of the protective custody legislation in the Northern Territory, a little over 20 000 people were apprehended. The following year, with the operation of the BDR, it was down to about 19 900. There was a difference of 300, which is not statistically significant. In truth, the former government continues to be misleading in this area.
What Mr Coates had to say was not supported by the assault rates. The assault rates had gone up over the period of the operation of the BDR. That is supported by the statistical measures put in place by the former government. It was not a deterrent in any fashion, and the data/models put together by the former government did not support it.
We get on to the issue of consultation. I appreciate the Labor Party is utterly beholden to the unions, but when you advertise in a newspaper, travel the full length of the Stuart Highway in the Northern Territory to have numerous consultations in the process, it is a pretty poor organisation that is not able to read a newspaper, telephone the office or whatever else. Even the communication between the Australian Labor Party and the union movement must be pretty flimsy if they are not able to pick up a telephone and speak to the union movement.
We are not beholden to the union movement. We believe it is full of quite clever people who are capable of organising coming to a public event when it is advertised in the newspaper. What do they want, a gilt-edged invitation to each union member? It is just nonsense.
I thank the member for Nhulunbuy for her kind words about the assault on me; I will pause on this briefly with a couple of things. Even if this legislation had been operational it would not have been applicable in that instance because there was no injury to me at all. I daresay, at the tail end of that series of events, the injured party was probably the assailant.
The police officer legislation is still stronger in the area where serious harm is caused, and so it should be; police officers endanger themselves on a regular basis in protecting us.
I pick up the comments in relation to sex workers. Where a person is engaged in their employ and that conduct is lawful they will be protected. For argument’s sake, if a sex worker is registered with the NT Police - and that is what they do - the legislation will apply to them if the conduct is lawful. It will not apply to a person engaged in unlawful conduct. If a person is engaged in unlawful activity then it will not apply, nor should it because we do not want this legislation protecting a drug dealer who makes his or her largest form of income selling drugs in our community. That is the borderline in relation to that issue.
A political volunteer working for an organisation - so long as that organisation is aware this person is doing volunteer work for them - will in every likelihood, and in normal circumstances, be protected under this legislative instrument. Why should they not be, no matter which political party is involved? We would see and expect that political volunteers would be protected so long as the organisation they were working for was authorising them to do their job. You cannot say a person is a volunteer when the organisation they are volunteering for is unaware they are doing that work for them.
I believe that covers most of the issues, but I also want to touch on the member for Nelson’s contribution in relation …
Ms Walker: Why no consultations in Nhulunbuy? You have not answered that.
Mr ELFERINK: Okay, consultations in Nhulunbuy. It was not on the Stuart Highway. We looked at the expense …
Ms Walker: Oh, so we are second rate. If you are not on the Stuart Highway, you will not get consultation. Shame on you, John.
Mr ELFERINK: I believe that you, the way you have conducted yourself in decisions surrounding …
Ms Walker: Gapuwiyak mob …
Mr ELFERINK: All right, forget it!
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Nhulunbuy, allow the minister to continue.
Mr ELFERINK: We looked at the expense of having a consultation there. People still had every opportunity to make contact with my office or the Attorney-General’s department. I believe the Northern Territory News goes to Nhulunbuy. Does it? Yes, it does. Okay, so it was advertised in Nhulunbuy.
Ms Walker: You could not afford to get out there but Gove residents have to get on a plane to come in. Good on you!
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order! Member for Nhulunbuy!
Mr ELFERINK: Now we have gotten over the sensitivities of the member for Nhulunbuy …
Ms Walker: The people of Nhulunbuy, let me be clear.
Mr ELFERINK: The member for Nhulunbuy ...
Ms Walker: The people of Nhulunbuy ...
Mr ELFERINK: Oh, goodness gracious …
Mr McCarthy: Semantics, minister, you are big on semantics - Stuart Highway semantics.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr ELFERINK: For goodness sake, what is wrong with you people? What is wrong with the Labor Party in the Northern Territory? You are so angry, it is incredible ...
Mr McCarthy: You used to sit here not so long ago.
Mr ELFERINK: At least I knew what I was doing. All I hear is anger. It is seething, dreadful anger coming from you.
The Leader of the Opposition’s office alone, evidenced by what I read in the paper today, demonstrates you guys have completely lost it ...
Mr McCarthy: Do you have a glass jaw, man? You can’t take it? You dished it out for four years when I was over that side.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! The minister has the call.
Mr ELFERINK: So angry, Madam Speaker. That is the one thing I said the Labor Party always does so much better than people on the conservative side of politics; they are much better haters. Gosh, they can hate in a way incomprehensible to me. It drives them; it is the fire in their furnace. I cannot imagine how you can sustain any form of happiness when your sole motivator is such a deep-seated contempt for all that is not of your opinion. However, I digress.
I pick up on the comments of the member for Nelson in relation to sporting contests. The member for Nelson mentioned he was an umpire and, should he get struck in the role of an umpire …
Mr Vowles: Big chance, Gerry, big chance.
Mr ELFERINK: I am not going to reflect on the potential for that. If he is a volunteer for an organisation, or being paid for that service, and the person is found guilty of an assault which injures you and causes you harm, yes, this will apply. You are a volunteer in that structure of serving an organisation, namely the - is it AFL you umpire for? There you go. Yes.
In regard to the sporting contest, the issue was raised in relation to professional sportsmen as well as people who are paid for doing it and that type of thing. I draw honourable members’ attention to Graham Blockland, Criminal Laws: Northern Territory, Federation Press, page 233 where the comments were made as follows:
- Consent would be a defence to a charge of common assault under section 188 arising out of a case of tattooing, body piercing, footbinding or other types of personal adornment. Similarly it would be a defence to a charge of common assault arising out of so-called ‘rough horseplay’ or violent sports. Section 187(d) of the Criminal Code specifically provides that an application of force is legal ‘if in the course of a sporting activity where the force used is not in contravention of the rules of the game’. This suggests that an assault will be committed if the application of force is outside the rules of the game, such as a deliberate blow on the football or soccer field. However, it is arguable that players of such sports accept that the rules will be breached on a regular basis and that not every infringement will amount to a criminal act.
It, basically, says when I run onto the Rugby field I accept that, from time to time, I will suffer some type of conduct against me which is outside the rules of the game. However, that does not automatically follow it amounts to a criminal act. To test that would be a case-to-case issue. For argument’s sake, let us say a high tackle I have on occasions in the past accidentally performed in playing football - not happy about it; it is a reflex action. Somebody is running past you, you throw your hand out and it is a high tackle, you are penalised, the whistle blows. If you read the Criminal Code Act literally that would potentially be dealt with as an assault. However, that assault requires something called mens rea. I draw members’ attention to the Criminal Legislation of New South Wales, page 324, 2001-02 edition, where it says, ‘mens rea of the offence’ talking about assault:
- In order to establish the offence it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove a specific intent to cause bodily harm, it is sufficient that the accused intentionally or recklessly assaults the victim and actual bodily harm occurs.
That is Crown v Williams.
The reason I read that is that for an assault to actually be an assault, there has to be an intention, more than just a reflex action. If someone breaches the rules in a game of football, you blow the whistle, it is outside the rules, but it was a reflex action, it was part of the rough horseplay outside of the rules of the game, but does not qualify as an assault. But there comes a point ...
Mr STYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Mr ELFERINK: I thank honourable members. If there is evidence to demonstrate a person had stepped outside of the rules of the game to such a degree as to become criminal in their conduct, then you would have a criminal assault, at which point, if it was a professional footballer or even a semi-professional footballer, they would be protected by this legislation, as they currently are for any other form of assault. If, by way of example, one player walks up behind another player on the field and starts punching him in the back of the head, the person drops to the ground, he then kicks him a few times - I realise that is a fairly extreme example – clearly, that is not rough horseplay or anywhere near the boundaries of the rules of the game; it has taken on a criminal quality.
To determine what is a criminal quality in those sorts of circumstances is a matter for the courts to determine. Evidence will be adduced from witness statements and any other forms of evidence that are available, and a court will determine whether or not we are talking about the rough horseplay contemplated in the case I cited earlier, or if there was some form of criminal conduct that amounted to something more than a mere breach of the rules of the game. I hope that satisfies the inquiry from the member for Nelson.
I want to also touch quickly on remote workers. Yes, it applies to them if they are engaged in the course of their duties. If a remote health worker, for argument’s sake, is mowing their front lawn and somebody jumps the fence and belts them because they do not like the sound of the lawn mower, that is an assault. But if somebody stubs their toe on the other side of the fence and the health worker assists that person - essentially in their duties as a health worker - basically, we would call it a call-out in the old vernacular. I am sure you have been in remote communities where police officers, nurses, and even chalkies have been called out for different reasons. If it is in the course of their employ then, yes, it will protect them. That is the idea.
I want to finish with some observations about the comments of the member for Nelson, which were observations on the appropriateness of drunkenness. This is probably one of the stark differences between me and the member for Nelson. The member for Nelson would, essentially, create a moral code by which the consumption of alcohol is in some way wrong; that we should not do it as something we do in the course of our daily activity ...
Mr Wood: No, no.
Mr ELFERINK: Well, he is sitting there saying no now, but he was starting to talk about the way we drink alcohol publicly and all those sorts of things, and the message is all wrong ...
Mr Wood: The word was ‘drunkenness’.
Mr ELFERINK: It was drunkenness. Okay, well, drunkenness. I do not care if people get drunk; it does not bother me in the least. I am not going to moralise about it. It is their conduct whilst they are drunk that I am interested in. If a person sits in their lounge room and drinks a bottle of tequila every night, that is their business; it is not for the state to walk into their home and dictate terms to them in what is considered to be a generally acceptable social product. They have health outcomes that come from that; they are answerable and should be responsible for those health outcomes.
We regulate liquor to a degree in the community, and different governments around the world respond in different ways. We respond differently to the way the former government responded. We also believe there is room for the regulation of sale and supply of liquor in our community because we have a Liquor Act. What we will refrain from doing is moralising about people because that, ultimately, leads to the experiment that was tried in the 1920s in the United States. All that really achieved was the establishment of organised crime in a way it had never been established before ...
Mr Wood: Are you saying I am promoting prohibition?
Mr ELFERINK: You can explain yourself if you like, but the point is, that is where you end up going. Either that or you have to be a lot clearer about the things you say, member for Nelson.
Getting back to the substance of this bill, I have dealt with each of the points made, I hope, by members opposite. I realise they will not be satisfied with that.
Madam Speaker, I return to the start point that this was a commitment we made to the people of the Northern Territory. It was a commitment which, when articulated, was welcomed. When the bill was brought into this place it continued to be welcomed, particularly by those in the taxi industry, but also more broadly. I believe it will continue to be welcomed by workers throughout the Northern Territory. I remain somewhat surprised and disappointed that the party which is supposed to protect workers’ interests is walking away from this for no other reason than they have to find a point of difference, no matter what that is.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I know there are rules about speaking to the third reading, but there were issues raised during the debate which required some response, especially the issue of drunkenness which has now somehow moved from me not liking people drinking alcohol, to me supporting prohibition. Nothing could be further from the truth and there was no intention of that being the case.
What I said is that governments seem to be too scared to say to the community that drunkenness is not something we need to support as a society for health reasons; there may be moral reasons as well. Also, as a society, do we condone drunkenness as something that is of great value in our community? I have nothing against people drinking, but you have to look around and see the problems we have in our society today. Are they based on just having a couple of beers? No, they are not. They are based on people generally being drunk.
This issue goes back to the very reason we are here today; that someone was bashed in a taxi. The minister has not come into this parliament with details of the case. I have to presume the reason this person was bashed was because someone was either drunk or under the influence of drugs.
We have so many people before the courts for violent offences because they commit them when they are drunk. When people are sober, they can generally restrain themselves. However, when drunk they bash police, and smash doors and shop windows. Sometimes young people get into all sorts of trouble - unwanted pregnancies. Often, these sorts of things relate to an overuse of alcohol.
I have never said people should not be able to drink. My daughters would be into me straightaway. They love a bit of red wine, but they do not get drunk. It is a matter of balance in this debate.
It is like whether you like gambling or not. I like a gamble. I go to the pub and put a couple of dollars on the dogs on Friday nights. However, I do not have a gambling problem. It is the same with alcohol; it is a matter of keeping things in perspective. That is what I am saying. No one seems to take it seriously. Part of the problem is governments are scared of vested interests which believe having some restrictions or putting forward ideas that will say that certain ways of behaviour such as being drunk in public are not what we should be promoting.
I have been to Mitchell Street; I have had the tour. I said before, tell me what the vodka room is all about. It is all done up in purple, it has boom, boom, boom, boofy music going. It is about selling grog. I do not even think there was any food in the place. Let us get real instead of just pretending; it is about selling grog and making profits, and that is what the big companies and the Australian Hotel Association are all about.
Who cares? They do not really care about drunkenness. They might make some statements every now and then about responsible drinking. However, the point is we have a problem and that is reflected in the number of people in our prisons. It has been said many times that 80% of people in prison are Indigenous and most of those people are in there for violent offences caused by alcohol.
It is not something we should just pass off as me saying I do not want people to drink. I am saying we need to promote balance and responsible drinking. We used to have a campaign in the Northern Territory which pushed responsible drinking, and that seems to have faded away in the past.
I have to race upstairs because I do these things by myself these days, but the bill in 2005 the minister was referring to was passed, and I did make some comments about it. Regardless, that was eight years ago and, hopefully, one of the things I do working in parliament, reading about various things and talking to other learned people, is learn; I am not static in my views.
I am just reading the front page of this book by Dean Mildren. There is a foreword in there from Hon Robert French, Chief Justice of the High Court. He refers to a Justice of our Supreme Court, Justice Martin Kriewaldt. There was a Professor Geoffrey Sawyer who described Justice Martin Kriewaldt, after he died, as ‘possessing the virtues traditionally in the Anglo-Australian judiciary: learning, wisdom, uprightness, fair-mindedness and a profound sense of public duty’.
I thought learning as you go along allowed you some latitude when it comes to your views on something you might have done or said 10 or 20 years ago. This book - I will probably raise it tomorrow - talks about mandatory sentencing in 1933. Well, it was scrapped in 1939. Someone changed their mind. How terrible!
I hope what I am doing while I am working in this parliament is learning and trying to bring a bit of wisdom. I am certainly not proud enough to say I do not make mistakes. Sometimes, I might have made bad decisions. I am not saying this was a bad decision, by the way. I am just saying if people are challenging something I did years ago that might appear to be different now - and I will have to go and study this matter because I only heard it from the Attorney-General just now - then I will be regarded as a lump of concrete with no ability to move outside the square.
This is an important debate. It is about the way we sentence people and the way we look after workers. I agree that workers should be looked after. All I asked is if the workers can be looked after under the existing law, and if people have been bashed or assaulted on the job, have the offenders been sentenced properly? I have not heard of any major appeals by the DPP, the independent arbiter, on whether some of these sentences are adequate.
The legislation sounds fine and I understand why the government has brought it forward. However, that is not a good reason for legislation which duplicates what we already have. I understand where it is coming from and am not knocking the concept of what has been put forward. I find it difficult to believe that saying there is too much drunkenness in our society and that we need to bring things back to a level where you say to people, ‘By all means enjoy yourself, but do not go too far because when you go too far we see what is happening’, is wrong. This legislation reflects that.
It is unfair of the Attorney-General to put that spin to it. It is not what I was about. Other people can decide what they thought I said, but it certainly was not that. As I said, we will have more to debate on the other bill and I will reserve some of my comments until then.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I believe we are debating my motion to seek leave, but for the purpose of this, it is fine.
To fill in a blank - and I ask the indulgence of the House in a third reading speech - the member for Nelson asked some questions about matters which had drawn some public attention.
I can report to the member for Nelson, regarding the article published on 8 July about incidents involving taxi drivers, that no charges have yet been laid but I believe the police are still in pursuit of a suspect in that matter.
In the article from 13 August about a taxi being stolen, there was no conviction of assault. If there was a complaint, there was not enough evidence to sustain a complaint of assault. However, the person in that instance was convicted of unlawful use of a motor vehicle, failing to pay a taxi fare, and behaving in a disorderly manner in a public place and was fined a total of $600. There was $120 in victims assistance levy.
The article published on 18 December, where a taxi driver was bashed and robbed, allegedly, in Nightcliff - we have been advised three individuals were charged with robbery in company, a very serious crime, and that matter is currently proceeding through the courts. Of course, we expect the courts to deal with the matter thoroughly and professionally, as they do. I hope that gives some information to the member for Nelson ...
Ms WALKER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I have a few procedural matters. The first is that during the debate following the second reading there was no opportunity, either in yesterday’s bill or today, to ask whether it is the will of the House to go to committee stage. We have missed that opportunity to speak. I was going to speak in the third reading debate but, obviously, the Attorney-General jumped quickly and deliberately, such that he got the call ahead of me. I have missed that opportunity to make comment and I see that as a very deliberate attempt on the part of the Attorney-General to gag debate.
Mr Elferink: If you cannot get off your backside that is not my problem.
Mr WOOD: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I believe the member for Nhulunbuy stood at the same time as the Attorney-General and the Attorney-General was giving an explanation rather than a third reading speech.
Madam SPEAKER: Attorney-General, was it an explanation?
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, I am more than happy to allow the opportunity for the member for Nhulunbuy to speak. She can put away the victim mentality. I jumped to my feet because I had some information to give to the House. I have no problem with the member for Nhulunbuy contributing to this debate. There is no villainy on my part as far as the member for Nhulunbuy is concerned.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nhulunbuy, do you wish to provide further comment?
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I wanted to say a couple of things. The first is the abuse and misuse of alcohol has a very important part in this debate. I do not accept the wrist slap from the Attorney-General that it does not. He knows only too well it does. I am flabbergasted by his dismissal of the remarks of the retiring Director of Public Prosecutions on alcohol, whom I quoted from the Northern Territory News interview he did. I am very surprised by his comments.
I also want to make it very clear that the principle of this bill is supported on this side of the House, from the party that has always stood up for workers’ rights and legislated for workplace health and safety and many other things that have supported workers that benefit everybody, not just those who are union members. We were very clear that what we did not support was a rushed bill that had not been thoroughly consulted on. We support the principle, of course, as anybody would, about supporting workers in their line of duty to be protected against assault.
On the subject of consultation, I am very disappointed and quite angry about the response about why the electorate of Nhulunbuy is not entitled. We are talking about the third biggest community in the Northern Territory, home to more than 4000 people. But, we are not on the Stuart Highway so we should just read the NT News. I can tell the member for Port Darwin that many people in Nhulunbuy do not read the NT News. They do, however, read the weekly newspaper, The Arafura Times. The Chief Minister has just discovered it, with a letter sent to our editor last week which was a very good use of local media to communicate directly with people. So, do not lecture me about people reading the NT News and seeing the ad and, presumably, Gove people have to book a fare and get on a plane to Darwin to attend the consultations.
Member for Port Darwin, a return air fare to Gove is approximately $600. For two to three officers from your agency I would say that is affordable in the interest of a government which says it is representing all Territorians, not just those on the Stuart Highway, and looking after those who are in larger centres, and even in centres where there happens to be a Labor member of parliament. Do not do this! It is offensive to the people of Nhulunbuy that you have ruled out their opportunity and their right to be consulted. I suggest to you next time there is a round of consultation, if you can get to Tennant Creek and Katherine, you can get to Nhulunbuy.
Madam Speaker, our position on the bill remains the same: we oppose it. The consultation has been poor and it has been put together poorly.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I will participate in this debate. We have to really deconstruct what is going on here. It is the government’s process to get their legislation through, and we all appreciate that. The new Attorney-General has brought to this House five bills that headline that the CLP is tough on crime: ‘Listen to us, we have a conservative vote behind us and we are tough on crime’. That legislative process is going through.
As I have said in this House many times, I consider myself still a new parliamentarian, and I learn off those experiences. I am not going to lean on this chair and swing the glasses around, because I did not like that part. However, I did like the member for Port Darwin’s contributions in opposition, whether they were intellectual, vindictive or deceitful. Whatever came, I learnt from it.
Therefore, it is rather alarming to see the Attorney-General so precious now, and trying to twist the semantics around, when he has an opposition which is demanding answers to questions and taking on board the legislation, pulling it apart, and deconstructing it for other Territorians who are interested in this. It is a bit precious, and I am a little disappointed in the member for Port Darwin after having learnt so many lessons over four years in this House.
This legislation is vastly different to Labor values. As the Territory knows, the CLP, in its DNA, has a very punitive approach. However, other jurisdictions globally are shifting and moving away from a purely punitive approach. I could sing a couple of versus of Botany Bay and how this nation, under its white contact, was established. Globally, people are moving away from a punitive approach. The member for Nelson researched in the United States different models of corrective services. He has outlined those to me on many occasions. I am very interested in alternative sentencing and alternative approaches to corrective services.
However, the CLP is going down this punitive road with these bills rolling out one after another. I am looking forward to the debate tomorrow on minimum mandatory sentencing. I encourage the new Indigenous members of parliament to take an interest on the journey they are going on with CLP punitive policy. It stands to account that 82% of the prison population is Aboriginal and 60% of those offences relate to alcohol and assaults. If you do not continue to fight for contemporary, innovative, alternative sentencing, then we will continue to gaol Aboriginal people, particularly, in the Northern Territory. You are going down this road with your Attorney-General.
We are being preached at from the other side that, ‘The Northern Territory voted and they threw you out and put you over there’. Actually, there were four seats in the bush that changed hands. Now, we have the new Aboriginal liberals and they are going down the road with the new Attorney-General.
I remember the new Aboriginal liberals from the Country Liberal Party saying in this House in the debate around alcohol, ‘We have brothers and sisters and we feel the pain’. Well that is right. I have had family members locked up too and we feel the pain.
You are going on a journey that will be quite revealing and confronting because you are signing up to a punitive policy which will clog the courts, fill the gaols, and deliver a lot of pain and hurt to Aboriginal families. I ask you to start really questioning what you are doing in this judicial area. I am going to ask you to question a lot of policy delivery from the Country Liberal Party over the term of this parliament, particularly in this judicial area.
I go into the Barkly and I try to deliver a good discourse, get people talking, to discern between the policies - what is different about the policies. There are alternatives. It does not have to be about, ‘We will solve crime because we are going to bang them up’, because, from a global perspective, we know that it does not always work.
If we look at one innovation that alternative sentencing brings, it is the new orders that were developed under this previous government. However, the violent offences were not captured in that; they were still outside of that legislation. It was a real attempt by government to look at keeping people out of gaol. The violent offences were very challenging, and the Aboriginal justice agencies were one of the loudest groups to lobby me, when I was minister for Corrections, to incorporate the assaults into the community custody order and the community work order.
I did not have success in that debate and, as a government, we decided we would continue to look at it. We wanted to go in a methodical, systematic way, to look at the new era in corrections rolling out, to start to get empirical evidence around it, which the Attorney-General demands with his statistical analysis of issues in the Northern Territory, and we were going to prove it.
However, we are spinning back the other way. We are going to the right, ‘We are going to bang them up. Let us just gaol them and they will learn their lesson.’
If we talk about a minimum sentence of three months, ask yourself, people who have been in the custodial system, and the prison officers, ‘What can you do with a person in three months other than isolate them in a cell, alienate them, and then talk about what we are going to do with them after that?’ The policy is preaching to the conservatives, ‘We are the good guys, we are the sheriffs on the white horse, we are going to lock everyone up who looks sideways at us, then we will deal with it later’.
This is the minimum mandatory sentencing aspect to the legislation ...
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! There is nothing in this bill about minimum mandatory sentencing. I draw your attention to House of Representatives Practice page 374 to 375 where, in a third reading debate the scope of the debate is more restricted than the second reading stage - which the member was welcome to engage in, but did not - being limited to the contents of the bill; that is, matters contained in the clauses and schedules of the bill.
Mandatory sentencing is not mentioned in this bill or any manifestation of it. I remind the honourable member he is restricted to the bill in his third reading.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Barkly, could you please restrict your comments to the bill and the technical aspects of the bill.
Mr McCARTHY: Madam Speaker, I thank the Attorney-General for his advice in parliamentary debate. Do you see what I mean? Always learning, whether it be intellectual, whether it be informative, or just pure vindictive and insightful, or a new level of trying to gag debate, because I believe I am hitting a nerve. I believe – and this is directly plagiarising the member for Port Darwin because he uses this psychology regularly in opposition where he tries to really get in your head and start to really twist it around - I am hitting a nerve. He does not want me talking to the Indigenous members like this. He really is concerned, ‘Do not think too deep about this’. Let us talk about this again tomorrow, Attorney-General. Let us talk about this philosophically. Let us talk about the difference in policy.
I am talking about legislation and I am trying to outline the differences that policy brings to this House and your very determined effort, as was mentioned in the media release on the eve of the first parliamentary sittings for 2013 which, basically, says the CLP will have a significant focus on law and order with five pieces of legislation to be passed, and it is all about making the Territory a safer place. Well, as parliamentary members, we have to question that. I ask all members of this House to participate in that process, particularly the new members of the CLP. The Aboriginal liberal members of the CLP need to start really questioning, ‘Where is this taking us? Have there been examples of this before in the Territory?’
I go back a long way in the Territory, I can talk about the CLP of the 1980s and 1990s. Are there global issues? There are many examples where we can look at alternative sentencing and we can look at alternative approaches, particularly around Indigenous people.
Madam Speaker, it has been an opportunity to participate in the debate, and I thank everyone for the opportunity.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Policing in the Northern Territory
Policing in the Northern Territory
Mr MILLS (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Madam Speaker, I wish to make an important ministerial statement on policing in the Northern Territory - to serve and protect. The Territory’s finest are, without doubt, the men and women of our police force. It is not possible to adequately describe the dedication, professionalism and ability Territory policemen and women bring to the job, but I will give it a go.
They are counsellors, psychiatrists, referees, protectors, educators, listeners, teachers and disciplinarians. They are prepared to put their lives on the line for us. They will go to extraordinary lengths to ensure our safety and if you have been involved in an accident, in most cases, your police will be there first to help until the paramedics arrive. They are, truly, very special Territorians. Forgive me if I repeat some of the historical information from the official police website.
The Northern Territory has had a permanent police history dating back to 1870 when Paul Foelsche and six other police officers arrived in the Territory. It was a small rural constabulary or part-time force that had existed earlier that was disbanded. The Territory was then under South Australian control, just as the Northern Territory Labor Party is now under the control of Canberra. The town of Palmerston, which is now the city of Darwin, was founded by William George Goyder, Surveyor-General of South Australia. In December 1869, the Governor commissioned Paul Foelsche, a corporal in the South Australian mounted police stationed at Strathalbyn, to be the first sub-inspector of police at Palmerston. He sailed for Port Darwin soon afterwards.
Like their predecessors, the rural constabulary at Escape Cliffs, the first detachment of police at Palmerston, had, as their first responsibility, the maintenance of law and order in the community known as The Camp. The main settlement area was on the harbour waterfront near what is today Stokes Hill Wharf.
With the discovery of gold near Pine Creek in 1872, the police found themselves with never a dull moment. Stations were established at Adelaide River, Yam Creek, Pine Creek, Roper River and later at Daly River. The first police fatality occurred in 1872 when Mounted Constable Davis, a noted swimmer, disobeyed a local standing order and had a swim in the sea and was eaten by a crocodile.
Since 1955, when 80 police officers were employed, the size of the Northern Territory Police Force had grown significantly in line with the population. Today, the establishment is more than 1200 sworn police, auxiliaries and Aboriginal Community Police Officers.
In April 1961, five women were sworn into the Northern Territory Police Force. This was the first time women were permitted to become Northern Territory police officers. The five women paved the way for many other women who have also contributed significantly to the policing profession since that time. At that time, their duties were limited but, by 1978, women were being employed with equal opportunity to male officers.
The landscape of policing has changed significantly over the years due to the considerable efforts of women and men within Northern Territory police since 1961.
This government is putting an extra 120 police on the beat: 20 in Alice Springs and 100 in the Top End. The 20 frontline police positions allocated to Alice Springs have already been created. These police will not be sitting behind desks, they will be on the front line where they are needed. Territorians can work out for themselves whether crime rates are falling or rising.
My government trusts the people of the Territory so we have started releasing the crime statistics as promised. This is in contrast to the Labor Party, which kept secret the rising crime statistics. Still, that is perhaps no surprise since they select their candidates in secret as well.
However, let us get back to the crime stats. The next quarterly release for the December 2012 quarter will occur in the third week of this month. Of note, we have seen a significant reduction in the number of assault offences in the December 2012 quarter compared to the December 2011 quarter: a reduction of 4.5%. Take note, Prime Minister Gillard and Leader of the Opposition, that reflects a quarter when the Banned Drinker Register was scrapped.
Let me ask the obvious question. Why? It is clear to all reasonable and intelligent people that the Banned Drinker Register did not work. The same people were drunk whenever they wanted to be. If they were on the register they simply got others to buy the grog for them. Other desperate drunks committed crimes to get the alcohol, but that is only part of the story.
The Northern Territory Police Force remains committed to reducing crime and to a target of 10% reduction in victim-based crime. Our police place a strong emphasis on repeat offender management. Recidivist offenders are the bulk of the workload being 80% of those arrested in recent operations.
For the current financial year to date, July 2012 to the end of January 2013, the majority of crime types are tracking slightly under the 2011-12 levels based on preliminary data as at the end of January 2013.
Total offences against a person have reduced by 0.2%; acts intended to cause injury, which include the range of assault and related offences, have reduced by 0.5%; offences against property have reduced by 3.1%; property damages have reduced by 5.6%; and illicit drug offences have reduced by 11.2%. In addition, antisocial incidents and alcohol-related events have reduced in the current financial year to date compared to 2011-12 by 7.1% and 8.8% respectively.
As mentioned previously, the Northern Territory police continue to place a strong emphasis on managing repeat offenders - the recidivists. Recidivist offenders are the bulk of the workload which requires effective management and targeted operations to reduce offending behaviour as much as possible.
The Northern Territory Police have increased the targeted operational focus on recidivist criminals. Operation Lahinch in Alice Springs and Strike Force Trident in Darwin have demonstrated the extent of repeat offending. Operation Lahinch has been operating since November 2012. Operation Lahinch uses an intelligence-led approach to identifying recidivist property offenders and targeting those offenders in order to achieve reductions in crime rates. To date, Operation Lahinch has made 46 arrests. Of the 46 arrests, 36 - which is 78% - were recidivist offenders. Of the 36 recidivist offenders arrested, 34 were granted bail. The government does not find this acceptable and, as we have promised, new legislation will, hopefully, make it much more difficult for these criminals to be released back on to the streets of the Territory.
Strike Force Trident is similar in operation to Operation Lahinch in that it focuses on targeting drug traffickers and recidivist property offenders. Strike Force Trident commenced in September 2012. To date, Strike Force Trident has made 256 arrests. Of the 165 arrests for property crime offences, 135 - that is 82% of those arrests - were of recidivist property offenders. Of the 91 arrests for other offences that are not property-related, 73 - which is 80% of those arrests – were of recidivist offenders. There is clear and undeniable evidence that supports the fact that recidivist criminals will offend while on bail. During Operation Lahinch, of the 34 persons who were given bail after being arrested, 25 of those people committed further offences while on bail. I find that astonishing.
Academic research reveals that 27% of people who have been incarcerated for the first time reoffended within two years after release from prison, and 53% of people who had been incarcerated for their second or subsequent time, reoffended within two years of their release from prison.
Domestic violence victimisation continues to be a major focus of the Northern Territory Police under Project Respect. The police take a zero tolerance pro-arrest stance against domestic violence in order to break the cycle of violence and bring those responsible to account. Project Respect involves a three-dimensional strategy - enforce, engage, and empower – and, when the three dimensions are combined, will reduce the incidence of domestic and family violence and hold perpetrators to account.
Project Respect recently highlighted the rates of recidivism regarding domestic violence offenders. The current data suggests that of the 3910 people who were recorded as being domestic violence offenders between 1 January 2012 and 7 December 2012, 1095 were recorded as the offender on the second or more occasions, 416 recorded as the offender on three or more occasions, and 169 recorded as the offender on four or more occasions.
The implementation of the Family Safety Network in Alice Springs has seen an increased capacity to provide a multi-agency case management approach to assisting with domestic violent crime. The Family Safety Network pulls together local government and non-government service providers in an effort to manage the high-risk families who are the subject of repeated domestic violent crime. The Family Safety Network meets on a fortnightly basis and has conducted 16 meetings since its inception. It has managed 44 referrals and has 19 open cases.
There has been much discussion around the Banned Drinker Register since the recent misinformation from Labor’s Prime Minister Gillard. What everyone is failing to talk about is that it did not work; it only inconvenienced the average Territorian when they went legitimately to purchase alcohol at a takeaway outlet. The Banned Drinker Register was in operation from July 2011 to August 2012, and across the Territory there were 6% more assaults during 2011-12 than in the previous year, and 3% more assaults during the September quarter of 2012 than during the September quarter of 2011. There were 2.9% more alcohol-related assault offences during 2011-12 than in 2010-11, despite the Banned Drinker Register being in place throughout 2011-12. The 2010-11 figures for alcohol-related assaults were 3.1% higher than in 2009-10. This shows a consistent rise in alcohol-related assaults over the past few years, with no apparent impact on statistics during the period of operation of the Banned Drinker Register from July 2011 to August 2012.
On a regional basis, the statistics are more variable but do not show evidence of a consistent drop during the operation of the Banned Drinker Register. Specifically in Alice Springs, the number of alcohol-related assault offences remained on par between 2010-11 and 2011-12 with a 0.3% increase. Since the abolition of the Banned Drinker Register in August 2012, the number of alcohol-related assault offences per month has remained on par with the 2011–12 monthly figures and below the 2009–10 figures. The statistics do not support assertions that the Banned Drinker Register significantly reduced the number of alcohol-related assault offences or that, since its abolition, statistics have risen.
A Darwin City Council meeting was held on 29 January 2013 where the council questioned what the government is doing to crack down on antisocial behaviour. The comparison between recorded antisocial behaviour-related incidents in the Darwin metropolitan area over the past three financial years are as follows: 2009-10, 49 662 incidents; 2010-11, 41 154 incidents; 2011-12, 30 586 incidents. In the six months of the current financial year, 2012–13, there have been 13 000 incidents. These data sets show a decreasing number of incidents each year.
The Northern Territory Police Force has undertaken the following strategies to deal with antisocial behaviour that can be attributed to these decreases in antisocial behaviour-related incidents.
Public order units have been established at Darwin and Casuarina Police Stations with a staff of nine and seven respectively. Each unit has a sergeant in charge. Dedicated police patrols have been assigned to the Nightcliff area. Problem areas are identified by complaints from the public and police intelligence. When a specific problem location is identified it is listed as a hot spot through the tasking coordination group process. This ensures these areas receive a targeted response by police.
Short operations targeting specific areas are conducted utilising dedicated personnel on a regular basis.
Effective use of the available legislation, including the Summary Offences Act and the Liquor Act, to assist police in their duties.
Recent Operation Csilla targeted antisocial behaviour in the Darwin area. This operation commenced on 18 January 2013 and has produced very good results to date - excellent, in fact.
Stakeholders from other agencies such as Public Housing Safety Officers, Transport Safety Officers and Licensing Inspectors are engaged to assist with joint operations in relation to areas of concern.
Liaison occurs between the police and the City of Darwin staff in relation to sharing of information and targeting areas of concern.
Liquor outlets are monitored in relation to the type and volume of takeaway liquor that is sold.
Operation City Safe has been reviewed and, whilst primarily instigated for high-visibility foot patrols of the Mitchell Street entertainment area, it now includes dedicated foot patrols during daylight hours.
Bicycle patrols have been reintroduced with the ability to respond quickly and quietly to incidents.
Mounted police patrols occur on a regular basis and have the ability to reach otherwise difficult to access areas.
Areas identified as camps are patrolled and dismantled.
The Metropolitan Patrol Group has been established and has commenced patrols in conjunction with the already established units in Darwin, Casuarina and Nightcliff.
The use of closed circuit television has proved to be beneficial through proactive monitoring of hot spots. Through proactive monitoring, police have been directed to particular areas which has prevented the escalation or occurrence of violent and antisocial behaviour. In addition, the CCTV footage is an effective investigative and evidentiary tool.
Continued excessive consumption of alcohol and its associated harm within the Katherine community is leading to violent domestic assaults, antisocial behaviour, property offences and other general disturbances within the community. This is unacceptable and will not be tolerated by this government.
Katherine police have been conducting targeted operations in and around all takeaway licensed premises to reduce the harm associated with excessive consumption of alcohol and, in particular, consumption of alcohol in alcohol-restricted areas. However, it requires intensive staffing to deliver this service. The initiative is widely supported amongst the general public, although licensees have highlighted the negative effect of this program on their businesses which, ironically, may be the best testament to their effectiveness. Incidents of antisocial behaviour linked to alcohol remain subject to intensive management within the Tennant Creek and Barkly Division.
Effective rostering of patrol officers during peak periods and in hot spots is utilised effectively to target, educate and prosecute offenders. A zero tolerance approach to antisocial behaviour is adopted on the basis that this behaviour often escalates to more serious offending. Tactics such as seizing and destroying alcohol from dry areas, prosecuting offenders, educating the community, liaising with businesses and licensed premises, combined with an intelligence-led roster, reduce antisocial behaviour and serious-type offending. Intensive patrolling of licensed premises, public parks, streets and community living areas provides a high-profile, visible police presence to minimise this type of offending.
These operations have included Operation Jawa and Operation Kawana which have provided large quantities of seized alcohol, people arrested on warrants and other offences, and people placed under protective custody for their care during intoxication.
Continued excessive consumption of alcohol and its associated harm within the Alice Springs community is leading to violent domestic assaults, antisocial behaviour, property offences, and other general disturbances within the community. The Alice Springs Public Order Unit is in operation and conducting lock downs of all takeaway licensed premises to reduce the harm associated with the excessive consumption of alcohol. However, it requires intensive staffing to deliver this service. The initiative is widely supported amongst the general public although, as in other areas, licensees have highlighted the negative effect of this program upon their businesses, and that is noted.
Could we suggest the Leader of the Opposition refers these tactics to her boss, the Labor Party Prime Minister, Ms Gillard? Ms Gillard might be able to impose them on Kings Cross in Sydney and St Kilda Road in Melbourne if they think they are so good here.
As you can see, our police are seizing the initiative in the fight on crime. They have the backing of a government that has spine: a government with the community’s best interests in mind that will support police to enforce the law.
I have recently asked the Commissioner of Police to investigate the use of GPS tracking of people on bail and, consequently, I can report that the NT Police Force is exploring options to support the legislative ability to electronically track offenders when they are on bail. Studies indicate that the success of electronic tracking of offenders who are the subject of patrol office orders also suggests a greater than 90% compliance rate and between 11% and 18% recidivism rate. As you can see from the previous statistics, this would make a significant difference. This is a very substantial improvement in our current figures. The research suggests that the ability to electronically track offenders who are on the pre-trial orders - bail - is similarly effective as posting incarceration orders - parole.
The Northern Territory Police Force and the Department of Correctional Services are working in partnership to establish an offender tracking system for law enforcement and Corrections to locate and track offenders in Darwin and Alice Springs. The introduction of an offender tracking system will allow the Department of Correctional Services and the Northern Territory Police Force to locate and track the movements of adult and youth offenders subject to court mandated bail and supervision orders outside their home, while also serving as a deterrent against further crime.
An offender tracking system consists of hardware and software segments designed to determine and report, at programmed intervals, the geographic location of a person who is subject to criminal justice supervision. The available technologies and equipment configuration to achieve this are varied. The Department of Correctional Services and the Northern Territory Police Force intend to invite potential offender tracking system providers to the Northern Territory to participate in a four-week pre-tender trial to be conducted in Alice Springs and Darwin by June 2013.
The men and women of our police force are impressive and we are grateful for their contribution in building a more cohesive community. We can probably never thank them enough for the job they do, but perhaps the next time you see a copper, simply go up and say to him or her, ‘Thank you’.
Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Madam Speaker, it is a great pleasure to speak on this statement on policing. I am pretty sure if you say to a copper, ‘Thank you very much for what you are doing’, you will get a smile and a friendly gesture. However, if you go to a drunk and say, ‘Stop drinking’, you will probably get a punch.
I will start with two quotes. The first is from Assistant Police Commissioner Grahame Kelly in September 2011 talking about the Banned Drinker Register:
- Alcohol measures are probably one of the best tools that we’ve had for combating alcohol abuse and antisocial behaviour in the Territory.
The second one is from the Chief Minister, who. several weeks ago, spoke to Darwin City Council about scrapping the BDR and said people should just ask drunks to stop drinking. Good luck. I hope you have private health insurance; you will need it.
This is a statement about police, and most of it was justifying why the CLP canned the Banned Drinker Register. We knew about recidivism - repeat offenders - and took action. The Police Commissioner had been on the record many times and had operations in place to check on people on bail - people who committed an offence who were left in their houses - and he did it very successfully. Tracking of offenders was a proposal he had put to our government, and we applaud and support it because this is a way to keep our community safe.
However, what people are really angry about is not that the BDR has been scrapped, but (1) it was replaced with nothing, and (2) the CLP is trying to tell people the BDR did not work and nothing is bad now, everything is good. Even the Darwin City Council called the Chief Minister to an urgent meeting to discuss the issue of antisocial behaviour and drunks. That was where he made this memorable quote, ‘If you see people drinking, just go and tell the drunks to stop drinking’. It is a wonderful policy, but it will not be very successful. If I was the Minister for Health I would be worried because if people decided to do that my emergency department would be clogged with people who had copped a hiding from drunks.
The CLP has broken many promises. The most important is they promised to cut the cost of living. I received my bill from Power and Water recently and my cost of living has gone up. I bet every other Territorian’s has gone up as well, especially when you are asked to pay a 30% increase for power, 40% for water, and 25% for sewerage.
The other promise is about law and order. Before the election, the Chief Minister said, ‘We will remove drunks from the streets’. After the election he said, ‘Well, go and talk to them and ask them politely to stop drinking’. He lives in cuckoo land. The promise to remove the drunks from the streets was on the front page of the action plan he presented to the public before the election. In ‘Action on law and order’, in the third sentence, it said, ‘Remove drunks from our streets’. We have more drunks on our streets now than we had 12 months ago.
If you want to come with me I will take you to Casuarina and show you how many of them drink port at 11 am under the eaves of the Casuarina Plaza Building. I will take you to Nightcliff and show you how many people are hanging around the liquor outlets buying alcohol and drinking.
As for the inconvenience of a few people, I was never inconvenienced showing my ID at the liquor store when I bought a bottle of wine. As a matter of fact, when I was queuing up in Woolworths Nightcliff to buy a bottle of wine, none of the customers in front of me turned around to tell me off because I had the audacity, as part of government, to introduce a card system other states found was useful and considered introducing into places like central Melbourne or Kings Cross. It was a card system which was dismantled by the CLP but has now been purchased, I believe, by the north Western Australia group of licensees for them to implement because they saw how effective it was in the Northern Territory.
Is it the only promise he broke within regard to policing? Let us look at it. They talked about police call centres and promised people calling police in Alice Springs and Katherine would be answered locally. Has it happened? No. Will it happen? I do not think so.
The alcohol plans are in tatters. Nobody knows what is going to happen. Tollner said rehab is the solution. Elferink said, ‘Put them into prison’, and Terry Mills said, ‘Just ask them nicely’. I do not know if they talk to each other or they know what they are talking about. I agree, in some areas, with David Tollner, the Minister for Health: ‘Health-based support, through rehabilitation, for problem drinkers who commit crime is the preferred approach’. My problem is whether health-based rehabilitation for people who commit crime works. Will it work? I can understand rehabilitation for drunks, but for people who commit crimes the courts should have the final say. I do not think a health-based approach for people who commit crime will work. In order for it to work, the government has to work as a team. At the moment we have three people telling us three different things. One talks about health rehabilitation, another is telling us to put them into prison and leave them there, and the third is saying just be nice to them and ask them to stop drinking and they will. Yes, I bet they will! You will be screaming, under doctor’s orders, while you recover in Royal Darwin Hospital.
The CLP has also made a number of promises and not kept them. They removed funding from Balunu. Where are the boot camps? They are six months into government and we have not seen any plans or anything to show for these boot camps. Where is the model of treatment? Is anything in place? Is legislation in place? Have they started doing something? They are still thinking about it.
They talk about the BDR and blame Gillard for interfering with the affairs of the Territory. I was watching television and the Leader of the Opposition, Abbott, tried to claim the BDR as their initiative. He said it was working and it was wrong of the Territory government to remove it. Despite the efforts of the Deputy Chief Minister to say that Abbott was misquoted or misunderstood, I saw him with my own eyes and heard him with my own ears claim the BDR as their own.
They promised an extra 120 police. I really appreciate that but I would like to have some explanation. Will these 120 police include the 94 police officers who are funded by the Commonwealth, which was our initiative at the time. I would be very happy to hear there will be 120 plus the 94 rather than putting the 94 police officers in that 120. I will never forget the graduation ceremony where the graduates had to go back to school because they had not finished their schooling. It took place at the Darwin Convention Centre. There were two classes; one had graduated truly; the other had not graduated. But, it looked really good on television to have people graduating - while they are still going through school and had to go back.
I looked at the safe street audits. I applaud it, but has it been finished? Can we look at the report? It would be really good if we could find out what the report said and if there were any recommendations. The other thing is, will they implement the recommendations because they keep breaking promises. I remember the noise they made about the board of inquiry recommendations on child protection. Just after they got into government, not only did they destroy the department with the amalgamation with the Education department, the Deputy Chief Minister - the social worker who used to make a lot of noise before the election about child protection - with a straight face, announced that the government would not be bound by the recommendations of the board of inquiry.
As a final straw, she sacked the CEO of the Department, Clare Gardiner-Barnes, who did a tremendous job under very difficult circumstances in a very difficult department. Clare Gardiner-Barnes started changing the culture of the department and promised to bring down ...
Ms ANDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! This is a statement on policing, not child protection.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
Mr VATSKALIS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. There is no point of order and she knows that, but she does not like it.
To change the culture of the department she brought down the number of cases that were to be looked after, and she did a tremendous job, which was recognised by everybody, including the implementation committee which the Deputy Chief Minister also dismantled.
Where are the nurses in the watch-houses? What are they doing about the overcrowded watch-houses and supporting police with the health safety management of people who are drunk and put back on the streets? Where are the Coroner recommendations regarding the Briscoe affair? Are there safe homes for victims of violence?
Crime statistics are really interesting. Let me have a look at the crime statistics. The Chief Minister said the number of assaults in the Territory is going up. What he did not say is that the way the statistics are now recorded has changed from a year-and-a-half ago. He knows very well because the Department of Justice advised him of that, so did the police. Before, if a person was a victim of assault and the police charged the person who assaulted the victim with three or four assaults, all these charges were considered as one against the victim.
Now, the police have changed the methodology to comply with a reporting mechanism for the Australian Bureau of Statistics in other jurisdictions, and every charge is counted as a separate assault. So, before, if you had two charges they would be counted as one assault, now they will be counted as two. As a result, the number of assaults has increased and is reported by the police as increased numbers.
The other thing I find very interesting is the Chief Minister said:
- The next quarterly release for the December 2012 quarter will occur in the third week of this month. Of note, we have seen a significant reduction in the number of assault offences in the December 2012 quarter compared to the December 2011 quarter ...
First of all, I cannot find any reference to December 2012 on the police website because it has not been released yet. Obviously, the Chief Minister has inside information. The other thing it says is that the number of assault offences in the December 2012 quarter, compared to the December 2011 quarter, has gone down: a reduction of 4.5%.
That is great news but he forgot to mention we had a whole eight months in 2012 of the BDR being in operation in the Northern Territory. He insists the BDR did not work. Really? Let us see if it worked or not. Going back to the police and looking at their statistics, I did some very interesting reading and did my calculations. I believe there is a famous saying, ‘Lies, damn lies and statistics’. Sometimes statistics can be worked to present your case as right.
Usually what we do is look at the statistics, analyse them and ask whether these things are working or not. The CLP decided the Banned Drinker Register did not work, so they went back to work the statistics to show that it did not work. Is it true? Let us have a look.
The BDR was introduced in July 2011, and we had the first report in September for the quarter that included July, August and September 2011. We had three months of the BDR in place where the numbers of people placed on the BDR started to appear and build up.
The total number of assaults in September 2011 was 1566. As time passed, more and more people found themselves on the BDR and, at the same time, we found the number of assaults increased to 1870, as recorded in the December quarter. But then, guess what? In the March quarter there was a small change; the general assaults were decreasing. In the June quarter 2012, the assaults decreased further and, in September 2012 they decreased even further ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: Does that include the domestic violence-related crime?
Mr VATSKALIS: I will get to that. This is the total number of assaults as recorded in the police statistics. While the number of assaults in December 2011 was 1870, by September 2012, when the BDR was operating, it went down to 1611. We had a reduction of 13.8%.
Let us now talk about domestic violence, since the member opposite asked for it. The number of assaults associated with alcohol in the first quarter of 2011, after the BDR was implemented in September, was 939. As the BDR started to take effect, the number of assaults in December increased to 1100. Then, in September 2012, after the BDR had operated for nearly a year, it went down to 963, which means a reduction of 13%. Assaults associated with alcohol in a year of operation of the BDR decreased 13% ...
Ms Anderson: Increased percentage of alcohol-related violence.
Mr VATSKALIS: I know you are not interested in that but other people are. That shows exactly how statistics are used by the CLP to justify their reasoning that the BDR did not work. When you look at the statistics - and I will ensure these statistics go on Facebook and everywhere else - people will realise that when you have a reduction of 13%, especially in assaults associated with alcohol, then you have something that is working. Something was working with the tool we put in place, the Banned Drinker Register. Of course, assaults associated with domestic violence, which we usually associate with alcohol, in the same period, went down by 16.9%.
We heard before that the BDR did not work. Well, the statistics as presented by the police on their website – as everyone can see - show there was a reduction of assaults from the time we put the BDR in place to the time the CLP removed it. That reduction must be associated with something, and the something that made the difference was the Banned Drinker Register.
I welcome the statement today because it is a statement for the police, and we all support the police. We are the only ones who increased the number of police after the freeze the CLP put on police recruitment. We are the first ones who ...
Members interjecting.
Mr VATSKALIS: We know very well that this is historical, it was referred to in parliament; it was tabled in parliament. We know very well we were the first ones to have a police review after many years. We implemented the recommendations of the review at an enormous cost. As the firemen said yesterday, with your cost cuttings you might save dollars but you will not save lives. We believe investment in policing is a good investment because, even if one less property is not broken into, if one woman feels safe at home and is not assaulted, if one person is not assaulted in the street, this is money well spent.
The number of police under the Labor government had increased and we welcome further increases to police numbers. Despite the fact it will make the Northern Territory the jurisdiction with the highest number of police officers per capita in Australia, we welcome that. At the same time, we are prepared to support any initiative that will improve the safety of the community and make people feel safe at home or in the streets, and will reduce the danger to the community.
We will support the allocation of money for putting nurses in watch-houses. I believe that is very important. We have seen how important it is after the recent case of the Briscoe affair in Alice Springs. We also support any initiative to support our police. What I find unacceptable is professionals like the police, well-paid, well-educated and well-trained professionals, doing a job someone else can do. For example, I find it objectionable for the police to walk around taking drunks from the parks and streets to the spin dryers, as they call them, the houses where they can stay the night safely, when this was done effectively by the Larrakia Nation people, and the non-government organisations people like the Night Patrol in Darwin and other cities.
The most important difference between us and the CLP is we believe that taking measures to reduce the consumption of alcohol not only will provide a circuit breaker for these people - as the Indigenous health services admitted in the recent meeting they had – but will increase the safety of the community. For the CLP to tell us the BDR inconvenienced a few - well, it might have inconvenienced a few but we now have many more people being inconvenienced by the drunks, the antisocial behaviour, the occupation of our parks by people who only go there to drink and, when they drink, become violent. That is more inconvenient than showing your card or having to record your name when you buy a two-litre cask or bigger.
I notice the CLP has not removed that requirement yet because I heard the head of the alcohol agency the other day on the radio saying this requirement to present your card when you buy a two-litre cask of port, a four-litre cask of wine, or a large quantity of wine still remains.
Madam Speaker, the CLP has not removed all elements of the BDR. However, for them to tell us the BDR did not work and that nothing shows the BDR worked - well, the statistics speak for themselves. Just a cursory look at the statistics, as presented by the police on their website, will show you the BDR was working, and was good for the Territory.
Ms ANDERSON (Regional Development): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on policing. As the Chief Minister said, the police are the Territory’s finest men and women across the Northern Territory.
I want to speak specifically on those Territory police officers, men and women in my electorate of Namatjira, before I go on to congratulating all Northern Territory police officers for doing such a wonderful job of keeping us all safe.
I bring to the attention of the Chamber the ACPOs - Aboriginal Community Police Officers - and congratulate young Farah at Santa Teresa, a young Aboriginal woman who has been working with the Territory police now for five or six years and does a fantastic job. Through all the circumstances of her little boy, who has leukaemia, she has had the support of her family, specifically her mum, who has kept that foundation and base and given the opportunity to young Farah to continue her dream of being an Aboriginal Community Police Officer.
It is fantastic that these opportunities and chances are given to Aboriginal people. I would like, one day in the not too distant future, hopefully in the next four years, the word ‘Aboriginal’ to disappear and everybody who serves in the Northern Territory Police to be called Northern Territory police officers. Also, that Aboriginal police officers be entitled to houses on remote Aboriginal communities and have the same benefits and rights as non-Indigenous police officers. I would like to see that happen in the next four years with the Country Liberal Party.
We, as politicians on this side, will be talking to the Chief Minister and, hopefully, can start working on a way forward to get Aboriginal police officers recognised, because they do the same work as non-Indigenous police officers on communities, and sometimes more. They go to all the sports weekends, they do all the after-hours, they do the paybacks. They are recognised in all these areas but are not recognised by having houses in communities or taking the word ‘Aboriginal’ off their title.
I have spoken on many occasions in this Chamber over many years about there not being a black or a white way to do anything - whether it is education or policing - there is a right way to do things. In this journey of moving the Territory forward, if we remove these titles we become one Northern Territory or one Australia.
We should not recognise ourselves as Aboriginal politicians sitting on this side, we are just politicians. It is quite insulting that sometimes in this Chamber we are held accountable, when there are bills in this House, and are told we should stand up as Indigenous politicians. Were we not elected by everybody in our electorate, black and white? Did Aboriginal people vote for us exclusively? That is very wrong. Are we not educated as much as you to have the title of politician rather than just be branded an Aboriginal politician? My colleagues take great offence to that as well. We would like to see that change in this Chamber.
I spoke about Farah, and I want to speak about my Nuntlang, Mr Ellis at Santa Teresa. He has been an Aboriginal Community Police Officer at Santa Teresa for many years. He is now on renal dialysis but is still serving as an Aboriginal police officer at Santa Teresa. Every second day he goes into Alice Springs, is dialysed, but he is still committed to the Northern Territory Police. He does the runs with Farah to Titjikala and Finke, and they do all the community sports weekends. I take this opportunity to congratulate my Nuntlang and tell him he has done a wonderful job across Alice Springs and all the remote Aboriginal communities.
Of course, my cousin at Kintore, Andrew Spencer, has been a long life friend of the member for Port Darwin who was the member for Macdonnell. I think you nominated him for one of the awards ...
Mr Elferink: A bravery award.
Ms ANDERSON: A bravery award, yes, exactly.
Mr Elferink: He was at the scene of an accident where he lost three of his family members and continued to show such strength of character that I remain astonished.
Ms ANDERSON: That is right, yes. He is a fantastic man and has worked across the border. The Kintore station is a Themus station which is a cross-border station between Western Australia and the Northern Territory. We have the same language, so he crosses the border into Warakurna and comes back and works at Kintore. He is one of ours, a Warlpiri/Luritja/Pintubi man, and absolutely fantastic. These are the great people who have made the Territory, and they are really great friends with all the police officers everywhere.
I take this opportunity to talk about Peter, who is the sergeant in charge of the Kintore station. He is a wonderful man who commits so much time not just into policing Kintore, Warakurna and Mount Liebig, but also has after-school programs where he takes the kids and plays basketball and rides around on bikes with them. These are the after-hours programs that police run that are not on their duty statements. His wife is fantastic because if Peter is doing that, then she goes and plays with the mums with their little bubs, and talks to them about raising healthy children. He has such a wonderful relationship with that community; it is really lovely.
You go there and all the kids are singing out, ‘Peter, Peter,’ and everybody loves him. Peter told me last year he was thinking about going. While I was overnighting there I mentioned it to a group of people I was staying with. They went to him in the morning and said, ‘Sergeant, you cannot go. You are here to stay.’ That is the attachment Peter has at Kintore. When the time comes, it will be very hard for Peter and his family to leave Kintore, because he has built that relationship with the people there.
Of course, our Jack at Papunya was nominated Policeman of the Year last year. I ran into him at the airport a week or two ago, and he is having twins. Congratulations, Jack, it is wonderful. These are police officers who do not go there just to arrest people; that is secondary. They go there to build relationships and live in the community for a long time with these people. They know their kids, they know each other’s families. Police officers’ children are born in remote Aboriginal communities and they see the remote Aboriginal children growing up with their children. That is the fantastic relationship police officers have.
Of course, we have wonderful police officers in our town of Alice Springs. You cannot say anything about the police officers in Alice Springs; they are fantastic. A friend of my son’s, whose family lives in Queensland, is a police officer in Alice Springs. It is fantastic for young kids to join the Northern Territory Police Force. There is so much encouragement, by this government, of having real employment.
I also pick up on some of the things the member for Casuarina said earlier about the BDR. The BDR did not work. One person was arrested over 117 times. Is that a system that works? It is just something that you, as a Labor Party, had set up. It was your baby and you were not going to let it fail. Regardless of all the statistics that came in to tell you, and the people who told you it was not working, you were not going to let it go because you gave birth to this child that did not work - that did not go to school and was the biggest failure in all aspects of life. It was yours, you gave birth to it, reared it, were going to hold on to it, and there was no way in the world you were going to let go of it as it was the best baby Labor gave birth to. I am afraid it was the worst baby you gave birth to because it did not work.
There are houses in Alice Springs now which are open seven days a week, 24 hours a day, selling alcohol to Aboriginal people. Police officers will tell you this as well; they were picking up drunks at 8.30 am when the bottle-Os were opening at 2 pm. Where were they getting the grog? Tell me! Prohibition has never worked because prohibition and the black market go together. They are like a husband and wife - sly grog. These people have houses all over Alice Springs that are selling grog. They are Aboriginal people selling to Aboriginal people.
You cannot have a floor price on the black market, can you? No, of course not. Can the BDR work when there is so much of this black market going on? Absolutely not.
In relation to child protection, I remember two years ago at Estimates Committee, the minister for Child Protection and Health, the former member for Johnston, was saying, ‘Child protection is going to be fixed up under Labor. We are going to grow our own.’ Where is your growing of your own now? You imported them all from Ireland, England, and New Zealand. That is who is here. You did not put anyone who is traditional in these jobs. You did not even have the money to pay the 90 people in those positions. What a shame!
Madam Speaker, I am so glad the last Territory election put Labor across the other side. They did not deserve to be in government because they were never governing for the whole Territory. You governed for yourselves, and you deserve to be there.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I also thank the Chief Minister for bringing on this statement. It is always good to have an opportunity to thank the police for the hard work they do: the long hours and the difficult situations. They have extraordinary challenges in the Northern Territory with huge distances, dense population centres in some spots, and quite sparse areas in others. They do a very good job at bringing law and order into hard places.
We have all witnessed that, I am sure, as local members. I am sure we all, as local members, have good relationships with the police who work in our local areas or, for new members, we are developing good relationships with the police who work in those areas because they are critical to what we do. You need to work with them through the challenges that arise in your areas. Everyone has slightly different challenges in the spaces they have to deal with as a local member. I have an excellent relationship with the police who come through the Fannie Bay area. I am sure other members have excellent relationships with their police as well.
Police have a difficult job. We all talk to constituents, whether it is on the doors, in our office, at the markets or other places. When you talk to constituents there are often stories you hear that you, as a local member, need to work on with the police to try to resolve those situations. The police are exemplary in how they take that on and their willingness to try to fix those issues. That is not always about arresting people; sometimes it is about providing a presence, good community policing, developing relationships, and networking. There are many aspects to policing beyond the conventional image of what a police officer does. There is no doubt, as a local member, we see that.
Growing up in Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and Darwin, I saw the police in a range of different environments. There will be members in this Chamber who have seen them in desert communities, in Top End communities, and many other places doing essentially the same job: developing good relationships with the community, making sure people are safe and laws are enforced. We have an excellent police force in the Territory.
I have some mates in the local police force and I hear stories from them which are sometimes funny, sometimes serious, but which always highlight the work the police do in the Territory. Sometimes, they have to face challenges that are - I use this word rarely - unique to the Territory. We all support our police and I welcome the Chief Minister’s statement so we have the opportunity to say thank you. I say thank you as the member for Fannie Bay.
However, the statement also went into an area where we do have an argument with the government around alcohol. Of the major concerns people have in the Territory at the moment, there are probably two that dominate most people’s minds. One is the cost of living, in including the cost of power and water charges, and the other is dealing with problem drunks. It is at the point where Darwin City Council asked the Chief Minister to come to a crisis meeting to discuss the increasing levels of antisocial behaviour and drunkenness in Darwin. The Chief Minister attended that meeting and, I believe what was a shock to most people, was that his advice was:
- Tell them: You should not be drinking. I think more people need to do it.
In response, the Lord Mayor, Katrina Fong Lim said:
- I’m sorry, Terry, but I don’t feel safe doing that as a single female …
It was very good that the Lord Mayor responded promptly, directly, and quite honestly to the Chief Minister about how she felt on receiving that advice. That advice was given within six months into the term of the new government. That advice was given after the CLP went into the last election promising on the front page of their 100-day plan to immediately remove drunks from the street.
Six months into government, their response to their election commitment to immediately remove all drunks from the streets is that you should ask them nicely to stop drinking. That is where we have come so far in this term of government in how we deal with the problems of drunkenness in the Northern Territory.
You can understand the reaction of thousands of people through Facebook, online comments, talkback radio, Letters to the Editor, or just coming up to us in the street in response to that advice from the Chief Minister, promptly rebutted by the Lord Mayor. It is not something people feel is sensible advice, or feel safe doing. The better dictum is first do no harm.
Everyone has stories of when they had been involved with problem drunks. You certainly hear the anecdotes as local members. I remember as a young kid in Tennant Creek, at one of my uncle’s places, a brawl erupted on the front lawn between some people who were intoxicated who were pulling out the star pickets and having a go at each other. At that stage, you call the police. You do not nicely ask them to stop. There is one reason we thank our police, and one reason we understand the hard work they do. There are times you call the police; you do not ask them nicely to stop drinking.
We had a lady came to our house needing shelter, being chased by a drunk man whom I assumed was her partner - I was quite young at the time but I could still work that out - we called the police, and they said, ‘Do not go out and tell that bloke out the front to go away. Stay inside the house, we will come around.’ That is what the police do, and we thank them for it.
The reaction of the community at large to the advice that you just tell them to stop drinking was that you had to be joking, Chief Minister! It was not taken seriously. For the Sunday Territorian journalist, Kylie Stevenson, who often writes satirical or opinion pieces, but often takes the mickey, this was obviously a prime target. To quote Kylie:
- ‘Tell them they should not be drinking’. This was our Chief Minister’s solution to end drunken antisocial behaviour in the Territory. Last time I checked Terry Mills was still alive, so I’m guessing he hasn’t tried out his own idea.
That was the reaction from most people on hearing this advice. I quote her again because it is just stating the obvious:
- Overwhelming sentiment on the NT News Facebook page and website was that the approach was simplistic and ignorant …
That was the reaction of many to the advice. Underscoring all this was discontent that the CLP had promised, coming into office, they would immediately remove all drunks from the streets, but instead, we have seen them scrap the Banned Drinker Register, Night Patrol, the alcohol courts, Return to Country, and put nothing in their place.
They promised to immediately remove all problem drunks from the street - front page of the 100-day action plan. They wrote it, they promised it, and they have not delivered on it. People are really frustrated with a government which has made a promise and not delivered on it. When you say you are going to immediately remove problem drunks from the street, people want to believe you are telling them the truth. They want to believe that when you make that promise and come into office you will actually do it. That is what you have promised and, now it is six months into a term and we still have not seen the details of your policy on how to remove drunks from our streets. When people hear the Chief Minister say, ‘Go up politely to some problem drunks and tell them to stop drinking’, they think it is stupid. Separate to that, they are wondering where your policy is.
I received a text message earlier this afternoon from a local constituent who lives in a hot spot area on Parap Road. He said, ‘Hi Michael, just a quick note as you are probably in sittings. I read the comments Mills made to you yesterday. You should have challenged him to speak to the drunks at Parap at 11 pm without the police, his minders or his mates, just himself. Let us see who the real hero is. His comments just frustrate me.’
I will not challenge the Chief Minister to do it because it would be stupid. He should not do that. I do not wish the Chief Minister any harm. That is why we have a dedicated, professional police force which is often at the hot spots in Parap, Fannie Bay, or around my electorate doing that job. People should not take the advice of the Chief Minister and put themselves in danger by talking to people who are drunk. People complain about drunks in our streets when they are concerned for their personal safety in that public space. To tell them they should put their personal safety at further risk by walking up to a drunk and saying, ‘Would you mind stopping’, is not good advice.
What is their policy? We are still waiting on the details. We are six months in. We had a rough outline prior to the last election; we still have a rough outline now. We have seen different comments from the Health minister and the Attorney-General about their approach. They can be interpreted as differing, but can also be interpreted as complementary, depending on which spin you take on it. The Health minister is saying there should be a health-based approach to helping alcoholics rather than sending them to gaol, and the Attorney-General is saying there should be punishment in sentencing. On the surface it seems like a direct conflict.
However, I have no doubt - in the joint media release they issued they said these two things can be complementary – that in some ways the CLP believes they can be complementary. That is why we have seen no detail yet, because they are trying to make two contradictory things come together and work.
The rough outline we have of the CLP policy is they want to lock up problem drunks and provide them with mandatory rehabilitation. We do not know how this will work yet because the CLP has not provided the detail. It is becoming increasingly obvious they do not know how it will work either. They are struggling to work out how this policy will work. They have a rough outline; they had a great theory in opposition; they are now six months into government and cannot work out how they will make this plan work - a plan experts say will not work even if they can pull out all the inconsistencies and put it in place; it has no evidence base.
We saw the Attorney-General admit to that during interviews. He has no evidence base; it is based on his personal experience. While we recognise the Attorney-General has some important personal experience in this area, personal experience does not quite cut it in developing a policy this complicated. There should be an evidence base and the experts are saying this will not work. How do you lock up problem drunks and provide them with mandatory rehabilitation? You have to create a facility where these people cannot just walk out. They are people with a problem: an addiction to alcohol. If you put them in a facility where they can just walk out, they will. You have to create a correctional facility. You have to spend the money on a prison to ensure they cannot leave but, at the same time, provide rehabilitation. You have to put in hospital beds, hospice beds, or a medical facility to provide the rehabilitation services. You are crossing a prison with a hospital and, to staff that, you will need guards and nurses. You will have this incredibly expensive proposition the CLP is floating, which the experts are saying will not work, of a prison and hospital with guards and nurses to provide mandatory rehabilitation.
The CLP is struggling to pull the detail together for a policy that will cost a lot of money and will not work. That is what we have already heard from the experts. We have heard comment from the Health minister and the Attorney-General that it will have a health-based approach and a corrections-based approach. We would love to hear more detail. We can only comment on the rough outlines we have heard so far. It is going to be a fascinating debate when they finally bring this forward. However, it is becoming increasingly obvious the government is struggling to work out the detail of this plan, despite going into the last election, on the front page of their 100-day plan, promising to immediately remove the drunks from the streets. Six months in, still no detail, still struggling to work out how they will build a facility for 2500 problem drunks. It will not work.
We have also heard from doctors who say this will kill, which is not something I imagine a doctor says lightly. Dr Boffa has said he thinks this will cost people their lives. I have read that quote before in the debate. I have it here somewhere. I would love to read it again, but I have read it before to the House where Dr Boffa said people will die as a result of these policies.
We have a problem with the fact the CLP has a policy with no detail; they are struggling to put the detail together. From what we know, there is no evidence base. They have admitted there is no evidence base to this policy. Experts say it will not work and they are breaking their election promise to immediately remove all problem drunks from the streets.
What they have done in the six months while they are trying to work out the detail to the policy they have a pipe dream of is scrap the Banned Drinker Register, Night Patrols, alcohol courts and the Return to Country program and put nothing in their place. They are ignoring the experts, business, and Territorians who are extremely concerned about antisocial behaviour and problem drunks in our communities, and the escalating problem we have with them.
Obviously, we have an argument in this House about statistics. The CLP has statistics they quote from. The member for Casuarina quoted from some statistics before, ‘Lies, damn lies and statistics’, to use a quote attributed to Disraeli. We have an argument about statistics. To quote Andrew Lang: ‘They use statistics as a drunk man uses a lamp post - for support rather than illumination’.
We believe, as many Territorians believe, the Banned Drinker Register worked. When an argument comes forward where there is a difference of opinion in the statistics, and people use different statistics, people often, in those instances, rely on their personal experience. The experience of many was the Banned Drinker Register was working and hot spots were improving. We were hearing that. It is on the record. I have said it before.
Some Fannie Bay traders, for example - people with 20 years of experience at the Fannie Bay shops, which is known as a hot spot area - have said the Banned Drinker Register worked and when it was scrapped things got worse. I have heard that from other places such as Parap shops and Stuart Park shops. The member for Casuarina has spoken about his personal experience as the local member. There is no doubt, from people’s personal experience, the Banned Drinker Register worked. They saw it with their own eyes and, when it was scrapped, things became worse. That was their direct personal experience, and they get frustrated when the CLP try to use stats to justify their scrapping of a program they saw was working.
Not all these people were immediate supporters of the Banned Drinker Register. I had traders in my area who were not convinced it would work. However, after it was in place and they saw the impact of it and after they saw it scrapped, they were converts.
It would be foolish to say the Banned Drinker Register was a complete solution. It was not. It was about making a difference, and it did make a difference. That was what the Banned Drinker Register was for. I have never said it was going to be a perfect solution. There is no one thing that will fix these issues; it is a mistake to think that. You have to look at a number of things to make a difference, and the Banned Drinker Register was making a difference.
Government promised to immediately remove all drunks from the street. They have broken that promise and, in the interim, have scrapped programs we believe made a difference. One of the great frustrations for many people is that you scrapped something only to do nothing. If you do not believe the Banned Drinker Register will work - and we know the CLP does not like it; that was obvious. They have never backed away from that, we knew that. However, the frustration of many causes them to ask why they could not wait until they got their own stuff sorted out and leave it in place until then.
Part of the problem is the CLP does not have their stuff sorted out. We do not know, and I do not think they know, when they will get it sorted out. There is a lot of detail missing from their plan to immediately remove all problem drunks from the streets. We will be fascinated to see the detail of that. I believe there will be some quite lengthy debate in this House around that policy when it finally comes forward, and we are looking forward to seeing it. There is no doubt from our side and from many Territorians that there is a frustration with the Country Liberal Party doing nothing, scrapping programs that many people believed were working, and breaking their promise to remove all problem drunks from our streets. That is my say today around the alcohol issue. I am sure I will have plenty of opportunity in this Chamber to talk more about alcohol.
Madam Speaker, referring back to the initial comments from the Chief Minister about the police, I close by saying we thank the police. I thank the police for the work they do. They do a fantastic job in my local area where there are some distinctive challenging spots. I know other members would have a similar appreciation of the work the police do. I thank the Chief Minister for allowing us the opportunity to thank the police. However, I disagree with his approach on alcohol and his current position - until they bring forward their policy documents - which is that the best way of dealing with problem drunks on our streets is to ask them politely to stop drinking.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Deputy Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I take pleasure this afternoon in responding to the Chief Minister’s statement on policing in the Northern Territory - indeed, to serve and protect. That is what we see the police in the Northern Territory doing, thankfully, throughout the Northern Territory. They are an essential part of our community and we on this side of the room honour them and give them the respect they deserve.
As the member for Araluen, a resident of Alice Springs for many years, I know first-hand the critical role the police play in my town and throughout Central Australia. Without the police force maintaining law and order and trying to ensure the safety of the people of Central Australia, we would be in a bad way. The role they play in Alice Springs is critical to our survival in so many ways - not just our personal survival and safety, but our whole livelihood and economy is heavily dependent on the police responding to and preventing crime and lawlessness in the town.
I listened with great interest to the speech just delivered by the member for Fannie Bay. I did snicker to myself when I heard him talk about the ‘distinctly challenging spots’ within his electorate. In Alice Springs, thanks to the former Labor government, it is hard to distinguish where there are not distinctly challenging spots.
We were left literally in the desert by the former Labor government throughout the last decade or so. Thanks to the police, there has remained some sensibility around trying to keep matters in order, trying to stop matters from getting out of control. However, over the last decade, all residents of Alice Springs will remember times when there was a sense of great lawlessness and great concern throughout the town of Alice Springs and the region of Central Australia because of the lack of attention from the former Labor government.
The police are at the whim of the government of the day, and that can no better be demonstrated than when we look back at the last 10 years of Labor and Alice Springs. The former Labor government made no secret of having little interest in Alice Springs. We were the poor cousins down the road, the embarrassment, probably, of the Northern Territory. It was all too hard to get there, and it was all too hard to put decent policies and resources in place to address the very serious problems that escalated, at times out of control, in the town of Alice Springs and the region of Central Australia.
When I think back, probably one of the worst years was only a few years ago in the summer of 2010-11. Everyone will recall with great sadness and regret that summer in which lawlessness prevailed. There were many kids on the street running around out of control, unsupervised. There was a great problem with antisocial behaviour, public drunkenness, and crime. The people of Alice Springs were absolutely beside themselves, desperate, unhappy, wondering about the future of their town. We had some extremely bad publicity nationally about the problem of antisocial behaviour and crime in Alice Springs. It was a dreadful summer.
The former Labor government presided over this decline in law and order in Alice Springs over many years which culminated in that dreadful summer of 2010-11. The police were doing their best with limited resources, probably no real support from the former Labor government because, as I said, they just were not interested.
They made no bones about it. The police were desperately trying to address a problem that even they admitted was out of control.
At that point in time, it was clear the people of Alice Springs were at the mercy of criminals, of people who were doing the wrong thing, and causing great heartache and discontent throughout the town. We had innocent people being assaulted, being subjected to violence, having their houses broken into, their property damaged. That was the worst we have seen in recent history, just two years ago.
The response from the former Labor government, with great reluctance, was to say, ‘Yes, we do have a problem. We have taken our eye off the ball and we have not supported our police force.’ They went about rectifying it, thankfully - dragged screaming and kicking into the arena of trying to resolve the dreadful law and order issues in Alice Springs. The police, as I said, were at the whim of the former Labor government at that time. They were able to do what they do best with proper resourcing, proper policy, and proper direction from the government of the day. Over the last two years we have seen a marked improvement in the social problems in Alice Springs.
That is just one example of how important the police are in my town of Alice Springs. They are critically important to how we go about our lives because, in Central Australia - I believe it is widely known; it is no secret - we have very serious problems that the police are at the forefront of trying to address. They alone cannot solve the problems in Alice Springs or in Central Australia, but they play a critical role.
Of course, one of those problems which is probably the root of all evil, the key to many of the problems in Alice Springs, is the very high rate of alcohol consumption. We all know about it, whether we experience the problems of alcohol in people’s lives, in our lives first-hand, or we are subjected to people who are out of control because of their dependence on alcohol. Alcohol has shaped the town of Alice Springs and it certainly shapes the role of the police force in Alice Springs.
Most of the crime throughout the Northern Territory can be attributed to alcohol abuse or dependence. Whether it is petty crime, very serious crime, crime against women and children, domestic and family violence, most of it can be clearly and undeniably attributed to alcohol consumption.
In Alice Springs we have a big story to tell. Alice Springs has had the strictest alcohol restrictions in the country. It is undeniable; there is nowhere in the country that has been subjected to the alcohol restrictions Alice Springs has. The police have been at the forefront of ensuring these alcohol restrictions have been upheld, enforcing the laws and the policy of the government of the day. Over the last 11 years, the government of the day has been the Labor government, and its policy has been to restrict the supply of alcohol in Alice Springs for the best part of - it is over 10 years now. The alcohol restrictions dribbled in before 2002, but they really started to ramp up around 2002. We saw restrictions on the supply of alcohol coming through the takeaway outlets, the hotels, and licensed liquor outlets well over 10 years ago.
I spent four years on the Alice Springs Town Council and, during that time, we saw some incredible changes to the alcohol policy the former Labor government brought in. One of them was the IDI system, the predecessor to the Banned Drinker Register. Alice Springs was the first centre in the Northern Territory to have the IDI identification system introduced. We trialled it, we were used, as usual, as the guinea pigs for what went on to become the Banned Drinker Register.
The IDI system was, essentially, the same as the Banned Drinker Register. When you purchased alcohol you had to provide identification and tell the retailer where you intended to drink the alcohol, which was not a requirement of the Banned Drinker Register. That would not have been very well-received by people in Darwin, but in Alice Springs we had to say, ‘Well, I might sit in the creek and drink my carton of grog, or I might go home and sip my chardonnay in front of the TV’. It was an interesting time in the history of alcohol restrictions in the Northern Territory. As I said, the IDI system went on to become the Banned Drinker Register. They used us as the guinea pigs and tweaked us and changed us according to their whim at the time.
The Alice Springs Town Council, around 2004 or 2005, reintroduced a different form of alcohol restrictions, a restricted area in Alice Springs called the Dry Town Policy. The Dry Town Policy said you could not drink within a 2 km radius of the CBD.
The reason I am talking about them this afternoon is they all relied on the police supporting the policy of the day, implementing and enforcing the laws. I look back over the last 11 years of Labor and the alcohol restrictions in Alice Springs and what they required of the police, and it was a tough period. I am sure any police officer in the Northern Territory who spent time in Alice Springs would look back on those years as being very difficult. It was a government that could not give a stuff, to put it bluntly, about the town or the people, and subjected us all to a series of failing, failed, and not-so-successful alcohol restrictions. The police were loyal, very professional; there is no doubt they would never criticise the government of the day for what they were required to do. It is clearly a part of their role to support, publicly and freely, the policies and laws they are required to implement.
However, the local people of Alice Springs stood back and watched these things unroll. There are certainly factions within the Alice Springs community that say all these alcohol restrictions and reforms have been a resounding success. However, I challenge those views because I know better. I mix very broadly in Alice Springs and I know most people in Alice Springs would say the alcohol restrictions have been a resounding flop.
The statistics speak for themselves. There has been no significant decline in alcohol-related crime and antisocial behaviour in the town over the last decade. Some would say the health status of Aboriginal people has not improved. There might have been some minor improvements in certain areas but most of those are due to advances in technology; for example, renal failure and renal disease in the last 10 years has come forward in leaps and bounds. The prognosis for those poor people has improved mainly due to the medicine and the technology around renal dialysis.
What have these alcohol restrictions the police have been required to enforce achieved? Very little. I do not say that with any joy because if there is one town in Australia that would love alcohol restrictions to work, it is Alice Springs. We are desperate to see changes and improvements in how alcohol reform could improve our town and make all of our lives better. At some point, every person in Alice Springs experiences the misery associated with alcohol abuse.
Alcohol policy is just one area in which I absolutely commend the police force of the Northern Territory for trying to adhere to the requirements of the government of the day. What I am saying is the police are only as good as the government that directs them. For the police in the Northern Territory, the last decade has been extremely tough trying to implement policies that have limited success, if not no success at all. The police have done their jobs with great diligence; you cannot fault them. I have rarely heard of any Alice Springs resident criticising the police for the effort and commitment by police officers, individually and collectively as a force. We cannot live in Alice Springs without them. It is just unbearable to think about a world without our police in Alice Springs.
That is one reason why the Chief Minister, during the election campaign for the general election that was held on 25 August last year, made a commitment to substantially increase the number of police in Alice Springs. He knows it is not restricting supply of alcohol that will make a difference in Alice Springs, it is about ensuring law and order is maintained. The best way to do that is through a good, strong, committed police force. We, as a new government, are right behind the police force throughout the Territory, particularly in places like Alice Springs where there are some serious law and order problems. Other places such as Tennant Creek and Katherine - regional centres - are experiencing the same sort of misery we are.
This new government has turned the page on that lack of commitment to upholding law and order in the regions. We have turned the page in providing minimal resources and trying to pretend the problems of the regions do not exist. We were elected into government based on the belief of the regions of the Northern Territory, in particular that we had the solutions, and we aim to deliver. We are not going to continue the failed policies and agendas of the former Labor government. Why keep flogging a dead horse when things do not work? Why continue to pour money into something that has failed? I stand by the decision of this government to drop the Banned Drinker Register very promptly, as we did four days after the election. I stand by that because it was, indeed, a waste of money ...
A member interjecting.
Mrs LAMBLEY: The people on the other side of the Chamber can start yelling me down, but as a person who has lived in Alice Springs for almost 20 years, I am sorry, I and the people of Alice Springs know better. No amount of screaming and yelling from the other side will convince anyone.
The police in Alice Springs play a critical role in all sorts of business and events in Alice Springs. There was a spectacular event in Alice Springs just last weekend, the AFL match between Richmond and the Indigenous All Stars. I am not a football enthusiast but I did attend that match with my family. I had the pleasure of sitting next to the former Administrator ...
Mr CHANDLER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I move that the member for Araluen be given an extension of time, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mrs LAMBLEY: Madam Speaker, I attended the football match at Traeger Park on Friday night and had the pleasure of sitting next to the former Administrator, Ted Egan, and his lovely wife Nerys, surrounded by some magnificent local people. The former member for Stuart’s mother-in-law was sitting behind me, with her family. The current member for Stuart’s daughter was sitting close to us. It was a great occasion and a thoroughly enjoyable night looking across the grounds of Traeger Park.
The point of me mentioning this is this event was planned months ahead. We had a Summer in Alice planning group from the word go. Within the first couple of weeks of coming to government I called a meeting of the Summer in Alice group of government agencies, and the police played a leadership role in that. We planned to ensure Friday night was an absolute success in all respects, and it was. It was one of the greatest nights I have ever had in Alice Springs. There was no trouble. People came from right across the region of central Australia and beyond. I did not witness any misbehaviour or drunkenness. It was a spectacular evening. The report I received from the Police Commissioner a few days later was that nothing extraordinary happened that evening.
One of the reasons why it was a success is the local licensees, the publicans and holders of liquor licences, came together and voluntarily agreed to put restrictions in place. There was no compulsion put on them by government or anyone. They agreed to ensure on that night there were limitations on the supply of alcohol. That worked well.
In addition to that, the police were everywhere, right down Gap Road, right down the highway, on horseback, in cars. It was so well managed, it was incredible. I extend my deepest thanks to the police force in Alice Springs for doing such a spectacular job. It is something to be proud of that they, as individuals, feel a great deal of love and respect for the town and the people in it, and we could all come together on such a great night and have next to no problems.
There are other issues in the town of Alice Springs that just do not go away. The police are at the forefront of trying to manage those. One of the most appalling problems in our town is the very high rate of domestic and family violence. This problem continues at a rate beyond anywhere else in Australia. No other area or jurisdiction in Australia has the rate of family and domestic violence - violence against women - as we do in the Northern Territory. Sadly, in Alice Springs we certainly have our fair share of the problem.
The police are required and expected to step in and try to work with these very difficult, potentially disastrous, tragic situations on a daily basis. It is something that none of us can be proud of. It is deeply shameful that it continues to be the problem it is in Alice Springs and the Northern Territory. However, I commend police for putting their lives at risk in trying to intervene and save lives, of women and children particularly. I know some men are also victims of family and domestic violence.
The people of Alice Springs have been subject to so many highs and lows in the poor policy of the former Labor government. The policies - or should I say lack of policies - have meant they have been subjected to crime waves, to different things that have gone on in the town that should never have happened.
As a member of the new government, as the member for Araluen, and a committed resident of Alice Springs, I hope we can give the police force of the Northern Territory the direction and resources they need to do their job as best they can.
We did not see that under Labor. We did not see the police force functioning at a level that was required, and that met the demands of the Northern Territory. We have made many commitments around policing in the Northern Territory: to provide more police throughout the Northern Territory, including Alice Springs, to try to reduce the level of crime across the Northern Territory by 10%. We will do it. We have not failed in any of our election commitments so far. We are committed to providing the people of the Northern Territory with a safe and orderly environment in which to raise their children, to live their lives comfortably, and to invest in the Northern Territory.
To serve and protect, Madam Speaker. I highly commend the police force of the Northern Territory. I am a proud Territorian and I deeply thank them for their hard work.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for bringing this statement before the House. He opened his statement with the words ‘to serve and protect’. I saw those words everywhere yesterday. They were on the back of blue baseball caps, embroidered in yellow. The people wearing those caps are employees of the fire service. I know this ministerial statement is about policing, but I want to put on the record as well the incredible work our firies do in the Northern Territory.
I mention them because during Question Time today the member for Greatorex, who is known to shoot from the hip and shoot off his mouth, described the protestors at yesterday’s rally as ‘grubs’. ‘All Labor supporters and grubs’, is how he described them. That is shameful. He needs to apologise to this House. He needs to apologise to those who work in the fire service - men and women, employees and volunteers - one of the most critical services, right up there with our police, ambulance officers, and those who work in the front line of emergency services day in, day out.
Seeing dozens of those firies at the protest rally yesterday, I thought it was less about their own jobs and more about the community they serve. That is where their concerns are: the threat of compromise to services delivered to Territorians. To hear them described as grubs is absolutely shameful. Our firies and policemen do, indeed, serve and protect.
The Chief Minister’s statement, after the opening words ‘to serve and protect’, continued with great words about the history and character of the Northern Territory Police, the pioneering spirit of those men and women who serve our community. Then, the statement soon moved into a bit of a chest thumping rant about how very tough on crime the CLP see themselves.
Yesterday, we heard our tough new Attorney-General indulge himself with a very shabby attack - a very low point in this House - on the former Chief Minister, Paul Henderson, who has served the Northern Territory for many years: a couple of years in opposition but, beyond that, as a minister of the executive of the government. He was sworn in on the same day as the current Police minister, the member for Blain. Whilst we might all have views about one another, to say what he did about the former Chief Minister on his retirement was shameful, and a step worse than that. He did not allow the Leader of the Opposition to participate in that debate. That will go down in history as one of the low moments, and people will decide for themselves what they think of the Attorney-General.
As shadow Attorney-General, I put on the record my view of the former Chief Minister having been our best Police minister ever. He had a real passion for community safety and a real empathy with the men and the women of the Northern Territory Police Force who are committed to keeping our community safe, rendering first aid to all types of members of our community, no matter how challenging the circumstances or where they live.
Former Chief Minister, Paul Henderson, and his government, consistently supported our police in their dedication to preventing crime and pursuing offenders who were causing harm or threat to our community - offenders violating our sense of family and community wellbeing. We know, like the member for Port Darwin and others here, he is a strong family man. Years of service takes its toll on people, and takes its toll on families. The Attorney-General knew that only too well when there was an episode when he was unable, sadly, to participate in the estimates process. I find it disappointing we had that attack. However, as I said, the former Chief Minister is a strong man, a strong family man, and was a strong Police minister.
The new government has filled its statement with a smorgasbord of statistics, particularly percentages, to support an argument the change of government last year has brought about a brand new day with a spectacular change in focus, supporting our police and improving community safety. They seem to have forgotten - it does not appear in the statement anywhere - how many police have been recruited over the years and, not only police, but nurses and teachers, because those agencies were starved of numbers under years of CLP government. Labor worked hard to build those numbers up again.
Anyone with any knowledge of the application of statistics knows it is the numbers as well as the percentages that matter and, when dealing with low numbers, small changes can result in, apparently, quite impressive changes in percentages. Of course, all things are not equal, so it is certainly disingenuous of the new government to throw around some very broad statistics as if every offence was a violent crime or led to some outrage.
If we are to have a debate about law and order and community safety, let us have a proper and well-informed debate. The always sensible person on the street will know improvements in crime fighting and community safety, particularly with recidivism, do not change overnight with a magical change of government and a magical CLP wand. Improvements are progressive and built on good policy, good law, and the diligent, professional enforcement of the law by our police men and women.
Our former Police minister, Paul Henderson, will be remembered as having strongly supported the growth and development of what we can say is an outstanding Northern Territory Police service - I doubt any member would disagree with that - providing them with the tools and resources they need to do their jobs effectively in the communities spread across the Northern Territory, whether they be major centres on the Stuart Highway or remote Indigenous communities.
Amongst those tools to help police do their job there are several I will talk of. The Banned Drinker Register, which police said was the best tool they ever had to prevent alcohol-related offences, is one. I have said before, but I will say it again, Nhulunbuy, northeast Arnhem, Groote Eylandt - ahead of Nhulunbuy for a number of years now - have had incredibly effective alcohol management plans. They were, essentially, the forerunners for the legislation that was rolled out around the Northern Territory under the Enough is Enough reforms to introduce the Banned Drinker Register to deal with the huge cost associated with alcohol abuse that costs taxpayers more than $600m in running health services, the justice system, the correction system, police, and everybody associated with dealing with the misery associated with alcohol abuse.
That immeasurable cost associated with alcohol abuse is to children and families. As the member for Araluen noted, yes, there are men who are victims of domestic violence, but predominantly it is women and children. Given the massive issues with alcohol in the Northern Territory, the Labor government took strong steps to address it based on alcohol management programs that were working and continue to work in northeast Arnhem Land. Yet, sadly, the CLP government has seen fit to dismantle it - it was an election promise – and, having dismantled it, replaced it with nothing.
I take exception to the comments of the Chief Minister in his statement about the Banned Drinker Register when he said, ‘It is clear to all reasonable people that the Banned Drinker Register did not work’. The Chief Minister is in a world and universe all of his own if he seriously thinks that and can ignore the comments which have been unrelenting in Letters to the Editor, online comments, and talkback radio. I mentioned today a Letter to the Editor yesterday from a Ms Maria Woodgate at Alawa, and her comments about the BDR. From what she has written, I believe this individual is a reasonable person. She wrote:
- It acted as an additional and largely effective barrier between the chronic alcoholic and their supply.
Further, some recovering alcoholics were using it in their rehabilitation program.
Dave Tollner argues that it is an imposition on the Northern Territory community.
What person would not be willing to accept the minor imposition of showing their driver’s licence when buying alcohol if it meant fewer problem drunks on the street, fewer violent acts?
Well, hear, hear, Ms Woodgate!
In Nhulunbuy and northeast Arnhem Land, we have been showing our driver’s licences for takeaway purchases in exactly the same fashion you hand over a credit card when you are making a purchase, or when you enter certain clubs, such as the Arnhem Club where you have to swipe a card to gain access. Ms Woodgate went on to say:
- The NT government has also argued that the BDR was too expensive. More expensive than stationing police full-time outside every grog outlet in Alice Springs? More expensive than a mandatory rehab facility when there is no evidence anywhere in the world that it works?
The NT government’s argument for removing the BDR is simply weak, and they are finding themselves increasingly alone and out in the cold on this issue.
Of course, the Chief Minister would deny that entirely and dismiss it as absolute rubbish.
Another tool police had at their fingertips that was developed over a period of time under the Labor government was the SMART Court. The SMART Court connected those without employment, but with alcohol problems, to income management so government benefits were not used to fuel alcohol-related humbug and crime. The member for Nelson asked a very valid question today about the proposal by the Attorney-General to dismantle the SMART Court without any evidence or consultation with those who have been a part of it. Its removal, as I understand, can only be done by an introduction of a bill to repeal it through the floor of this House. I guess that is coming along.
I also, at the same time, plead with him to reconsider and not send the Territory backwards, but to give those individuals who are not violent offenders but who have issues with alcohol and/or other drugs and have offended a second chance; to recognise that sending people to the lock-up is not the way we need to go. If there are avenues where we can keep people out of the correction system through a justice reinvestment program, then we need to look at that. Eighteen months is too soon to stop something, throw it out, and just say it was too costly and it did not work without any real evaluation from the experts about the effectiveness and long-term benefits. It costs $20 000 to lock up an offender for around three months and $110 000 per individual for 12 months in a corrections facility. You start to weigh those figures up against what a court like the SMART Court is doing. We know the Chief Magistrate is very much in favour of it and NAAJA is in favour of it. The only body not in favour of it is the new CLP government. I am pleading with them to have a rethink about that.
I appeal especially to the CLP bush members opposite who represent an Indigenous constituency. I ask them to think about whether we want to see our constituents locked up, or do we want to give them a real and second chance?
I want to go on to the other tools we have had in place for Northern Territory police under a Labor government: CCTV, new forensic facilities and state-of-the-art equipment and training for our police to ensure they are always one step ahead in our fight against crime. The investment into CCTV has been incredible. Whilst it has not been a Northern Territory government investment in Nhulunbuy, but under Nhulunbuy Corporation, I know that CCTV - it is the same in Darwin - has captured offences in the act, quite literally, with the opportunity to identify individuals and proceed with an investigation and charges, if that is what it comes to. CCTV, in particular, is a significant tool that has made policing far more efficient.
We look at other tools like our Safer Streets initiative delivering more police patrols in Darwin City, Casuarina, Palmerston, Alice Springs and in Katherine. We look at the development of intelligence-led policing and support for successful targeted actions against youth gangs and property crime. Some of the members on this side have talked about Police Beats in their electorates - on both sides of the House - where Police Beats have been established to give that visibility and presence in places where people need to see them and have access to them, as well as those grassroots police responses in our local hot spots.
Another tool has been successfully negotiating with the Commonwealth government for more police and police stations in remote towns, providing better protection and support for families and children no matter where they live. The intervention is debated amongst different people who hold different views about the value of it. However, all those years ago, it brought recognition of an underspend in our communities. It is from there that police stations in some of our remote communities have rolled out.
One of my early visits, as the new member for Nhulunbuy in March 2009, to Elcho Island was for the opening of the police station. I know there are others opening around the place. I know the one at Gapuwiyak is under construction and due to open soon. People really value these communities and the officers and their families who come to work there, recognising the needs of the residents of the Darwin rural area - that would strike a chord with the member for Nelson and you, Madam Speaker - and establishing a proper police presence in building a police station in Humpty Doo. Let us hope the Chief Minister does not do to Humpty Doo Police Station what he has done to the firies there and expect volunteers to deliver those services.
We have had the introduction of our wonderful and hard-working drug detection dogs, an incredibly efficient means of policing. What an impact they have made on targeting drug traffickers. It is a very costly exercise to train these dogs, but they are a very effective communication tool.
There was a targeted campaign last year. Travelling back home to Nhulunbuy, I quite often take the option to travel home in the evening on the Airnorth flight, which is a smaller plane with about 30 seats. That plane lands in Nhulunbuy and then goes on to Groote Eylandt; so, people who have been in for the day or whatever, will go home on that evening flight. For a couple of weeks, every time I caught that flight, all passengers would go through the check in, go down the stairs, and head out towards the plane. However, at the bottom of the stairs, it became routine that we lined up and put our bags around us. There would be a few police officers there and a sniffer dog would come through and do a very thorough job of sniffing out contraband material. It sent a shiver up your spine when, occasionally - it happened on two occasions - someone was pulled aside by police saying, ‘Can you come this way, please?’ That threat was very real. If you continue to travel with illicit, illegal substances in your baggage you will be caught.
I acknowledge our support cross-border policing initiatives, with those new police stations sharing resources with neighbouring states on our Territory borders in the very remote parts of the Territory.
There are also the major improvements to interagency collaboration around that really critical and important area of child protection and other community safety issues.
Unbelievably, the minister claimed that the establishment of interagency task forces and targeted interventions at crime hot spots is a CLP innovation. They were actually started under Labor. I know for a fact the Interagency Tasking and Coordination Group in Nhulunbuy has had the funding for its secretariat removed. I understand that group has not met for six months. Removing that secretariat’s support is a short-sighted move. That is where we get heads of agencies together. They talk about and gather important information about what is happening in the communities - safety and other related issues – and feed it through to agency heads in Darwin. There has been a very close tracking process to ensure these meetings are not talkfests but are task, outcome and action oriented in flagging community issues. Well, the secretariat position has gone, the group has been left to its own devices …
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move an extension of time for the member for Nhulunbuy.
Motion agreed to.
Ms WALKER: Thank you very much, member for Barkly, and thank you, Madam Speaker.
The Interagency Tasking and Coordination Group at Nhulunbuy has lost the support of the CLP government, having had its secretariat removed.
Anybody with any knowledge of the truth will know these developments were an important part of change developed and implemented under the watch of the previous Labor government. All of us in the Northern Territory share in the responsibility to reduce family and domestic violence. We know this is not just a police issue, and that is why we took the strong step of introducing mandatory reporting of serious family and domestic violence - the first jurisdiction in Australia to do so.
I am sure, like me, the member for Namatjira will recall that debate when that was passed. It was a very emotional debate. I heard stories from my colleagues that made me cry. There were other members on their feet, particularly women, who were able to describe first-hand some of the horrific things they had seen and lived through with their own families. We need to continue to promote that it is mandatory to report domestic violence. We must continue to do anything we can to combat domestic violence.
Knowledge is power, and this has been a very important tool for police and other agencies, ensuring they have the information they need to protect women and children in our community, and to respond to violent assaults that were too often hidden behind closed doors.
Another key matter in the statement from the Chief Minister is around recidivism and concern around repeat offences while offenders are on bail. This is an issue of concern to our community, obviously, and that is why we took firm action in 2008, as the Labor government, to ensure there was no second chance for serious violent offenders. We introduced a very tough approach - it was when Dr Chris Burns was the Attorney-General – so it was presumed serious violent offenders would not be granted bail, rather than a presumption they could have access to bail while they were awaiting a court hearing. That law changed in 2008, so a person who faced a serious assault charge and had committed a similar offence in the previous five years had to prove they deserved bail. It certainly was not an automatic thing. This was a very major change introduced to keep violent people charged with serious assaults off our streets and away from those people they might harm.
We understand community concern about repeat offenders, who are often youths, committing property crime. We well understand the sense of invasion of our private space and abuse of our property when people break, enter, and steal.
We would be very interested to hear of any new initiatives in that regard from the CLP government, but let us see the evidence of what works and what does not. Let us hear the professional view of our police and others in the justice and corrections system. Let us see some new options and approaches beyond immediate gaoling for people charged with property offences. Let us remember mandatory sentencing for property offences - the headline policy of the CLP in the late 1990s - did not work. It was a game changer for them in the lead-up to the 2001 election. If the new government is proposing that people charged with property crime be denied bail then what programs will be employed to change their behaviours?
Labor well understands the impact of crime on families and the right of all of our citizens to go about their lives without fear of assault, humbug and theft. These subjects are very topical at the moment as we have law and order bills before the House and another one coming up tomorrow.
The minister should be talking about recognising and thanking the members of our police service. I add in there, again, the members of our fire service, who also wear those caps which say ‘to serve and protect’. They are not grubs, they are hard-working individuals who provide a critical service and put service above themselves. They deserve our strong and unfailing support in their work.
I agree we should all find the time to thank a copper for their work. I am very mindful of the great history of the Northern Territory Police, particularly their work in the bush. Of course, police themselves would be the first to say how important it is as a bush copper to be part of, and to work with, your local community.
I acknowledge the fantastic work Nhulunbuy police do. In the 23 years I have lived there I have always admired the work they do, being a small and close-knit community. Their families, like my family, are part of the community. I will not name everybody by name because there are too many of them.
However, I acknowledge our current OIC Senior Sergeant Brendon Muldoon. He must be coming up for his second or third year in Nhulunbuy. He takes a very proactive approach to his job. He has led a project for a few months now on an awareness campaign for boating safety. He has worked with our local Rotary Club, the fishing club, I have been involved, and the local newspaper has been involved. They will be delivering very soon, thanks to support from various stakeholders, but Senior Sergeant Muldoon has led the charge.
Big signs with important safety messages will be placed at each of the boat ramps around the Gove area. They will be changing those safety messages so people have uppermost in their minds the checks they need to make before they go out on the water. There will be a letterbox there where people are strongly encouraged to fill out a piece of paper to say what time they have set off, who is with them, and when they are expected back so there is some record as to who is out there. Of course, this is borne out of rescues at sea that have been conducted by Police and Emergency Services. This is an additional channel to make people aware of some of those hazards on the water. I congratulate that initiative.
I also congratulate an initiative which is running for the second year in a row. It generally starts during the school holidays. Again, it has been initiated by police under Senior Sergeant Muldoon. It is to reward kids who are riding their bikes and doing the right thing: helmets on, stopping at roads, and getting off their bikes and walking them across pedestrian crossings. I cannot remember the name for it. Essentially, you get a ticket for being good. Many businesses supply prizes and they had a barbecue on Monday at the police station. Unfortunately, I could not get to that because I was here. I have seen messages on Facebook from proud mums and dads whose kids presented their tickets and received prizes for doing the right thing on their bicycles. That is what good policing is about: working above and beyond, being very much a part of the community and being proactive.
I acknowledge the bush police as well. Within my electorate, at Elcho Island there are four families - if we include Bettina Danganbarr, our incredible ACPO at Elcho Island, and the great work they do – who make sacrifices by going away from urban areas and all the creature comforts and be in the minority on communities. But, for the most part, families I meet there love it, are dedicated to it, work hard, and one of the best parts of their job is becoming a part of the community. They come away with life-changing experiences following their years in the bush and are invariably adopted into family, and come to urban life with new skills and knowledge which can only help to further build the skills that will allow them to continue to serve the people of the Northern Territory, whether they be in urban or remote areas.
I close by remembering the police who have lost their lives in our service and those everyday police officers who work in our interests for our family and community safety, as I have said before, often above and beyond the call of duty. We have a great police service that needs to be supported in its work, not pushed and pulled and dragged into political debates for law and order chest thumping. That is what we always looked to and worked for in government: to give them the tools to do their job in the best way they can. So, let the police get on with what they do best: supporting people in distress, preventing crime, and bringing offenders before the court.
Madam Speaker, I commend the statement to the House.
Ms FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on policing. There is no doubt the scope of the duty of a police officer in the Northern Territory has transformed and evolved since 1870. Certainly, the responsibility and expectation the public has on the role and duty of a police officer has expanded into non-traditional areas of policing. Tremendous respect must be afforded to those who choose to serve and protect our community in all shapes that might take.
The Chief Minister referred in his statement to an extract from the NT Police website which recounts that in 1961 the first female NT police officers were recruited to the force. From these five courageous trailblazing women we now boast a female presence in the police force in 2011-12 of 34.7%. I will refer to some numbers that come out of the Northern Territory Police, Fire and Emergency Services Annual Report for 2011-12. This graph shows the NTPFES staff by group and gender. In the Emergency Services, 47.37% were women; in Fire and Rescue Service, 10.49% were women; in civilian employees 67.26% were women; and in the NT Police, 30.06%. Whilst there is always room for improvement in the area of the advancement of women, some of these numbers in some of these areas are good. At the very least, the NTPFES has a commitment to equal opportunity employment and understands the importance of the contribution a diverse workplace makes to service delivery and the service of our community.
The final graph I will look to - from the same report - shows females by rank of constables and above. For 2011-12, we had 200 constables and a very small portion of females who are commissioned officers. It is encouraging that the large number of female constables at those lower levels will be coming up through the ranks. I hope, over the course of our term, we will start to see an increase in women taking on those more senior ranks and roles in our police force.
I have spoken in adjournment on a number of occasions about crime in Palmerston. It was an election commitment of mine, and of our government, to do everything in our power to ensure people feel safe in their homes, on their streets, and in their community. My constituents are concerned about law and order and are looking to me and this government to take a real stance on these issues. My constituents want to see the wrongdoers lawfully punished so people doing the right thing can live their lives. I will be analysing the December 2012 quarterly crime statistics to watch the trend of crime in my community.
I note the Chief Minister’s praise of closed circuit television in monitoring criminal hot spots. CCTV for Palmerston is an initiative I would like to see delivered for my community in suburban areas. I have been advancing this initiative since mid-last year. I believe the installation of CCTV in key areas, such as known trouble spots in Grey, Driver and Durack, will make an enormous difference on the ability to achieve prosecutions on matters that move through our court system.
I empathise with police officers who work tirelessly to catch criminals in the act, investigate crimes and charge appropriately, only to struggle with the evidentiary issues of identification. CCTV will assist the courts, the police, the prosecutors and, in turn, the victims, the defence lawyers and the defendants in expediting the delivery of justice. The presumption of innocence until proven guilty and the threshold test of beyond reasonable doubt are critical principles of our justice system and our democracy. CCTV goes a long way to providing the evidence that is not only beyond reasonable doubt, but beyond all doubt. CCTV is also a powerful investigative tool that cannot be underestimated.
For the last five-and-a-half months we have been in government we have had to sit here and endure the cries of this opposition about how successful the BDR was. I refute any assertion that the BDR was effective. I cannot count the number of times I have spoken to people who work at bottle shops who have told me the scheme was a nuisance which did not stop problem drunks from drinking. They would come through in minibuses, taxis, friends’ cars, and go to any lengths to get their hands on the grog.
Local shop operators who still continue to be humbugged, childcare operators who still continue to deal with the aftermath of alcohol-fuelled evenings, members of the community who loathe being punished for doing nothing wrong and, importantly, the police, did not see an impact of the BDR. In fact, I can report that crime around the Palmerston Shopping Centre has decreased recently. The issues which were there before the BDR were there during the BDR. Anything Labor says in defence of the BDR is simply laughable.
Minister Tollner, the Minister for Alcohol Policy, has a number of initiatives that will make a real difference to the lives of Territorians who do the right thing and will tackle, at its core, those individuals who continue to do the wrong thing.
I also take this opportunity to thank the NT Police for all of the interactions I have had with them. Even when I was a candidate, I wrote on numerous occasions to the Police Commissioner, and all of my concerns were promptly responded to, even by personal phone calls from the Police Commissioner. I know these timely responses from police meant a lot to those in my electorate who had raised their concerns with me.
More recently, I have had frequent interactions with the team at Palmerston Police Station. OIC Daniel Shean is an inspiring officer whose leadership has transformed the way in which Palmerston police do business. I thank him and his team for their initiatives, passion and commitment. I believe you do your job best when you love your job, and it is clear, whenever I speak to Daniel, that he loves Palmerston and is dedicated to exceptional service and to the protection of Palmerston residents.
The knowledge which Palmerston police have of our area and of our troublemakers never ceases to amaze me. They work collaboratively with council, Mission Australia and other bodies to deliver holistic policing in our community. The member for Brennan and I met with police last week to raise our concerns about Palmerston and we were pleasantly surprised. I was comforted by the quality of police we have patrolling our streets.
Recently, I have been on a graffiti blitz in my electorate and the response and commitment I have had from Palmerston police is exemplary. I am amazed at the level of police intelligence on youth activities, graffiti tag styles, motivating factors, and graffiti deterrence measures. The level of concern and connection to community issues like graffiti is, in my view, community-based policing at its best.
Madam Speaker, in closing, I give my wholehearted thanks to those who choose to serve and protect Territorians, and I thank the Chief Minister for his statement.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, there are a couple of comments I will make in relation to this statement. However, one of the things we should do in this place is lead by example. I invite the Leader of the Opposition to lead by example in good order and orderly matters. Whilst I was not going to enter into a public comment about what I read on page 6 of the paper today, it was the contribution of the member for Nhulunbuy which inspired me to respond.
I am not going to get angry about it or anything like that; I simply ask the Leader of the Opposition to tell this House whether or not she supports the conduct of her staffer in relation to those very unfortunate comments made on Facebook - I presume on a government computer upstairs.
Whilst I do not mind receiving criticism, if such common abuse had been articulated on the street and expressed in those terms it would be an offence which would breach the Summary Offences Act. However, the question I have for the Leader of the Opposition is simply: will you reprimand, or in some way chastise, that staffer for their conduct or will you tacitly support that person’s conduct by doing nothing?
If the answer to that question is the latter then it does not bode well for a government led by a Chief Minister Lawrie into the future. If she cannot contain and restrain people around her and by doing nothing, essentially, support them, then how can she govern and lead police in the Northern Territory? I have nothing more to say about that issue.
I also want to talk about this conversation we are consistently having about the Banned Drinker Register. I do not care about what a person’s opinion is of the Banned Drinker Register one way or the other, in the sense that we can argue until we are blue in the face in this place about statistics and how to read them. I am quite confident the decision we made in opposition to terminate the Banned Drinker Register was reinforced by the numbers that came through.
Putting all of that to one side, I found it intriguing that the Prime Minister of this country said it was the Territory government’s duty to return the Banned Drinker Register, based on information received from the Northern Territory Branch of the Australian Labor Party which was factually incorrect. Moreover, there is a much more fundamental thing on the table here.
I find it incomprehensible that we can continue in the way we have been in the past. I have made comments about passive welfare in this House in the past and will do so again. The Prime Minister and Jenny Macklin in Canberra oversee the single largest financial contribution to the alcohol problem in our community in the Northern Territory, in fact, to many of the remote and even non-remote places around this country. The fact that every fortnight the federal government pours millions and millions of dollars into this jurisdiction which fuels and underwrites financially the consumption of so much liquor in this community - particularly in those areas where the consumption becomes problematic - and somehow thinks she absolves herself by pointing at the Northern Territory government and saying it is our responsibility to fix it, is not an appropriate approach.
This will not be an exercise in Prime Minister bashing, because the approach of giving money away in a passive welfare framework is not historically something just the Australian Labor Party has done. Indeed, no shortage of Australian Liberal governments have done the same thing. However, the time has come for us to reassess it, because after the federal government pours millions of dollars every fortnight into this jurisdiction, which to a large extent - it is not exclusive - inflames the problem here and the Northern Territory government – be it the former Labor government or the current Northern Territory government - spends millions of dollars every fortnight fixing up the resultant mess.
All I am calling for, as the Attorney-General of the Northern Territory, as the member for Port Darwin - goodness gracious me, just as a citizen of the Northern Territory - is some better way to spend those two sums of money. Currently, it is almost like one level of government spends millions of dollars pouring fuel on a fire only to have the second level of government spend millions of taxpayers’ dollars trying to put the fire out. Surely, there must be a better way to deal with this issue in our community.
I do not want to be seen to be bashing any flavour of government in these comments because I would like to have a constructive debate in this country - particularly in regard to the relationship between the Northern Territory government and the federal government - to find a way to make the expenditure of the Northern Territory complement the expenditure of the federal government. That will require, I suspect, a movement in both governments in how you reconcile that spending. I have proposed some ideas and will mention them again because I am going to keep talking about them. I would like to see a system of work for welfare.
Once again, it is not to beat up on the recipients of welfare but, rather, to enable them to gain some dignity and self-worth by having a job. I do not want to see this imposed from on high. I imagine in the community - whether it is Nightcliff or Yuendumu - such programs would be governed by local boards which would have capacity, with the assistance of the government business managers they currently have in these communities, to find worthwhile local projects in which to use local labour.
In many Aboriginal communities, why is there not a committee of locals who can identify projects which need doing that could then be funded with labour through Centrelink projects. That way, vital community work could be done. You would have people who are employed - albeit through a form of CDEP for lack of a better description; however, it would be some form of employment for them - governed by local boards that would say this work needs to happen here, here, and here, and get the money, which, to an extent, has translated, up until now, as a destructive force in our community working as a positive force in our community. Would it not be a wonderful thing, I suggest to members of this House, that, all of sudden, we could tap into a source of labour that would be able to work in all manner of areas to develop our communities so we get better results? I would apply that attitude in Nightcliff, Alice Springs, Kintore or Docker River. God knows, so many of these communities could do with community work. There is a labour force sitting there ready to go, yet we do not do that.
What we, unfortunately, see is so many of the problems we have in the Northern Territory being exacerbated by federal government expenditure. I ask the Prime Minister, if she is serious about alcohol problems in the Northern Territory, that she do her part with the money she currently spends in this jurisdiction so we could get much better results than we are currently. However, that requires negotiation. I have spoken to Simon Crean, a few minutes ago to the new Attorney-General, Mark Dreyfus, and to a number of other people to try to get somebody in Jenny Macklin’s office to contact me so we can talk about these issues. If there is a legacy to be left behind by any minister with carriage of this expenditure - whether it be Jenny Macklin or any of her successors - the legacy of rescuing thousands of people from the curse of idleness would be a wonderful legacy to leave behind, no matter what your political persuasion.
Madam Speaker, it is 5.30 pm.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, it being 5.30 pm, in accordance with Standing Order 93, debate is now suspended and General Business will now have precedence over Government Business until 9 pm.
Debate suspended.
TABLED PAPER
Former Member for Wanguri’s Interstate Travel Report
Madam SPEAKER: Before I call the opposition, honourable members, I table the former member for Wanguri’s interstate travel report pursuant to 3.14 of the Remuneration Tribunal Determination No 1 of 2011.
MOTION
Country Liberals’ Election Promises
Country Liberals’ Election Promises
Ms LAWRIE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I move that this Assembly condemns the government for breaking the promises they made to Territorians at the last election by driving up the cost of living and increasing public drunkenness and antisocial behaviour.
This is an issue which is on the lips of Territorians. They cannot believe such a series of blatant broken promises has occurred. There was no greater demonstration of the public outcry around the behaviour of this government led by the member for Blain, the Chief Minister, than yesterday at the protest.
Shamefully, in Question Time in the Assembly today, members opposite labelled that protest as a Labor Party protest and the protestors as Labor Party political hacks. The member for Greatorex called them grubs. That is incredibly shameful because at that protest were citizens of the Territory who are not card-carrying members of the Labor Party. No doubt there were a few there who were. That protest was organised in conjunction between the unions, which are seeing workers lose their jobs and have grave fears for the privatisation of the port and Power and Water in the manoeuvrings of this government, and the Citizens for Action, which is a non-party political action group of concerned citizens, which has sprung up since ...
Mr Chandler: Driven by lies and hatred.
Ms LAWRIE: I pick up on the interjection, ‘driven by lies and hatred’. Peter Chandler, the member for Brennan, is describing the Citizens for Action as being driven by lies and hatred. You are appalling! They are not. They are normal, everyday Territory citizens who are so disturbed and appalled by the power prices being hiked up by the CLP government, and the impact this is having on their lives, that they have gathered to protest. We live in a democracy where we have always had freedom of speech - to the core and the heart of who we are. Member for Brennan, to hear you describe the Citizens for Action as a group driven by lies and hatred is appalling. There is no doubt you will have some explaining to do when those citizens come to you and ask why you say that about them, because these are Territorians who are absolutely distressed by the CLP breaking the promise on the costs of living.
Terry Mills said in the election campaign, ‘If you want to see a reduction in the cost of living, vote for us’. Yes I am paraphrasing him, but he said in the cost of living election campaign, ‘If you want to lower the cost of living, vote for the CLP’. He then stepped in and hiked up power prices by 30%, and hiked up water and sewerage prices.
People are gobsmacked that it was one foul swoop, that it was a direct broken promise on the cost of living. We have heard the excuses, and they have chopped and changed a bit. The themes have been, ‘it is Delia’s debt’, or ‘it is the Labor Party debt’, and, ‘we had to do it; they made us do it’. The next thing that came through was, ‘We need to fund the infrastructure, and it is all about the infrastructure’. As I have said in the past, if you are going to make something up, stick to it. At least be consistent; do not chop and change your reasons around.
The reality is, you did not have to do it. It is completely unnecessary. You have also tried to say, ‘We have done this because Labor did not do anything and it is all their fault’. What a lot of nonsense! The 2009 review of Power and Water reset the tariffs for the first time in 20 years. It took a Labor government to do that for the first time in 20 years: reset the tariffs by 18% one year, and 5% the next year for power; 30% resets in tariffs across three years for water and sewerage.
To pretend, as you have done, it was all about Labor doing nothing, ‘We have had to come and do this terrible thing. We really did not want to do it, but trust us, stay with us, bear with us’ - what a lot of nonsense! You are trying to turn Power and Water into a cash cow. You want to earn money, dividends out of Power and Water like you did for the best part of a decade to put into the consolidated revenue coffers so you can fund your unfunded election commitments in the bush. You went to the Territory campaign with $400m worth of election promises you submitted to Treasury on the eve of the deadline for the costings being submitted to Treasury. In contrast, the Labor Party had $200m in costed election commitments. So, you are spending $200m more on your promises than the Labor Party. You have to roll them out the door. You have to find $400m in election commitments.
On top of that, you had a plethora of promises that were not written down on the costings submitted to Treasury. They are the unfunded promises that exist in the contracts across the bush such as the Borroloola contract and the contracts you made on the Tiwi. You made contracts on all those major regional centres across the bush so people voted you into government. They were not in writing in the election commitments submitted to Treasury. You have a host of problems there. You have to find the money to fund the promises - like the $20m port at Melville - that people made and are remembered out bush. They are promises people talk to us about when we travel out bush. There is a whole host of problems for you there - billions of dollars’ worth of promises. Have a look at the new Katherine Hospital or sealing the road to Wadeye; that is a big stretch of highway hundreds of kilometres. There were promises all over the bush.
We are cataloguing because people are really good at telling us what the promises were and where they were made. We do our own costings on the promises and work out how much you are up for. We quickly figured it out; you are stripping the dollars out of the pockets of hard-working Territorians to fund your unfunded election commitments in the bush. At the same time, if you can fatten Power and Water for sale, would that not be a lovely cash revenue injection?
No doubt, there were many people protesting at the rally who are very concerned about the port. You saw the MUA members out there proudly. They do not want to see the sale of the port. They are worried about it because they are starting to see conditions being squeezed at the port. You have heard the MUA spokespeople talk about how tough things are getting and how they are worried about the safety of their workers there. These were genuine people with genuine issues protesting yesterday about their genuine concerns about how you have driven up the cost of living.
You also heard at the protest yesterday concerns coming directly from the representatives of the nurses, the Australian Nursing Federation. They are not affiliated with the Labor Party. They are not card-carrying members of the Labor Party. You called them political Labor hacks and grubs today in Question Time, but they are not. They were there telling the audience that agency nurses have been cut; agency nurses have lost their contract at our main hospital. They are no longer getting shifts at work and they are being made redundant. These are frontline nurses who, before the election, were caring for Territorians as patients in the hospital. Now, as a result of the CLP cuts, they are no longer there.
I shudder to think what the nurse-to-patient ratio is starting to look like at Royal Darwin Hospital. We know the nurse-to-patient ratio exists for a reason: to save lives. We know the CLP cut the offer on the table from the federal government of a new children’s wing. They pay scant regard to the needs and the demand pressures at Royal Darwin Hospital. We know you have gone on to cut the medi-hostel. The descriptions of it coming from the Health Minister have been alarming. It is disrespectful, to say the least, to call it a hotel for people.
As people heard at the rally yesterday, the medi-hostel is designed for patients in the hospital who need medical care in recovery to be in so they receive appropriate care. They live in the bush and this is the recovery care before they go home. We also know the hostel was designed for our pregnant mums coming in from the bush areas, when they needed obstetric birthing care, to be in there until they go into labour. For the Minister for Health to describe that as a hotel is extraordinary. The point of it all, and the point the nurses were making is, it saves money. It frees up the acute beds that are being occupied by those patients by putting them into a less expensive care model; meaning the person sitting in accident and emergency in Royal Darwin Hospital can more quickly get into a bed and get the care they need.
These are genuine concerns about the broken promises because these jobs that are being lost in the front line directly contradict the promise made by the Chief Minister when he said, ‘Your job is safe. No jobs will be gone. Public servants will not lose their jobs’. We have seen people on contracts across all agencies have their contract ceased. They no longer have a job. They had a job before the August election, they were serving the public in their various agencies and, because they were on contract, their contracts have ceased and they no longer have a job. We are not even talking about the CEOs and the high-level executives. These are not the people who earn more than $110 000, these are the people earning less than $110 000 who the member for Blain, when Leader of the Opposition, said in this Chamber, ‘Your job is safe’. Well, it was not. They have been sacked; they have lost their jobs.
I met them at things like the protest rally yesterday and while doorknocking in Wanguri. I met them at the New Year’s Eve multicultural functions I attended where there were no CLP members. Literally in their droves people are saying, ‘I am one of the ones who lost their job’. They are only just hanging in there because their husband or wife still has a job. They are only just hanging in there and they do not know how on earth they will pay this power bill that has been hiked up.
You can spin all your political spin with your $180 000 a year spin doctor just for Facebook. Are you guys for real? You can spin all you like but people see through it. They get it. They can see what you are doing. They can see that you are fattening up Power and Water for sale, and you are paying your mates, the old boys, $1m for six months just to give you the lame excuses to do whatever you want to do, to cut whatever you want to cut. They can see through it. Why? Because this is a small town. People talk. Public servants are talking. I know they are worried about their jobs but they are starting to chat in the communities to their friends who are not public servants, who then come and have a chat with someone else who has a chat to someone else. What is happening under the CLP government is the talk of the town’s coffee bars, and people do not like it.
They do not like that you have so blatantly broken that promise to reduce the cost of living. They do not like that you have been mean enough to put $1 on bus transport for seniors. They do not like that you are mean enough to say, ‘You have to pay $20 if you front up at the MVR’. They are all adding to the cost of living. They do not like that. Those power and water price hikes flow on to everything. We had a whole Question Time argy-bargy over the cost being passed on at the childcare centres, with, ‘Oh no, it is not, Labor is not telling the truth about that’, when there were letters going to parents from childcare centres pointing it out.
It seems that whenever someone says something to you - and certainly when the opposition says it - it must be wrong. ‘You are wrong; you are making it up’, when it is actually happening. People are actually packing up and leaving because they cannot afford the power price hikes you have imposed. People ask me, ‘Why are they not doing this in increments? Why can they not do this in increments?’ I say, ‘Well, it was a pretty clear answer on the Channel 9 news. I was sitting at home watching it and I was gobsmacked’. When asked on Nine News in the studio by Jonathan Upton, ‘Will you be bringing it in all in one hit because you want people to forget about it in four years’ time when they vote?’, the Treasurer candidly replied, ‘Oh, no. We hope they forget about it in two years’ time’. That was the most incredible piece of footage I have seen because it brought home, starkly and clearly on the TV set through Channel 9 Nine News she is admitting it is petty politics. It is all about the politics of, ‘Let us hit them up, do the money grab at the start, and do not worry, they will forget about it’. That is the plan, ‘Let us grab the money so they forget about it’.
It is not going to happen; people do not forget about it. Their power will not magically be 30% chaper in four years’ time or two years’ time. They still will be running the fridge and, yes, often people have a second fridge in the Territory. Why? It is so hot here. You rely on refrigeration more than in the southern climates. If you have a large family and are trying to run a fridge full of food, where do you put your drink containers? I am not just talking alcohol. I have a large family. I have my stock of juices and milk containers for the kids in a separate fridge. Many people use it to put their beer and wine in. We live in a hot place and our use of refrigeration is greater than down south. Down south they can leave the butter on the bench. Here, if you leave the butter on the bench for five minutes it is melting. We store so much more in our fridges. Our preserves, vegemite and peanut butter are in the fridge. That means we often rely on a second fridge and we are trying our best to make it as economical as possible. You go for the better rated fridges as often as you can save and afford one. The second fridge is not a luxury.
Running air-conditioners is not a luxury. For families trying to get their little ones to sleep at night it is not luxury in the build-up, even in a Wet Season like the one we are currently having where the monsoon cooling rains have not arrived.
People are literally saying, ‘I cannot afford this price hike. I am packing up and leaving’. Often in those families at the moment one person has been sacked by the CLP government; I met one on the weekend. I was looking for a household item for some time, so I looked at the lawn sales on the weekend and went to one which had the item to check it out. The man there had been sacked by the CLP and they could not afford to live here any longer with their two kids. They were devastated. They had raised their kids in the Territory and wanted to continue to live here. With him unemployed, they could not afford to. He was in a specialist field so there was no alternative job here for him. He is taking his family south because he was sacked by the CLP. The broken promise: ‘Your job is safe’. The reality has hit hard in that family.
They are not the only ones I have met. Part of the role as Leader of the Opposition is being out and about in the community; you are accessible with a small community. I have had complete strangers telling me their stories. They will not forget in four years’ time because of the pain. Whilst they move south, their friends and extended families are living here, and they do not like who did it to them. Your own polling will show you Terry Mills is absolutely toxic! He is the one in those election ads, he has broken every promise he made, and people will not forgive.
He can spin all he likes about debt but, at the end of the day, he is increasing debt. The debt is at a serviceable level: 8% of revenue to service the whole of government and the non-financial debt. We have a stable AA+ credit rating. There is no threat to that credit rating.
You can spin it all you like, but people can see through the spin because we are a small community. I guess what is not helping you is your method of operation has been the carbon copy of the Campbell Newman method. They are saying, ‘Hang on a second, we have heard all this before. We have heard it in Queensland. They are spinning the same stuff in Queensland and they are taking the same action in Queensland. Oh, that is right, Labor pointed out in the election campaign that the CLP election material, the five-point plan, was the same as Queensland’s’. They get it; people are not fools. Your Chief Minister might be a fool, but the people are not fools.
On that subject of the chief being a fool, he advised us all what we need to do to deal with the problem of the drunks on the streets – another broken promise by the way; it was on the front page of his 100-day plan that he was going to take the drunks off the streets. That broken promise the people can actually see. At a Darwin City Council meeting which he attended to discuss the problem of the drunks on the streets – this is not the Labor Party saying it, it is not the opposition saying it, the aldermen said it - his great advice was, ‘Well, just tell the drunk you do not like them drinking’.
That is dangerous; that is how people get hurt. That is contrary to the advice a respectable and responsible Chief Minister should be giving. It is stupid and dangerous. People get hurt. My advice is, do not go up to the drunk. Do not put yourself in harm’s way. They are drunk; they are not in their normal senses. Be careful. Contact police; they are trained to deal with drunks.
Not only does he have a litany of broken promises, he is now trying to work his way out of dealing with that broken promise of taking the drunks off the street by putting normal citizens in danger, which goes to another issue.
How do you call firefighters grubs, member for Brennan? How do you call them party hacks when you are sitting there making those accusations about the process vote ...
Mr CHANDLER: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I would like the member to withdraw that. I never called anyone a grub, thank you very much.
Ms LAWRIE: I withdraw, member for Brennan, it was the member for Greatorex who, in Question Time today, called the protestors grubs and party hacks and he was asked to withdraw. How do let your colleague, the member for Greatorex, describe firefighters like that when they turn up to the protest rally because of the cuts the government has made to their budget? They are foolish, dangerous cuts which the firefighters say threaten lives - shutting the Humpty Doo Fire Station and taking away the rescue vehicle from Palmerston, which has the Jaws of Life equipment.
The firefighters stood there, in their numbers, and one of them spoke, pleadingly, about the dangerous situation that exposes everyone to, and asked the government to change its path, to keep the Humpty Doo Fire Station open and to keep the rescue vehicle staffed at Palmerston. We are talking about two firefighters on the rescue vehicle. It is ludicrous that not only is the government taking away two firefighters from the rescue vehicle, they are proposing to decommission the rescue vehicle. When the firefighters said to the government, ‘Do not decommission the vehicle’. The answer was, ‘No, it will be decommissioned’. Unbelievable!
The four firefighters being ripped out of Humpty Doo are the ones trained for structural fires. They are sitting in that growth environment of the urban centre: all the housing going up around Humpty Doo, the INPEX village, the increased traffic out that way; it is a high growth area. There is all the gamba grass out there with its fuel load. On the day shift, those firefighters issue notices to rural landholders saying, ‘Clear that fire break there’. They are keeping it safe. But no, rip them out. For savings? For how much when it is okay to spend $300 000 on the member for Greatorex’s favourite golf course? When you will spend $1m on four people to work here for six months to tell you what you want to be told so you have the excuses to rip the money out of everywhere and spend it on your unfunded bush commitments? Wrong priorities. No wonder you are toxic. No wonder people are hostile.
Blame me all you like. I am not going anywhere; I will stay here and take it because people know you are making that up. No, I was not going to increase power and water prices. You are running around telling people, ‘50%’. What a joke! You guys are unbelievable. You will make anything up. We went to the election with a very clear policy: CPI adjustments. I did the heavy lifting in 2009; I did the increases then. Was I going to work with the Power and Water Corporation? Absolutely, I would have continued to work with them, watching their capital program and going through efficiencies, without a doubt. You have not done that work, you just went straight to, ‘Let us hit the hip pockets of Territorians and break that promise. Let us compound it by sacking people’. As if the cost of living hike was not enough of a problem for them, sack them so they have no livelihood to pay their bills anyway. Then make ridiculous decisions in the mini-budget around cuts to critical services such as the firies at Humpty Doo and the rescue vehicle.
Then, pour more fuel on people’s contempt of your behaviour by scrapping the BDR. Whether you like it or not, you did not have your alternative ready. Whether you agree with it or not, you did not have your alternative ready. Not only did you not have it ready, but it will not be ready for a long time. You still have no legislation coming to the Assembly. You have not built any camps. How far off are you? A year? Two years? Six months? Four months? Any indication? Any time lines? Any model of legislation? How is the drafting going? Any luck with that?
Meanwhile, the drunks are on the streets and the Chief Minister makes a comment that we should just tell them to stop drinking. I called him a fool for that comment. I cannot count the number of people who have said to me, ‘You are spot on’. Irrespective of their political persuasion, they say, ‘You are spot on’. It is dangerous and stupid to approach a drunk. People get hurt doing that.
Increasing drunkenness and antisocial behaviour has seen a real difference to the urban environment in which I have been living. The business operators around the CBD are appalled. They are describing the return of the drunks. They are talking about the return. They are not saying, ‘Oh yes they have been there all the time in large numbers’. They say, ‘They went away; they returned’. You will not hear it and I know you disagree with it. I know you will argue against it; that we are just making it up and they were there all along. But, every time you say that, the business owners of this town say, ‘Well, those guys do not know what they are talking about then. Those guys are obviously not listening to us when we are turning up in forums and saying the drunks have come back. It is a real problem for my business now’. You are doing yourself a further disservice because they are saying, ‘These guys are out of touch. They do not understand’.
You have railed against the booklet, but it was pretty easy to put together. Six hundred public servants will be sacked. That was straight from an interview on the 7.30 Report by the Treasurer …
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request the member be given an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Ms LAWRIE: The Treasurer has railed against the use of the figure 600 when we say 600 public servants will be sacked, and she said it herself. It was in an interview on the 7.30 Report. We lifted it straight out of the Treasurer’s interview on the 7.30 Report and put it on the piece of paper. What? You are telling yourself off for saying it? They are your words. You have not said you got it wrong, that you made it up. ‘I am sorry I got it wrong, I made a mistake’. You have not backtracked on your comments, on your words, on your numbers. Fair dinkum!
Paying them almost $1m for only six months’ work is a fact. It has been in the paper. You have admitted it. You led the information here in the Chamber. And you are paying for their luxury accommodation, or are you pretending you are not? You are not paying for C2? You are not paying for luxury accommodation on the Esplanade for - well, we know there are at least two but I suspect there are four of them. I definitely have confirmed two. I am hearing it is three; I suspect it is four. I am hearing - did not put it in the booklet because we cannot substantiate it - that even their wives have access to NT Fleet cars. How does that happen when you are taking NT Fleet cars off public servants? If I am wrong, by all means in this contribution tell me that their wives are not driving around in NT Fleet cars. I hope I am wrong on that; I really do, because that would be a bridge too far, surely, while you are taking cars off public servants.
You cancelled the Arafura Games. You have put up power prices by $2000 a year - in your own words, in your own media release, Treasurer, you said it was $2000 a year. Oh yes, and the rego. What a coincidence that when we took the information off the MVR website, on 2 January, which shows the registration for a four-wheel drive Land Cruiser will go up by $159 a year. If you go to the website, that information is not there anymore; it has been cleared. It was there on 2 January, but it has gone since the booklet was produced – coincidental, I am sure.
Make our children suffer: slash 10% from the education budget. This gets them really hot under the collar. However, the thing I enjoy the most about it is it was the Treasurer’s own mini-budget media release which talked about the 10% cut in education - in her own words ...
Mrs Lambley: No, savings.
Ms LAWRIE: Oh I see. The Treasurer just said ‘No, savings’. You call it 10% in savings, and I will call it 10% in cuts. Guess what? It means the same thing; it is a 10% reduction in the Education budget.
They hurt seniors by putting their power prices up by 15%, their water prices up by 20%, and buses are no longer free. I mean, seriously guys! I do not know how CLP Bubble Land is going, but in the real world this is the one that really irks people, that you have gone after the seniors. They cannot fathom that. They cannot accept it. Julia Christensen asked the Chief Minister why he put up the bus travel for seniors and people are having quiz nights trying to understand what he said, to unpick it. Was it a bit of dog whistling? There has been that question: ‘Were there certain types of people we do not want travelling?’ Was it a bit of that? Or was it that, as he said in his own words, people were using the public transport, willy-nilly, to get around? What else is it? Julia Christensen was so gobsmacked about it, she said, ‘But that is what public transport is. It is a bus’. That is one of the most extraordinary things we have heard.
Scrapping the Banned Drinker Register, allowing 2500 problem drinkers to have unlimited access to takeaway grog again - fact. Cut funding to our firefighters, putting Territorian’s at risk when fire threatens and even scrapping funding for the Jaws of Life. Are you going to say Labor is making it up? The firefighters stood outside Parliament House yesterday and said it. They have said it in the NT News. One of my personal favourites is dismantling first homebuyer schemes meaning there are now 1000 fewer homes for families to buy - gone. Are you guys for real? You reset your own bizarre schemes and cut people out of the housing market.
I met someone the other day who had got into HOMESTART Extra before you scrapped it. They are battlers. They are a single income family with kids and they have the shared equity scheme. They have a home they can call their own and they got in there just before you scrapped it. They climbed that ladder at work a little and got a pay rise. They would have just been over the eligibility if they had not gone into the scheme. We are hearing people over the eligibility criteria now in public housing are getting letters from the CLP regime saying, ‘You are out. Get out!’ We will find someone to come forward eventually. That is what we are hearing. By all means, if I am wrong let me know. Tell me you are not turfing people out of their public housing if they have scraped over the eligibility criteria. If I am wrong, by all means let me know. Tell me you are not telling pensioners in public housing to get out of a three-bedroom home. By all means, let us know. If that is not true, let us know.
There is a 24% cut for the family and parent support services. It is true. It is in your media releases. You call them non-government agencies, which lead me to the next page: a 5% cut to charities. You did that on Christmas Eve. Cutting charities by 5% - people find that pretty appalling, but to tell them on Christmas Eve! Could you have not held that letter for a week or maybe sent it a week earlier. You know what our government used to do on Christmas Eve? Give the charities an extra $20 000 recognising it was the time of the year where people were doing it the hardest. There were greater expectations on them and the charities needed a small one-off funding increase to deal with the Christmas hampers and toys. No, you cut their funding by 5% and then you make a $4.8m cut to child protection and youth services and pretend you do not. We listed the organisations just in case you had forgotten. We listed the organisations you cut funding from. And you did say, Treasurer, there is more to come so we mentioned there is more to come - your own words.
Line your own pockets - oh, this is a special one. While dishing out financial pain to Territorians the Country Liberal Party members of parliament are working towards giving themselves a pay rise of up to $50 000 a year. By all means, let me know if you are not going to have the RTD do the review of members’ remuneration. By all means, let us know that, Chief Minister, when you are responding.
Dodgy deals in the bush: you are opening up the rivers of grog because grog is before jobs and healthy families. Failing families in the bush: cuts to health, education, youth work and child protection services. But, there are many promises for better bush roads and bridges, but there was no new money in the commitment to Treasury. A telling tale and it is true.
It is your shame, Chief Minister, and that is why you are toxic out there. That is why people are angry you have broken your promises, that you have hiked up the cost of living, that you have literally sacked Territorians, and you have let the drunks back out on to the street. We now have to deal with that, and you are foolish enough to tell people to put themselves at risk and walk up to a drunk and tell them to stop drinking. You have it very wrong.
Mr MILLS (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, this is a serious attempt by the opposition to gain some traction, spinning their wheels on the hatred and feeling from the community to generate a situation where they can, perhaps, score a couple of points.
I acknowledge, coming into government and having to assess the circumstances we have been presented with - take a careful look, understand the situation - and then make decisions which are not made on the basis of trying as much as possible to be popular. It is not about the government, it is about the decisions the government makes. Those decisions have been difficult but they have been necessary.
Believe it or not, yesterday, talking to some of the people prior to them being whipped into some kind of scary frenzy, there were a number of people who said, ‘We understand there is a problem that had to be dealt with by increasing tariffs’. There is a debate over whether it should have been done in one hit or not. Some were surprised to find the increase brings us to a level which is still below, in most cases, the national average and is the cheapest in the country. When you ask people how much they pay for power, most people do not know, they just know it is huge. When you ask them to identify the primary pressure placed on a family, is it a decision to increase the cost of power or is it the 200%-plus increase in the cost of rent and mortgages, that is it.
For five-and-a-half months you have had a government that made decisions. We did not make these decisions to be popular, we made them to secure the future of the Northern Territory. For some of the learned folk on the other side who have had a little go at trying to deconstruct this - to use the famous word of the member for Barkly to deconstruct how you lower the cost of living, first you have to deal with the waste and reduce debt. Then you have the capacity to use the money you have saved to reduce the cost of living. You are living in la la land to think you just pluck money out of some place and put it in people’s pockets so everyone cheers and loves you, then we all live in some kind of Nirvana. It is ludicrous. That is not what your community has put their trust in you to do.
I welcome this motion. The clever people upstairs have probably crafted this. ‘I know what we will do. We will bring out our deadly secret weapon, the one that has really hit them hard; that is, the book of lies’. Or the ‘Did you know just after 100 days in power’. They cooked this one up and thought, ‘This is going to be a humdinger; this will blow them out of the water’. You guys seem to forget we are not in a political debate where you can throw anything or say whatever you want to try to score your point. It is being conducted in the presence of grown-ups who are able to assess whether these things are true or false. Surprise, surprise! We welcome this debate. My colleagues will join the fray and respond to you.
We have not much to respond to when the Opposition Leader was given an extension of time - to what? To read from the book and make allegations and assertions - no strong debating points, no strength of argument, nothing compelling whatsoever, just little snide comments here and there and things you may have picked up. I am not 100% sure. ‘You see whether you can verify that or not. Here is another thing I heard when I was at such and such a place. This group of people said he is an idiot. That is what everyone is saying’. That level from an Opposition Leader?
This is a debate about important matters like debt. Debt is real. Debt has to be responded to, because anyone who is managing their own affairs knows they have to deal with it; it just does not go away. If you deal with it, you have a stronger future. But, if you do not have the courage, wisdom, or the care for your community or your circumstances to deal with it today, you store up a far greater problem for yourself in future.
Make no mistake, we welcome this debate because it is time we had proper debates. There are many quiet, good people who are starting to tune in and realise we have a situation in the Northern Territory where there is obvious opportunity, but we are being hampered by the poor situation we have been presented with. But, at last, there is a government which has the courage to deal with these things. We are dealing with these things because I honestly believe, as my Cabinet colleagues and members of the Country Liberals team believe, the best days of the Territory are ahead of us. There are some very exciting days ahead of us, but we have to plan properly. We have to get our house in order; we have to recognise where there is waste. We have to deal with the debt so we can reduce the cost of living. That is the real world, that is the world we operate in, and we are going to make real difference. Watch and see!
You have given us an opportunity to outline the status of our responses to serious issues facing Territorians five-and-a-half months since my government took office. On Friday 20 July 2012, the ABC News announced the following:
- This week the Country Liberals launched its five point plan for the Territory if it wins the August 25 election.
- Opposition Leader Terry Mills says it involves cracking down on problem drinkers, cutting debt and creating a ‘three hub’ economy around resources, tourism and education.
- We've got negative commentary from Labor, who is the government, more interested in the opposition than they are in dealing with the basic problems that Territorians have such as the release of land in a timely manner ...
Many of us have worked in the real world and we know there are times of difficulty. I am not going to talk about my own experience except to say that living on the land was not easy; there were some dreadfully difficult times, pressures that were borne upon families and decisions that had to be taken, including my own family, which resulted in me having to leave the land. They were real. We responded and we survived. There are families and small business operators in exactly the same circumstances; they know. There are families balancing their budgets, trying to get their kids to understand that truth and doing the right thing is important.
In these first sittings of parliament in 2013, we have exactly the same situation I described halfway through last year in the preparation for the last Territory election. Now, the great important office of Chief Minister resides with me. The responsibility is now with the members of the Country Liberal Party to carry the responsibility of government. I have said on a number of occasions, from that side, I was aware of everything I said in opposition. I carry it with me. You have the capacity and the interest, I am sure, to get all of those words and bring them back. I do not mind because I am aware of the words I have spoken. I know what the nature of this job is, and I am prepared to make the necessary decisions.
We are now faced with a Labor Party in opposition which continues to display more interest in throwing stones across the House and getting into grubby gutter politics than in showing any kind of leadership in addressing real issues that face the Northern Territory. They do not even have the capacity to participate in any bipartisan support for an important nation building project or securing the energy future of the Territory – getting gas to Gove – could not even drag that up. Good on you, Martin Ferguson, I am impressed by men like you who are not so concerned about your political stripe but more motivated by what is right. That is the sort of leadership that will inspire those good families across the Territory and this country. They want to see that. I want to be a part of that and we have a team that wants to take the Territory into that space with that kind of leadership.
As voters in Wanguri go to the polls on Saturday, I am certain what they are looking for is leadership for the Northern Territory based on facts and planning for our future, not the appalling lies and distortions produced by Labor’s spin doctors. The fact is, one of them is contesting the Wanguri election. Indeed, Labor’s Wanguri book of lies, as it must be called, was one of the most disgraceful, cheap, shallow publications I have ever seen. I reckon the saddest part of this is that you guys are actually proud of it. You think you have come up with something really good. It is not! It points right back at you. I would be embarrassed.
The Country Liberals’ five-point action plan, as I emphasised at the time, ‘lays the foundation to end more than a decade of Labor’s mismanagement and neglect’. Territory Labor has ‘given the Territory soaring debt levels’. That is a fact. ‘Diminished key industries like tourism,’ – fact – ‘mining and the pastoral sector’ - fact. Check for yourself. ‘Created a climate of skyrocketing rents and unaffordable house prices’ - fact. Let me remind honourable members of the exact words of the Treasurer in this House on 30 October 2012:
- The Power and Water Corporation is in such a financial position that without government underwriting it, it would not be able to continue as a going concern. A private company would have been moved into administration in such circumstances.
- I was also made aware of the existence of correspondence exchanged between the then Treasurer …
Now Opposition Leader:
- … and the Chair of the Power and Water Corporation over 12 months ago, where the board was aware of the state of the corporation and they alerted the then Treasurer, and now Opposition Leader, to the state of the finances.
They were serious. The Treasurer concluded her remarks with the words,
- I want to be very clear on this: the gravity of the position of the Power and Water Corporation should not be in any way underestimated.
The words of the now Opposition Leader, untroubled I assume, by such important observations, have to be responded to by real leaders.
The government has made the responsible move to implement tariff increases in line with every other jurisdiction in Australia, not because we want to upset people and hurt people; that is not our intention. That is the impression you got from out the front of parliament yesterday, that we are just cruel people who want to do this because we really like inflicting pain. It is the exact opposite. You have to do this, otherwise the wages workers receive will not be there, they will be swallowed up. On what? Debt repayment, because as debt grows you have to get it under control. I am sure most people have had credit cards that just seem to swell up and almost get out of control. Think about a credit card - a giant credit like that sitting over a government. That is exactly what we have over the Northern Territory so we simply had to be committed to the long-term future of the Northern Territory, not a short-term political strategy, which was the hallmark of the previous government, to hide the severity of the problem under some political rock.
My Cabinet has to make some tough and very unpopular decisions. Many Territorians find it difficult to accept that some of these changes were necessary, but strong leadership is required to deliver what is possible for the Northern Territory. The Country Liberal’s five-point plan not only includes cutting Labor’s waste and reducing the debt, it also creates a three-hub economy which will ensure the Northern Territory is not totally dependent on individual projects just to keep the economy going or keep it strong.
Instead, there is a wide range of career and vocational opportunities that attract people to come here and encourage our children to make their futures here. Sounds like a housing issue that needs to be dealt with. We have land; we need to release it. We need to plan. That is why there is a focus not just on INPEX, for example, which was very nearly the undoing of the people of Gove. Not only did the Labor government of the day not insist on any gas, or ensure there was some set aside for the future of the Northern Territory in whatever mechanism they chose to employ, it was all short term, not looking over the horizon - none made available, none secured for the future. That is the issue we have had to deal with.
I do not know whether the member for Nhulunbuy will recognise that some of the consequences of the short-termism of the Labor government has exacerbated the problems and the anxiety of the good families of Nhulunbuy and the East Arnhem region. I wonder whether the member for Nhulunbuy would ask for an apology from the now Opposition Leader, or the former Chief Minister, for the short-term thinking that resulted in a very serious problem for the people of her own constituency? Unlikely, it is not in the DNA of Labor. It is much better to project outwards and blame somebody else. It makes them feel much better in the short term. It does not do anything though.
The Labor government did not say anything to Pacific Aluminium in January 2012 - that they could have the 10 years of gas requested. The Opposition Leader is saying, ‘He is just dithering. All he has to do is sit at his desk and say, yes, give them the gas’. Really? What did this former Labor government do? It received a letter, sat on it - member for Nhulunbuy, take note of this, you have heard it before, hear it again - it sat on that letter for seven months. It organised a group of people that already existed just to ensure they talked to each other about this. It was not really of the calibre that matched the urgency of the situation. Seven months - alerted heads of departments to ensure they got together and found some kind of strategy, then let it ride for a while to see whether it would sort itself out.
Not only does a government have to be aware of background, it also has to invest in the future. The Country Liberals’ five-point plan includes planning properly for the future. The Planning Commission is already in place and is independent, transparent, and provides certainty. It is a vital component to consider the enormous potential of the region. It includes the commitment to tackle crime at its roots and to be accountable. That is why we went down to the rally yesterday. You asked, member for Barkly, ‘Do you have the courage to go down there?’ Absolutely I have the courage. They are fellow Australians and have the freedom to speak.
I am proud to be an Australian. I was not particularly proud of the behaviour, but the way I was raised was, perhaps, a bit different. It does not matter. I did what I believed was the right thing, as did my colleagues. If you are happy with the way it turned out, if you go away thinking, ‘Wow, we scored a few points there’ - many people are watching. People are trying to raise their kids and wondering what the right thing to do is, how you handle conflict, how you resolve issues, how you try to get your head around it and make hard decisions. It is not a cartoon show we are watching, it is real life.
As of 25 January 2013, paid police staffing totals 113 in Darwin, 107 in Casuarina, 88 in Palmerston, 90 in Regional Operations Northern Command, and 210 in Regional Operations Southern Command. Three police recruit squads are currently in training. New police overnight facilities are planned for Areyonga, Mount Liebig and Robinson River, with design work on identified land developed for the Milikapiti facility.
NT police have an increased capacity to respond to domestic and family violence, pulling together both government and non-government service providers. There are a number of important policing projects which I outlined in an earlier statement to the parliament. We have taken this very seriously. It is going to be difficult for you but you will find your way around it I am sure; where there is a will there is a way. The figures in front of you will indicate that by holding people responsible for their behaviour and putting an emphasis on frontline policing, you change the profile of crime, and the statistics will be evidence of that.
One thing I found disappointing in the contribution by the Opposition Leader in particular - carried on by a couple of other members, one being the member for Nhulunbuy - I am astonished to find those Labor members often speak of tolerance and acceptance of all things; they like to preach these things and expect an attitude of respect. However, when it comes to something which crosses their path, the tolerance brigade turns into a lynch mob. When it comes to the age of people who have made contributions, I cannot believe the disrespectful manner in which you have prosecuted your argument against the Renewal Management Board because of their gender and their age. They are such low-level debating points that speak more about the person making the point than the point being made. It is astonishing!
If you pretend you care and are tolerant and accepting of seniors and those who have amassed life experience, they will see right through it. Time will tell. Do not enjoy your time in the sun too long because there are clouds coming, I reckon.
I want to touch on a matter which was raised this morning. I find it galling that you bring gender and age into question as ways of bringing down people who have contributed to both sides of politics as though it is political issue. They have contributed significantly to public policy and financial management over many years right across the country, and laid some very significant foundations which are enjoyed today, such as the railway, for one. You whip up this point; you get the community really anxious about it. You have a responsibility when you start putting out information. The consequences of the information and the effect that will have on people do not seem to worry you.
Your record of using public funds to fund consultancies is appalling. I honestly do not know how you could go out in the marketplace and run these arguments when you know what you have done. I did not get a chance to finish today, but we talked about Hawker Britton. I wonder whether your book of lies, just to add a bit of balance there, will tell the truth about your Hawker Britton issues. I have already mentioned it, but it bears repeating because it connects to something else. You paid Hawker Britton $300 000 from March 2011 to June 2012: for 15 months for intergovernmental and ministerial relations. It was political. In addition to the $300 000, you provided accommodation at $300 a night. That is $2100 a week. The shocker is that with this arrangement - and you are worried about our mates - your mates were told in their contract they did not ever have to provide you a written report unless you asked for it. They did not have to submit anything; you just sent the money. Heaven knows what this is really about, but that was a real contract.
Deloittes were paid $600 000 for a climate change policy and implementation strategy. This was for 12 months’ work. I am not sure whether they had to provide a written report. Perhaps it was simply $600 000 for climate change hot air. Who knows? But that is real money you spent on a consultancy. But you do not get too anxious about that.
Then, there was $1m paid in consultancies for financial advice on the Marine Supply Base. That does not compare, to be fair, to the quality and the amount of work done by the Renewal Management Board. They are large amounts of money paid for obscure purposes that appear difficult to justify. However, what really troubles me – it does not trouble you – is that you can run these vitriolic arguments and call into question the character of good people who have been asked to do an important job to deal with a real issue, which is the real mess: the debt issue. You get some kind of churlish delight in bringing them down.
Like the unpleasant criticism of a fine man who would be horrified to be brought into public debate, Dr Ted Campbell, and the role he played. Anyone who dealt with him and his negotiations in the best interests of the Northern Territory over this recent gas issue would hold him in high regard, and at least respect him. But not the Opposition Leader. Not a man who has a doctorate of chemical engineering from Cambridge University. Not a man who was the lead agent for the construction of the Mereenie pipeline, which powers the generator right now. He was there at the beginning of that visionary project and loves to serve and make a contribution to the Northern Territory. He is learned and respected around the country, but not by the Opposition Leader. It would be good if we had a contribution from the Opposition Leader that had dug a little deeper and came up with a real argument. All we get is low-level grunge that comes out to try to foul anything around it and to try to, perhaps, make the Opposition Leader look good. It is not working, but keep doing it.
This issue of your 100-day plan and that little document that has been circulating around - I reckon you might stir up a few people but you will stir up many more questions that you will not be able to answer because, ultimately, the question comes back at you. What would you do, given that most people accept - even if they do not want to - that there is a problem? We went through the public service and asked senior public servants. They all knew there was a financial problem. They all knew it had to be responded to. The Opposition Leader knew there was debt problem with Power and Water Corporation and that there had to be tariff increases. So, think it through. If the Opposition Leader were the Chief Minister today, what would she do? Would she roll back all these tariff increases, bring them back down? I do not think so.
Would she reinstate the home affordability scheme that all the experts said was actually feeding demand and increasing the cost of housing, costing a motza and, at the same, driving housing out of reach for anyone who is trying to get into the market? That expensive scheme that made housing more expensive for Territorians? Is that the scheme the Opposition Leader would bring back? I do not think so because we had commentators all around the country saying, ‘Do not go there’. However, the Opposition Leader was happy to go there in an attempt to try to seduce the electorate into thinking this scheme which, on the surface, looked like something that was okay and might serve a political purpose was, in fact, masking a problem enhancer; it was creating an increased problem. Would that be brought back, and what scheme would replace it?
What would the BDR look like? We would just continue on with it, keep these crimes stats hidden from view and hope people would think it is working even if they could not measure it. The only way we can measure it is by the statements that were being made by the government, ‘Trust the government’. That is not a very trustworthy approach; it does not engender trust in the community. But, is that what we would get if we had the person making the accusations and observations and inciting this kind of response in people providing leadership today? Is that what you would get in response to a real problem? I do not believe people, when thinking through it, would think that is an answer.
There are many things I could say, but my colleagues are going to join this fray because you have asked for it. You have brought out a document that is more reflective of you than anything else, and that reflection is a bad one.
Mr Deputy Speaker, there is a real issue out there and most people know it. You have tried and you will not be able to hide because the truth is becoming clear. There is a need for a better response to real issues. I believe he Territory is just about over this. We will wait and see because this book of lies is not really of any substance and it is not, in any way, a foundation to lay any career other than a long career in opposition.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Mr Deputy Speaker, I speak in support of this motion condemning the government for breaking the promise they made to Territorians at the last election, driving up the cost of living and increasing public drunkenness and antisocial behaviour. The Chief Minister’s No 1 promise leading into the election last year was to cut the cost of living. Yet, all he has done since being elected is increase prices, fees and charges.
Each day, residents in my electorate tell me heartbreaking stories about how this new government’s actions are causing them a great deal of stress and anxiety. They are struggling more each day. Each day, it seems there is a new surprise, a new fee or a new charge being levied on them. The government’s ill-thought-out decision to raise power prices by 30%, water by 40%, and sewerage by 25% is hurting greatly. To charge people $20 to visit the MVR does not bring down the cost of living; it causes more annoyance with government. People are near tears as they explain to me they just do not know how they are going to pay these increases. These are genuine people I meet in my everyday life buying milk at the shop or dropping the children at childcare.
They are now starting to get their power and water bills with these increased rates. Only part of their bill is under the new fees. They cannot afford these increases on part of a bill, let alone a full bill. The increase to power by 30%, water by 40%, and sewerage by 25% is hurting greatly. They are greatly stressed about this bill, and already thinking about the next bill. Senior Territorians are trying to use their air conditioners less, people are not watering their gardens, and they are thinking twice about letting children cool off under the hose. These are basic things that people should not have to think about. Your policies are impacting on all Territorians. It is causing stress and changing our way of life. These policies are driving up the cost of everyday living on all Territorians, but are having a particular impact on families and senior Territorians.
Charging senior Territorians to catch the bus - how crazy. Chief Minister, you act like senior Territorians catch the bus for fun. They do not; they use it to go to appointments. Constituents in my electorate have to catch two buses to get to Royal Darwin Hospital for an appointment. Previously, they would catch a bus to Casuarina, possibly have a coffee, then get to the hospital and back comfortably, not rushing. Now, they are trying to turn this trip around in under three hours so they only have to pay once.
There is the flow-on effect, with childcare fees going up, council rates rising, and businesses passing on increased charges. Landlords are putting up rents as leases expire, and will likely soon add a water charge to their rental agreements. Your policies and actions have not reduced the cost of living as you promised, but have dramatically increased the cost to Territorians.
We have seen cuts to government departments, the loss of hundreds of public service jobs, and a culture of fear introduced into our public service. Before the election you promised no jobs would go, but the sackings started in the first week. We have written confirmation that jobs have gone. We have seen frontline services cut. How can removing $4.8m from the NGO sector that works so hard to support Territorians be supportive? That is $4.8m to provide support and services to Territory families. Your mini-budget slashed the funding to NAPCAN, seeing their funding cut by half. Your mini-budget slashed NTCOSS funding by $0.5m. You slashed the funding to SAFE,T and you totally removed funding from the NT Youth Network.
Right before Christmas, you let health NGOs know their funding was cut by 5%. How mean-spirited! Organisations survive off minimal funding and are working so hard to deliver services to our community. Staff give it their all, to cut their funding by 5% is heartbreaking to them. It can mean a huge difference.
How will cutting the funding to frontline child protection and health services support our Territorians? Domestic violence case workers at our hospitals have been cut. I cannot think of a greater demand than supporting Territory families and children, but since being elected this government has cut vital funding, putting pressure on service delivery.
You, Treasurer, have warned there will be more to come. These NGOs that support Territorians are anxious and worried. They cannot plan for their future and they risk losing specialist staff. As a government you have said:
- The refocus of funding to non-government organisations will be based on value for money and the delivery of real outcomes for our most vulnerable children and families.
Under Labor, child protection services were expanded to include family and support services, youth services, out-of-home care and the Children’s Commissioner, yet your government is cutting these services back to the most basic value for money. Child protection is not about value for money.
Labor was growing its own child protection staff; in fact, last year I attended a graduation of staff who received their Graduate Certificate in Remote Health Practice through the support of the then Department of Children and Families. All I have seen from your merge of child protection into the mega department of Education is the loss of focus on children and families.
I again remind this House that in the Territory child protection issues are mainly around child neglect. As a society, we are trying to overcome decades of neglect - trying to change behaviours. Removing funding of these support services goes against research from around the world that prevention is the best long-term solution in child protection, which is the exact thing your government is turning its back on.
You have slashed the funding to the only Aboriginal-controlled peak body in the Territory and directed them to change their focus to out-of-home care. These organisations are heartbroken. This framework also committed to strengthening Aboriginal non-government services and the NGO sector as the best way of ensuring these families can access culturally appropriate services to seek the assistance they need. Given the significance of this, and your government’s strength in representing the bush, it comes as a huge surprise your government is turning its back on these policies.
One of the key recommendations of the Board of Inquiry and themes in modern child protection is the dual pathway model involving NGOs to support families and nurture relationships. You have previously stated this is one of your priorities:
- Non-government organisations providing support for statutory service provision is a key to managing demand and achieving quality outcome for children and families.
Yet, as a government, you have cut the NGO sector; you have slashed their funding.
In relation to Parks and Wildlife, I understand you are reviewing the operations of the remote ranger stations. I urge you, as a government, to ensure this is done openly and with full consideration of any impact of closures for both the environment and local communities. These rangers are often important government representatives in remote areas. They are people others turn to in times of need, for example, crocodile management, firefighting, and helping to locate lost people, whether locals or tourists. They are seen as role models in their community and play a vital role in contributing to the development of their local communities, helping with mentoring and the growth of a fledging community ranger program. I urge caution when you review this program. Tourists also enjoy these rangers interacting with them. As I have mentioned previously, in times of emergency assistance, look to them.
Territorians are still unclear about the cost, human and financial, of relocating the head offices of Parks and Wildlife and Tourism NT to Alice Springs. The Country Liberals are unashamed that these moves were made to suit the personal needs of the minister and his CEOs, but at what cost to the programs?
Mrs Lambley: Regionalisation.
Ms FYLES: The agencies are expected to deliver for Territorians no matter where they live. The Treasurer is shouting at me about regionalisation. We have no problem with well-thought out regionalisation ...
Mrs Lambley: You would not understand.
Ms FYLES: The Treasurer says I do understand regionalisation. I do, I have seen it in many states, but it is well-thought out policy, not policy made to suit a minister or his CEO.
On behalf of concerned Territorians, I ask the new government what steps have been taken to reduce the risk of brain drain from our public service, especially our stand-out staff with intimate knowledge? We are taking about small agencies with specialised staff who understand environmental management issues.
My electorate of Nightcliff has a large amount of open public space; beautiful parks and reserves, stretching along the foreshore from Rapid Creek to Nightcliff and along Coconut Grove. These areas are not only enjoyed by local residents, but by large numbers of visitors from both within Darwin, the Territory and wider.
In the election campaign last year, you promised that problem drunks would be removed immediately from the streets - I still have the material in my office – yet, it has never been worse. In the last few months, my office has had to call the police numerous times after witnessing antisocial behaviour in front our office, in front of the coffee shop and next to the children’s playground. There has been so much antisocial behaviour it has become a daily occurrence. In fact, my staff have been confronted a few times and we have had to take unprecedented safety measures. We are still waiting to see your government’s policy around this. Residents are frustrated. They are experiencing this behaviour daily and contacting me to express their unease and distress in the dramatic increase in the antisocial behaviour in the area as a result of your government reducing the Police Beat, and removing the Banned Drinker Register and the Night Patrol. These actions have a direct consequence; if it is not witnessing their behaviour it is cleaning up broken glass from bottles.
Chief Minister, in the election campaign last year, you claimed you would open the Nightcliff Police Station 24/7. In parliament, when questioned, you said you would honour this commitment. But, all evidence suggests the exact opposite has taken place with the Police Beat being removed. Police have spoken to me. They are frustrated they now have to travel from Casuarina to do their patrol. They are trying to do their best but the tools they need to be supported have been removed. The antisocial behaviour is worsening and the support has been removed.
You talk of the BDR as an inconvenience. Chief Minister, I did no find it inconvenient showing ID to purchase alcohol. However, I certainly find the increase in antisocial behaviour in Nightcliff inconvenient and threatening, as do local residents. One resident told me of having to carry their dog as sections of footpath are covered in broken glass. That is inconvenient! Local traders have said the Banned Drinker Register worked; it made a difference.
You mentioned in your police statement earlier today, Chief Minister, that Nightcliff was considered a hot spot and this would indicate a targeted response from police. However, this is not preventing antisocial behaviour, it is getting worse. I urge you to have a look.
Mr Deputy Speaker, in supporting this motion, I condemn the government. If you are really conscious of how your decisions are hurting Territorians, you would reconsider many of the policies you have bought into place - or lack of policies.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Deputy Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I respond to the motion brought forward by the Leader of the Opposition condemning our government for breaking the promises we made to Territorians at the last election, driving up the cost of living, and increasing public drunkenness and antisocial behaviour.
Some people in this Chamber certainly have a very short memory. Five-and-a-half months ago, the former Labor government had racked up the government credit card. They had been on a spending spree for years, willy-nilly spending on things that were probably not particularly necessary at the time, racking up the deficit. Lo and behold, five-and-a-half months later, it is all our fault. The long-term memory has gone down the drain and the former Treasurer bears absolutely no responsibility for the current state of our fiscal problems, the debt, and the deficit. It has all been erased from her memory, very conveniently. All the damage she has done through her fiscal mismanagement seems to be not there at all. Now, it is apparently the full responsibility and fault of this new Country Liberal government.
Well, most of us do have a long memory. Territorians are not stupid; they remember how the last decade has unfolded and have an understanding of the fiscal issues of the Northern Territory. No matter what the Leader of the Opposition and her very ordinary team will present here tonight, they will not be duped or fooled, nor will they take the word of this very poor opposition, the former government, that led us into the financial doldrums we are trying to get ourselves out of at the moment.
I patiently listened to the words of the former Treasurer, now Opposition Leader - the worst Treasurer in the history of the Northern Territory. She claims she did work with the Power and Water Corporation. She said she tried to identify efficiencies, and claimed she was committed to keeping the Power and Water Corporation in a reasonable state of financial viability. Well, that is not what we found over the last five-and-a-half months.
The increase in tariffs can be directly attributed to the very poor performance of the former Treasurer, now Opposition Leader. It is her fault we had to raise tariffs - undeniably so. This is a fact. She was lacking the ability, judgment, management skills and commitment to make the necessary decisions to increase tariffs as she was advised to do by the Chair of the Power and Water Corporation in April last year. These documents have already been tabled. The Chief Minister briefly referred to them earlier.
In April last year, the former Chair of the Power and Water Corporation, Judith King, wrote to the former Treasurer and implored her to increase the revenue of the Power and Water Corporation. The only way to do that is to increase the utilities tariff: to increase the tariffs of water, sewerage and electricity of the Power and Water Corporation to try to make Power and Water Corporation financially sustainable. To be financially sustainable really means you are just asking to break even. You are asking that your revenue covers your expenses. Not commercially sustainable - that was so far out of reach it was not funny. Commercial sustainability is when there is a decent profit on the horizon, and that was simply out of the question with the way the former Treasurer was managing the affairs of the Power and Water Corporation. Judith King, the former Chair, implored the former Treasurer to increase tariffs because she realised that without increasing the tariffs, the Power and Water Corporation was facing insolvency; there is no other way to put it.
The former Treasurer responded to Judith King’s correspondence on 30 April 2012 by saying:
- The tariffs for retail electricity, water and sewerage are to be reviewed during 2012-13 on the basis of financial and commercial sustainability. This is expected to result in an outcome which will likely improve ratios for the future years of the Statement of Corporate Intent. As well as financial support, the Territory government has provided an indemnity to directors in respect of any civil actions arising from directors acting in good faith.
What does that say? It says the former Treasurer confirmed to the Chair of the Power and Water Corporation in April last year that she would increase electricity, sewerage, and water tariffs. Not only that, the most intriguing part of it all - we know she was going to increase the tariffs, it is in black and white – is she mentioned that the chairman and her board would be indemnified if they were found to not be acting in good faith.
The former Treasurer understood she was placing these people in a situation where the whole of the Power and Water Corporation could have become insolvent, could have crashed and burned, because she was not willing to make the decision necessary to allow the Power and Water Corporation to operate at a level of financial sustainability. She was negligent in her duty as the shareholder minister responsible for Power and Water Corporation. She was the main contributor to the potential demise of the Power and Water Corporation and the inefficient operations of the Power and Water Corporation through her inability to make a good decision and her preference to make politically motivated decisions to allow them to be re-elected.
The reason this government, within weeks and months of coming into power, increased the tariffs for electricity, sewerage and water to the levels we did is because the former Labor government failed to do so. They had to; they were advised to do so. The former Treasurer acknowledged she would, but she would not do it until after the election.
All the people who were outside parliament yesterday protesting against the Terry Mills Country Liberal government were probably not aware that the woman standing at the front, clapping and supporting their cause, is the cause of their problem. That is one way in which the former Treasurer is responsible for the escalating cost of living.
The other way in which she has contributed to the astronomical cost of living in the Northern Territory - and this is the most important one - is through the cost of housing which is the main contributor to the cost of living. The former Treasurer and the former Chief Minister - who is not here today because he could not be bothered extending his tenure until after the election –presided over the cost of housing for the last 11 years. Over the 11 years in which the Labor government was in power, the price of rental accommodation and housing in the Northern Territory increased by 260%. That is outrageous! An increase in the cost of housing of 260% in the Northern Territory because of Labor’s mismanagement, once again: their inability to release land to meet the demand of the growing population of the Northern Territory.
When we talk about whose fault it is that the cost of living in the Northern Territory is so high, we can only look across the room at the former Labor government members who allowed the cost of living to go through the roof and allowed the cost of housing to become the highest in the country. We pay the highest rents in Australia. In Darwin, rent is the highest of any capital city in Australia. That is what Labor gave you. That was their parting gift to the people of the Northern Territory.
However, that has apparently all been erased from their memory: the fact that they, for some reason, were unable to release land to create housing, a basic necessity of life. They could not create and stimulate the housing market to meet the demand. Therefore, we have to pay the hideous cost of housing we have in the Territory now.
It is complete and utter hypocrisy that we even have to even address this hideous motion tonight. The book of lies is a testament to the lack of insight and responsibility that defined the former Labor government of the Northern Territory, now the opposition. One has to make the connection that they are in opposition because they were not responsible. They were very poor financial managers, and were unable to make good decisions. The only thing that motivated them was political opportunism, which is really a sad state of affairs.
The Leader of the Opposition is a very unhappy, belligerent woman who, in her very undignified way, tries to strip people down to her level. She tries to attack people at a very personal level based on their gender, age, and her analysis of what they may or may not have achieved in life. You will not hear that base level of debate from this side of the room; we have bigger fish to fry.
We have a vision; we are getting on with the job. Just five-and-a-half months into government, we have certainly kicked some goals. In Cabinet I look around the room at a highly-motivated, enthusiastic, intelligent group of people who are hard at work.
I listened to the member for Nightcliff talk about her electorate and her perceptions of what we have and have not done in five-and-a-half months since coming to government. She talked about child protection. She is, obviously, quite committed to her new role, but is completely deluded and misinformed.
I urge the opposition to look at this document, which is the 2012-13 mini-budget which contains figures and facts pertaining to the budget. The budget is a set of figures which will give you an indication of just how much money we spend within the different agencies of government. I know this is a basic level of information I am providing, but it is very obvious from this side of the room that the opposition, despite the fact that half of them were in government recently, do not have even a slight comprehension of what a budget paper looks like. This is a mini-budget so, in a couple of months’ time, you will be faced with a full budget which will more than likely confuse you even more.
If you look at this budget paper lo and behold - I am opening it at the Office of Children and Families for the benefit of the member for Nightcliff - you will see there has been an increase in money allocated to the Office of Children and Families of $10m for this financial year. In discussion around the reduction of funding to the Office of Children and Families, I state for the public record and for the benefit of the people of the Northern Territory, it is not true. We have not reduced funding to the Office of Children and Families - to the business of child protection. We have increased funding this financial year by an additional $10m.
Do people over the other side of the room comprehend that? There seems to be some blockage there, some brain snap going on where they cannot seem to get it.
It is the same for Education. I draw your attention to the fact that, in this mini-budget paper, there is a section on Education. You will find in there, Leader of the Opposition and opposition members, we have increased funding for Education. Did you hear that member for Fannie Bay? We have increased the funding. Have a briefing. I am happy to point out for your benefit that in this mini-budget paper we have increased funding for Education by around $10m in this financial year. It is incredible. When you open it up, all will be revealed. It is very simple, with a bit of practice, members for Fannie Bay and Nightcliff. The Opposition Leader, former Treasurer, is welcome to have a briefing too. I can show you how it all works. It is really quite basic and simple.
When you go through these documents you will find we have not reduced the funding for many agencies at all over this financial year. We came to government and found all these promises made by the former government to which they had not allocated funding. The Office of Children and Families is a great example. The former minister for Child Protection told the CE of Child Protection to go ahead and employ 90 extra staff. ‘Do not worry about the money, we will find it somewhere’. Guess who had to work out how to pay for these workers? The new Country Liberal government.
It is quite incredible that a group of people who constituted the former government have no idea how to read a budget paper, understand the budget paper and, then, put it into some coherent form within their brain. They have produced this wonderful book of lies. I do not even give them that much credit. It is a book of miscomprehension. They are so stupid they cannot even understand what is in the budget paper. Calling people liars is not very nice, so let us call it the book of dummies’ comprehension of the mini-budget. They are so stupid they cannot understand what is in black and white for the whole of the Northern Territory to see.
They had all their union Labor followers in front of the parliament yesterday. They have, unfortunately, fed them all these miscomprehensions, and off they went with their flags shouting and carrying on, and everyone got into a frenzy over nothing about cuts to government agencies.
The other thing they were confused about was the public service. Those poor people out there were screaming, ranting, and carrying on about reductions to the public service. Yes, we have made a statement - and the Opposition Leader did read that correctly – that we intend to decrease the level of the public service by 3% over the forward estimates over the next four years, by 570 to 600 workers. She got that right but she did not comprehend it was not in the first five-and-a-half months we intended to decrease the public service by 600; it was over four years. Indeed, the figures provided by the ...
Mr VOWLES: Mr Deputy Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move an extension of time for the fine member, please.
Motion agreed to.
Mrs LAMBLEY: I thank the member for Johnston for providing that extension for me.
The other miscomprehension was of the figures provided by the Commissioner for Public Employment on the last quarter of 2012: the December of 2012 quarter. Those figures showed there had been an increase in the public service over that quarter. That is, obviously, totally beyond the comprehension of the opposition. They still seem to think the public service has been cut by 600 when they can see for themselves there were 19 989 FTE positions in the Northern Territory Public Service during the December 2012 quarter, an increase of 645 from the same time the year before. Over the same period, Executive Officers who earn between $183 000 and $331 000 grew by over 50% from 336 to 581, which amounts to an additional $45m a year.
What that says - I know I have to interpret these facts for the benefit of the opposition and those poor souls who are believing everything they say – is the public service has increased in the last quarter of December. There has been - have you got this? - no reduction in FTE numbers in the public service for that quarter. I am quite happy to give you a briefing on that. I am now the minister responsible for that area and it is very simple to read and understand.
These poor people across the other side of the Chamber are deluded. They just do not understand. We hear more stories of all these bad things we have done, which are simply not true. There has been some mention of the Banned Drinker Register and how 2000 drinkers are back on the grog. Guess what? They were never off the grog. The rivers of grog never stopped flowing; they kept flowing the whole time. The former Labor government willed itself into thinking people had stopped drinking and the rivers of grog had stopped. I heard from the Prime Minister last week in her closing the gap speech that the river had stopped but now it was flowing again. Well, hello! Come down to Alice Springs. I am sure the member for Katherine would love to have you there to talk to the people and find out the real story. We know the member for Barkly did not spend much time in Tennant Creek over the last four years, but you will find the people in Tennant Creek will tell you that the rivers of grog never stopped, they were flowing the whole time, despite the Banned Drinker Register.
The member for Nightcliff talked about the cost of housing going up. There again, she simply does not get it. She was not a member of the former government, so I will not lay too much at her feet. Your former Labor government presided over a 260% increase in the cost of housing in the Northern Territory.
She talked about how we stripped back the non-government organisations within the Office of Children and Families. Yes, we, as a government, came in, we have a different agenda, we reprioritised and decided we wanted to get better bang for buck; we wanted to get value for our money. We changed how we go about doing the business of child protection. You will see more changes come about in the future as we decide what needs to be prioritised. We have taken some money away from some non-government organisations. I can tell you here and now, member for Nightcliff, all that money will be put back into the non-government sector, every cent of it. Stay tuned and watch this space and do not despair because I can assist you in your comprehension of these facts and figures.
In closing, there are some questions that need to be answered. We have had these nasty allegations from the Opposition Leader telling us we are lying and that sort of thing. One question I would like to ask the Leader of the Opposition is: will she be cutting the electricity, water and sewerage tariffs if and when she gets to government? We need to get that on the public record. Perhaps when there is another rally out the front of Parliament House she might like to tell the marauding crowd about her intention when she gets to government - God forbid it is in the next decade – and whether she will be rolling those increases back. I very much doubt it.
The second question I would like to ask the Leader of the Opposition is: what is your plan? Are we in for more water parks? What is the go, Leader of the Opposition? More than anything, the third question is: how would you have addressed your astronomical debt and deficit? Or would you have been deciding to remain in a state of denial? We have Delia, debt, deficit and denial. I believe that the latter is probably more the case; that is, the Leader of the Opposition would have probably continued to be in denial, and that is the most disturbing part of it. If that sad and sorry lot across the Chamber were re-elected five-and-a-half months ago she would have remained in denial. The debt would have increased and the deficit would have escalated. The amount of interest repaid on a daily basis would have gone from $750 000, which is outrageous, to over $1m in a very short period of time. That is $750 000 per day every day of the year we are paying, compliments of the former Treasurer, the Leader of the Opposition.
My final question to the Leader of the Opposition is: what about poor old Trish Crossin? You backed the Prime Minister in getting rid of Trish Crossin. You said you thought it was a good thing getting Nova on board. This Leader of the Opposition, this woman who has been a part of the leadership team of the Northern Territory for years, has turned her back on her colleague. What is all that about? This parliament would enjoy hearing the explanation of the Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Deputy Speaker, what we are seeing here is a woman who is struggling. For all the allegations she makes across the Chamber about leadership challenges she, of any one of us, needs to be watching her back. We are hearing intelligence already that the delightful, very polite member for Fannie Bay is sizing up that chair to replace the belligerent, undignified Leader of the Opposition. It is time you did some self-reflection over there. It is time you started to think about what really matters. What really matters is that we re-establish a strong economic base in the Northern Territory, give Territorians a real future and stop going on about these lies and this nonsense.
Mr VOWLES (Johnston): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this motion. Yesterday, at the rally outside Parliament House, protestors voiced their anger about this government. There was one chant that was bellowed out long and loud after the Chief Minister retreated back to Parliament House. That chant was: ‘CLP cannot be trusted, CLP cannot be trusted’. And rightly so.
Never before have we felt so betrayed by a political party and its leader. The CLP cannot be trusted because, since coming into government, all they have done is break promise after promise.
The people of Johnston were promised by the CLP candidate that her party would ‘fight to drive down the high cost of living’. They said they would, ‘tackle this issue head on’.
Now the CLP is in government, what deceit we have found this promise to be. One of the first decisions this woeful government made was to hurt the most vulnerable people in our society: our senior Territorians, our pensioners. Under Terry Mills and the CLP government, pensioners who have fixed low incomes have been compelled to pay $1 to catch a bus. The former Labor government made bus travel free for seniors, recognising that many senior Territorians were doing it tough and this was one of the measures that could help alleviate the cost of living. Instead of continuing with this good, compassionate policy, the heartless CLP decided seniors were one of the groups on the list they wanted to target to get more money out of them. Absolutely disgraceful! In fact, Terry Mills on the radio on 16 January seemed to imply that he did not want seniors staying on the bus and going around town.
Let us quickly compare our credentials. We, on this side of the House, looked after our senior Territorians with the most generous pensioner scheme in the country: nearly $20m. We care for our senior Territorians.
At my electorate office the other day I had a long-term senior Territorian come into my office who said, ‘Can we ask Terry if he could at least let the fares be free for people over 80 years of age?’ He was in his 80s and was concerned those elderly people who were not driving, or who cannot drive, but needed to frequently catch the bus were being left out.
Another elderly constituent was in my office. We often do a bit of photocopying and helping out where we can by letting them use the phone. He was telling me how he goes to see his wife in the nursing home every day. Every day he visits her and spends most of the day with her. One dollar may not seem like much to us in this House, but it certainly is a lot of money if you are doing it twice a day. It all adds up; that is $28 per fortnight. As I said, that is not much for us in this House, but it means a lot and it will be recognised in a senior’s budget. Terry Mills promised to lower the cost of living and, instead, he came into power and hit Territorians like my constituent, with almost $30 out of their pension a fortnight so he can visit his wife. These are real stories.
I have also heard from concerned mental health non-government service providers. They have told me that since the CLP introduced the $1 charge, their client numbers have dramatically dropped. These clients, who need to access services and support, under the CLP are now isolated and staying at home because they cannot afford the $1 per day to go to these services. Or, if they do decide to access the services, I am told by the service providers they will rush off halfway through the session or program because they want to get home on the same bus ticket. There is no other way this could be understood than Terry Mills hurting Territorians. It almost seems that the more vulnerable and voiceless you are in the community, the harder you will be hit by this CLP government.
I turn to some of the CLP governments’ decisions when it comes to sport. Last month, after being forced by the media release from me, the minister for Sport confessed to the Territory public that despite his spruiking of the Brumbies-Western Force union match, his government was no longer interested in bringing top class rugby to Darwin for the thousands of rugby fans across the Northern Territory. I wonder if the minister has ever made it to a rugby union match in Darwin or even met with Northern Territory Rugby Union to understand the impact of his decision. The people of the Northern Territory are big union fans. Many were disappointed with another disgraceful decision, a decision made despite telling Territorians earlier in January:
- It is important for the community to experience the benefits of bringing large sporting events to the Territory.
A month later, Super 15 Rugby was cancelled. ‘No bang for the buck’, the minister stated in a hurried media release. No bang for the buck for the $300 000 per match to see top class rugby in the Northern Territory, but the minister’s golf club in Alice Springs gets $300 000 in the mini-budget. That is taxpayers getting their bang for buck? I do not think so.
First the Arafura Games, then Super 15 Rugby, what is next? BassintheGrass, the Superbikes, maybe no AFL games? I know the five-year $8m AFL deal this side of the House brought in when we were in government is running out next year. I call on the minister for Sport to guarantee the future of AFL matches in the Northern Territory. Or do I need to put out a media release again so you will answer me?
There are, of course, the sporting vouchers the CLP promised during the election, which I will admit I welcome. However, I am also concerned because I am getting many calls from families that you cannot use the $75 voucher in different organisations. What good is a $75 sports voucher if you are paying an extra $2000 a year on your higher power bills?
I want to go into the sports vouchers a little more because I can see more broken promises coming. Before the election, the Chief Minister assured Northern Territory families the vouchers were not just for sport. His words were, ‘It could be ballet, it could be scouts’. I am getting reports from dance organisations that their students are missing out on the $75 voucher. I do not have a child who participates, but I know from my friends whose children participate in dance that it can be quite costly - the dance lessons, the costumes, travel - but they cannot use the $75 sports voucher for any of it. Why, Chief Minister, did you say one thing before the election and now parents are confused and annoyed as to why they cannot use the sports vouchers to pay fees on many active recreation activities?
There was no mention of the forced move of Tourism staff to Alice Springs before the election. Then there was the minister for Tourism’s strange and confusing media release congratulating Qantas for cutting direct flights from Darwin to Canberra, then congratulating the scrapping of the seven flights from Sydney to Uluru to be replaced by only four flights. It was very strange.
I turn to some specific broken promises in my electorate of Johnston. I have already spoken many times in this House about the plight of residents living along Rapid Creek in Millner. These residents were promised, by Terry Mills and the CLP, a down payment of $1.5m towards the Rapid Creek flooding issue. In the mini-budget last year, the Country Liberal Party broke that promise, allocating only $750 000. In the Chief Minister’s letter dated 5 December following my letter to him, he said:
- The flood study report raised concerns regarding creek and floodplain levels and recommended a resurvey of the area. This survey is complete and new flood maps will be developed with a view to release both the report and the flood extent mapping in December 2012. This release will be followed by community consultation to ensure a thorough understanding of the new inundation mapping and the potential impacts on the affected community.
It is now February and there has been no report, no consultation undertaken, and yet another broken promise is on its way. Many residents feel it is just a continued string of broken promises on this issue and they do not trust you anymore.
Finally, I turn to law and order in Johnston. One of the biggest deceits was Terry Mills’ promise before the election. His five-point plan read:
- Problem drinkers will be removed from the streets. Your parks and neighbourhoods will be made clean and safe.
This is a broken promise if I have ever heard one. Seniors, parents with babies, and bus commuters have contacted my office telling me about the problem drunks in their local neighbourhood, many of them saying things have become worse since the Banned Drinking Register was scrapped. What was the Chief Minister thinking? The evidence is right in front of you wherever you go. The Chief Minister’s bizarre advice to confront drunks has seen my office receive many calls from shocked people on how out of touch he must be with normal people.
The Country Liberal Party has made decision after decision that has directly affected the number of drunks in our streets. They scrapped the BDR with nothing in its place and they cut funding to non-government organisations which help with the problem of antisocial behaviour and drunks.
Madam Speaker, in closing, in any relationship there are key pillars which keep the relationship strong. One is trust. If there is no trust the future of that relationship is uncertain. The Chief Minister’s relationship with Territorians has been built on broken promises. The relationship has no strong foundation and, unfortunately for the Chief Minister, his future is uncertain. Territorians are making their message loud and clear because of these broken promises in this relationship. Like the large crowd at yesterday’s protest, I finish with: the CLP cannot be trusted.
Mr ELFERINK (Attorney-General and Justice): Madam Speaker, I do not know how often in this House I heard the Labor Party, when in government, slagging off at various organisations and institutions for book-up in the bush. We hear from the Labor Party how bad book-up is. Book-up is a dreadful curse that Aboriginal people had inflicted upon them by these dreadful shopkeepers; it is all over the place and is something that should be managed. We should manage book-up because it is bad, bad, bad for people. Well, guess what? We all book up. I book up from time to time. I booked up to buy my house. I booked up to buy a car. We book up, but the question is how you book up and what responsible book-up is. That is really what all of this is about.
I am going to pause for a second in the book-up conversation, but I will get back to it shortly. I want to reflect on something that was said yesterday. One of the firies went to the microphone at yesterday’s rally - which I went to because I know the decisions we have made as a government have not been particularly popular. I will get back to the reasons for those decisions shortly. It is very hard to argue with the argument I heard from the firie. He was at an accident scene with a young girl who was two years old. He had to hold her hand and put up with her screaming - not ‘put up’, that is the wrong word - suffer through her screaming for two hours. That is a strong and powerful message. I listened to that and I thought, ‘Yes, I know what that feels like’.
I remember an accident on the Kintore road many years ago where a Nissan Patrol end-over-ended. There were about eight people on board and grandmother was dead when I got there. Her daughter died whilst I was taking her pulse. Despite our best effort, we could not save the baby either. There were multiple other injuries and it took a long time for the police to arrive. We managed to get though on the satellite phone to Alice Springs and managed to get a doctor who happened to be in Kintore to come out.
I triaged the scene as best I could. I provided what first aid I could. I was very fortunate to be able to dig a kid out from under the car who is alive to this day, as far as I know - a young fellow called Ambrose, I think. If he is still going he would be about 12, 13 by now. I was very grateful for that at least, that was a blessing. I remember sitting there saying, ‘Gee, I wish the coppers were closer’, because they had to come in from Papunya. That was a trip of about 200 km from Papunya. I thought, ‘It would have been great to have a better way to respond. They could build a police station closer. Kintore was close enough, I suppose. Maybe we can get helicopters with proper range.’ You start to think all of those things when you are in those circumstance because the immediacy of the circumstance means you are thinking, ‘Oh my goodness gracious me, how can we do this better?’
I was compelled by that story from that fire officer the other day. Do I doubt his sincerity? Absolutely not. His sincerity was genuine, heartfelt, decent, upright - all of that. The response from me is I have a duty - we say it every single day when we sit - to the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory. That is what the firie who was speaking yesterday was arguing about: the true welfare of the people of the Northern Territory, the true welfare of that two-year-old girl.
The problem, from a government perspective, is it costs money to provide police services. I would like to have a police officer on every street corner in the Northern Territory. Our community would be much safer. I would like to have a full cardiac unit, heart transplants - all that stuff - five radiology oncology units right up and down the Northern Territory. I would like to have renal dialysis in every small community. I would like to have a student teacher ratio of 1:1 and streets paved with gold. I would love to fully subsidise everybody’s power. They are the things I would love to do. We could do it for a while. We could do it because we could book it up.
The former government, the Labor government, understood book-up, in the sense they knew how to use it. However, they did not take their own advice. I heard the Leader of the Opposition say it was all manageable debt. I do not believe it was, and the rationale can be found for that when you compare two documents. The first document I invite honourable members to look at is Budget Paper No 2 for the last Labor budget, which was 2012-13. I draw honourable member’s attention to the non-financial public sector balance sheet, which is the balance sheet which incorporates the Power and Water Corporation and all of those other components other than the general government sector.
The Leader of the Opposition does not want to talk about all of that. When she talks about the debt being manageable she is talking about the general government sector. The fact is, under the Labor government, we were subsidising the operation of Power and Water Corporation to the tune of $30m a year, or something like that. That was what is called the debt for equity swap. It is called a bail out; it is a subsidy. Let us call it what it is. That is $30m a year we would not be spending on things like schools. We will not have schools to the tune of $30m a year, we will not have this, we will not have that, we will not have anything else.
All we have done through the decisions we have made is enable the Power and Water Corporation to charge to deliver the services it delivers. It delivers several services: the generation of power - the process of the network of power - the power lines; the retail component where you pay for your power at the shop fronts; sewerage, the removal of our bodily waste products from our homes; and water.
We asked how much it would cost to make the organisation financially sustainable, and a little better - give us a little extra room so we can be somewhere between financially sustainable and commercially sustainable. The answer came back at 30%. We said, ‘Ugh!’, because we knew it was going to be tough.
That now has been freed up because it costs money to remove waste products, to bring water to the tap, generate power, bring it down to network. It even costs money to send out the bills. By doing that, we have freed up $30m-odd a year which we can spend on other things.
The problem is, with the book-up arrangements we have inherited, much of that money we now have to spend on interest payments we are copping for this. If you look at the forward estimates from the government’s last budget, the interest expense in 2015-16 under the comprehensive operating statement for the non-financial public sector is $405m a year. That is $1.2m a day-ish. I am doing the numbers off the top of my head. That is $1.2 each day!
The Leader of the Opposition consistently says it was affordable. Is $1.2m a day affordable? The budget could probably cope with it, but that is the full amount we raise through all taxation in the Northern Territory. If you look at taxation revenue in that budget paper - I was not incorrect - it is almost the full amount.
I now take you back, quite deliberately, to the firie I was listening to the other day. I was thinking, ‘That is a compelling story’. Here is another compelling story. I would hate to find a future government in 10 years’ time, if we do not show the restrain on this side of the House now - our debt will increase in that time, by the way. If we capped the debt right now the cuts would be much deeper. We cannot do it; we are not going to do it. We knew we were pushing the limits of what people could tolerate already by the decisions we were making. These were not happy Cabinet meetings, as members can well imagine.
I want to cast our minds forward. Let us say we did not cap the debt. Let us say we did not look after the book-up properly. Let us say we said, ‘Oh bugger it. We will just go down the same line the Labor Party had set for us.’ Not much pain in that - yet. Then you come to a point in 10 years’ time when somebody calls for a firie and the government of that day has to make some decisions because the interest bill on the book-up has reached $3m a day. The government in 10 years’ time realises - because the federal government said ‘Enough is enough, you guys have to control your debt’ - it has to make some really deep agonising cuts. It turns out that the firie, had the previous government been more careful with their fiscal management, could respond from a nearby fire station because some prudent fiscal management had been shown carefully over the years leading up to that point.
In this example, of course, the past government had been irresponsible, had not made the tough decisions and, now that the tough decisions - as are being made in Greece - are really cutting deep, that firie was not 10 minutes away or 20 minutes away; that firie was an hour-and-a-half away and had to go to two other jobs on the way.
That two-year-old girl at that scene will not be born for another eight years. It was a compelling story when I heard it yesterday because it tugs at the heart strings. I have two little girls in my home. The very thought of them not having the best of the best bugs me to tears. What about their children? What about the two-year-old girl who has not been born yet for the next eight years? Where is her rescue coming from?
That is what this whole discussion is about. Every conversation I heard from the unions yesterday was about the immediate problem. Our wages now, our issues now, what is happening now, this now. For years and years they have had a Labor government that has satisfied this desire for dealing with the now, now, now. With the rivers of GST money that have flown into the Territory over that time, they could have positioned the Territory for that 10-year period. They could have grown the public service only by half as much as they did over that period and gotten rid of that debt.
In the last couple of years, when times have become fiscally more difficult, our debt in this jurisdiction would only be - even if we borrowed as much as we had to support the government - probably about $1bn.
I draw members’ attention to the debt figure on the bottom of page 105 of the government’s last budget. Rather than a $1bn debt, which is whereabouts it could have been had we shown some fiscal restraint in the way we spent that extra money, it is $3.5bn for the current financial year. After all the work we did and all the pain we caused at the end of the current financial year in the mini-budget, we are only about $180m better off. So, yes, there have been savings in a number of areas.
However, if you forward that out across the forward estimates and go to 2015-16, the debt under the Labor government’s last budget was $5.6bn. Under us, it will still be big but it will be $4.3bn, which means over those forward estimates we will have to rein in what the former government was proposing to spend because we need to control our book-up. We need to be able to not only feed our family today but to be able to look after our family tomorrow, the day after, next week, next year, and in 10 years’ time. If you do not control the book-up now, you will not be able to look after your family because you will be too busy paying off the debt to the man at the shop. That is what this has been about.
The immediacy of having to deal with the problems these people have identified is real. You reckon I do not listen to the people in the union and think to myself, ‘Mate I can feel it; I can feel what their thinking and what they are saying’? When that firie told that story I heard it, it resonated in my core. However, I want to ensure he is there in 10 years’ time and 20 years’ time. I am terrified - and that is what this government has been worried about – that in 10 or 15 years’ time he will not be there because all we are doing is trying to service the book-up. That is at the very core of what we are talking about.
For the responsibility we have shown, we have had criticism from the unions and whoever else. In response to our responsibility - our duty not only to today but to the future - this is what the Labor Party pushes out there.
The Labor Party was great at consultancies. We heard some figures from the Chief Minister today during Question Time about some of the consultancies. The Hawker Britton consultancy was $300 000 for not even having to put in a report. There was another consultancy for Deloitte of $600 000 for some greenhouse policies. Consultancies, consultancies, consultancies. How many of those consultancies saved money or addressed the book-up situation in the Northern Territory? Very few, if any. Even if those consultancies had made suggestions to make savings, the truth of the matter is they were not listened to. They were not listened to in the forward projections.
We have a contest between the immediate and the future and, like any credit card, if you have the credit card you can rack it up and have what you want now. However, it must, at some point, be paid back or at least reined in because, eventually, the bank will say no or, in our case because of the implied underwriting of the Northern Territory by the federal government, the federal government will say, ‘No more’. When it does we will be in diabolical strife.
Are we talking about statehood? It is conceivable that if we rack up too much debt the feds will say, ‘We will not even give you self-government because you are not capable of doing it properly’. That is where this could go. I am, and have been, really concerned about it.
For the short-term political gain the Labor Party sees in attacking that principle, they will do whatever it takes. Why? That is their motto. In The Fixer - Graham Richardson - whatever it takes - you see things like, ‘They have slashed 10% from the Education budget’. No, we have not slashed 10% from the Education budget. There are, however, things called forward estimates and, in those forward estimates, there are upsies and downsies. Some of this 10% slash they go on about is the winding down of federal agreements. We have arrangements inherited from the former Labor government where Education agreements are starting to wind down. In the forward estimates that looks like a reduction in expenditure. There is a reason for that. It is a reduction in expenditure. What the budget books do not capture - they cannot at this stage because they are not finalised arrangements - is the further federal money that will find its way back into the Territory Education budget in the area of agreements surrounding the Gonski review.
I was in Sydney recently putting the final touches on that. We have pretty much reached an accord with the federal government. Some $50m will roll out of that and find its way back into that. We will never get to this point where, in the future forward estimates, you will get a reduction of 10%. We had the scaremongering of the member for Fannie Bay, the shadow Attorney-General saying, ‘Hey, they have cut 10% from the budget’. No, we have not. We have looked at the forward estimates and have done some other things.
We have asked teachers to leave the bureaucracy in Education and go to the coalface. That is not an unreasonable thing. If I said to the parents of the Northern Territory, ‘We had more bureaucrats than chalkies. We asked some of the bureaucrats in teaching ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, your time as expired.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I am proud to contribute to this debate that has been brought to this House by the Leader of the Opposition which deals with the recent election and broken promises. It also talks about driving up the cost of living and increasing public drunkenness and antisocial behaviour, with a lack of any Country Liberal Party policy or delivery around alcohol.
To start my contribution to this debate, I reflect on the Chief Minister’s and the Deputy Chief Minister’s contribution and their continual entry into that victim blame dialogue and discourse where we, the opposition, are the bad guys. The hypocrisy is they come back with exactly the language, sentiment, and vitriol they are accusing the opposing of using. There is some ultimate hypocrisy there.
My psychological reading of it is the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister are an endangered species. They are very nervous. They are nervous politically, but they are nervous on the wider front; they understand they have come in with a wrecking-ball policy to try to address a budget deficit. They are being led by advisors, the Renewal Management Board. They are starting to question that advice. They are hearing it from Territorians who are hurting, and they are showing their nervousness and are reacting with vitriol and vindictive discourse, the discourse they are accusing the opposition of using.
When the Chief Minister says he is about real decisions, we say as an opposition, yes, Chief Minister, but you have unreal and bad priorities. If you want a policy to grow the Territory and return the budget to surplus, then do not try the king hit approach. You do not hurt Territory families in your ambition to return the budget to surplus.
The member for Port Darwin eloquently provided us with his contribution to debate around fiscal strategy. But, he does not fill you in on the before and after. The before was we were in the grips of a global financial crisis. We all believe the Territory is the best place on Earth and has the best future, which is now coming to fruition. Our Labor government, after eight surplus budgets, went into and managed deficit to deliver social infrastructure, to save jobs, and to build the Territory to set it up for when the private sector comes in and continues to turbo-charge the capital of Northern Australia. The member for Port Darwin neglected to tell us all about that part of the fiscal management.
The other thing he neglected to tell us about the fiscal management was the previous Labor government left the books in Treasury with a defined stepped-out fiscal strategy over forward years. He has access to that information. He could use that information, but he is not the Treasurer. So, we will have to ask the Treasurer, the member for Araluen, to show us that information, because the Treasury people - who I had the privilege to work with and are some of the smartest people I have ever worked with - have those plans and that strategy.
It was presented to the electorate. Unfortunately, the Country Liberal Party made many promises and commitments - massive commitments to the bush - that were never put through the Treasury, never costed, never prepared. They have themselves in a spot of bother and, now, they are breaking promises.
If the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister do not believe me and want to continue to slag me off with their vitriol and vindictiveness - and I have to laugh at the Deputy Chief Minister who was having a crack at Labor members on this side talking about the age of members of the Renewal Management Board. How dare we? Hansard testifies to her comment about ‘poor old Trish Crossin’. How dare she? She should apologise to the Labor Senator of the Northern Territory, Trish Crossin. She should withdraw her ageist comments and get real about alleging and sledging Labor members if she wants to continue to use exactly the same discourse that is offensive and hypocritical.
If they do not believe me, as a Labor member, I would like to put on the public record a letter that was sent to me by respected business people from Tennant Creek: Tony and Heather Watson, PO Box 1237, Tennant Creek, NT, 0860. They take a bipartisan approach. It is a very good comment on the wrecking-ball approach of the Country Liberal Party and the effects it has in a regional sense. I especially would like those newly elected Country Liberal Party members born in regional and remote areas to think about the added pressure this wrecking-ball economic strategy is having on regional and remote residents:
- To Country Liberal Party and Labor.
Re: Small Business Pressure and Power Increases in the Northern Territory
Dear Sir/Madam
Heather and I are the directors of Central Building Group Pty Ltd, which owns the Top of Town Caf, Pink Molly Cupcakes and Pink Molly Designs.
Heather has resided in the Northern Territory for 24 years and I have been here for 10 years. Over these years we have both worked for small business, government and Aboriginal organisations prior to starting and building our company.
We researched the NT, Barkly and Tennant Creek for six months and believe this area of the NT to be an ideal place to base our business. Over the past seven years, we have invested in a considerable amount of property and developed our business as well as purchasing an existing business, we currently employ six people (Indigenous, non-Indigenous and migrant workers) and employ seasonal casual staff.
Our business is about to embark on our third year of our comprehensive business plan. By the end of this year we have a plan to commence products throughout the NT and then Australia. This will in turn create further jobs in this small community and contribute to the NT economy.
A change of government, government regulations and increased service costs were all considered and mentioned in our risk analysis when developing our business plan and we have regularly reviewed our risk strategies to ensure our business plan is solid.
However the recent substantial price increase in power and water costs has shaken our confidence that both parties whether it be, Labor or Liberal have any idea on the effect this dramatic increased cost has had on small business.
The honourable member Joe Hockey last year spoke on Sky News stating ‘small business is struggling right now. Our policy will be to ease the pressure on small business so that they can have the opportunity to become big business’.
These few short sentences sounded like he understood, even if it was for a short moment mentioning these few words!
As a small business that is not attached to a large company or a franchise system we have had to research, develop and market our own business plan and system, at the same time as growing and working our business. We do not have the buying power as the multinationals and have learnt the hard reality of increasing pricing pressure.
Within weeks of the November 30 announcement of Power and Water cost we saw nearly all of the multinational suppliers announce increases in prices commencing at the end of January 2013.
Last week we saw a contractor for Power and Water enter several of our residential properties and we spoke with him. He stated his sole purpose for checking our electronic meters was to increase them as per the government legislation in regards to the Power and Water rate increases.
We have gone from using $8.56 per day to now using $16.00. Prior to the increase, we commenced a personal power audit to review and upgrade our equipment and take note of the cost of our power usage. We use one air-conditioner for nine hours overnight, have two laptop computers running, one fridge, one ceiling fan, one 80 L electric hot water system and one light which is switched on and off each time we enter a room. We have treated our business premises much the same and educated our staff on economising power and water costs.
- Being in the business we are in, we interact and have spoken to a lot of people about this and wish to make you aware of a struggling family in Tennant Creek. The father works full-time and financially supports his wife and four children with the fifth child just days away from being born. They spend $50 a week on a power card and due to their low income have till now have lived relatively comfortably. They have resorted to all sleeping in one bedroom of their three-bedroom home so they too can use only one air-conditioner overnight, they have one fridge, one freezer and a hot water system and are only too well aware of cost of living increases. This struggling family have seen their weekly $50 power token lasting them three days. Meaning, with the current cost of living, they have resorted to the main evening meal of fish fingers and a few vegies. Their families are urging them to sell up and leave the Territory.
We have recently employed this man to give him secure employment, however as small business owners we can only pay him a few dollars more than the award. As we too now have deal with increased costs on our small business; ie, Power and Water, superannuation, CPI wage increases, and increases in the cost of goods supplied to our business.
We have family and business contacts in other states and they too are urging us to reconsider our plans and leave the Territory as the cost associated with the remoteness and the increased service costs have become too great.
That both the Territory government parties seem too focused on securing the interest of large businesses than focusing on the bread and butter ones, the small businesses that will keep the Territory going long after the large ones have gone.
We simply ask this with the forecast that federal budget is unlikely to enter surplus this financial year and the predicted federal government party change at this year’s election. What does a pair of committed developing business owners have to look forward too by trying to better their community and the Territory that they call home?
We have thoroughly looked at each end of our personal business and financial systems, ‘to wring out the tea towel’ so to speak to ensure our financial systems remain, if only marginally in surplus and are able to withstand the current round of price increases. We are rapidly developing further strategies to attempt to survive the expected ones that will come with the consequences of the federal budget not meeting a surplus and the anticipated, drastic and sudden changes our federal Coalition government will make, if their strategies are similar to the current Territory CLP government.
I wish to remind politicians of both political parties that we can only be squeezed so much before every drop of money is expended from small business and low and middle income earners.
Can you please inform the honourable Mr Mills that a small business is where you have a meal on the weekend and the corner store that you buy your milk from when you run out at an inconvenient time. That we rely on these low and middle income employees and if these people leave the Territory, a small developing business such as ours is unlikely to continue to contribute to the NT economy and will have to look at less costly states to move their business.
Our business does not have financial loans and owns everything and maintains a good credit relationship with our suppliers. What benefits can we expect over the next three years to progress our small business and ease the cost of living for small and middle income earners?
Yours sincerely,
Tony Watson
Director
Central Building Group Pty Ltd
Leave granted.
Mr McCARTHY: That brings me to the point Tony makes about small business and losing families. Where I come from in Sydney, if you lose a job or have changes in circumstances you can move within the system and find something else. In Tennant Creek, the Barkly, or the Territory for that matter, if families are squeezed and hurting they leave. They pack up and cross the border. They go interstate. We lose the whole family.
The Deputy Chief Minister talked about education cuts, saying they are not cuts, they are savings. Well, for those members interested - particularly those members born in regional or remote areas of the Northern Territory and who are newly elected Country Liberals - in the Barkly Education office, supporting teaching in a region which is one-and-a-half times the size of Victoria, there were 24 support positions. We expect, when they finally finish their saving cuts, there will be 13 positions. Do you know how many families that equates to who will leave the Barkly? How many professionals? How many people who buy their lunch at Tony and Heather’s business? How many people who book catering jobs and support our local business?
As well as that, the member for Araluen neglected to tells us that her regionalisation policy under the Country Liberal Party is taking positions from Tennant Creek and relocating them to Alice Springs. Not only are we seeing cuts and savings, we are seeing relocation of positions which directly affects small business in our town. For the member of Araluen to quote the politics of economic rationalisation - it cuts both ways. I will quote from a media network brief on Tuesday, 4 December 2012. That was the day the mini-budget the member was quoting from came down. The compere was Danielle Parry and the interviewee was Robyn Lambley, NT Treasurer. A summary says:
- In her mini-budget speech to parliament, the Treasurer has told Territorians that they can no longer expect to pay lower taxes, fees and charges, than other parts of the country.
The member for Araluen was quoting Mr Abbott the other day, talking about his visionary plan to grow northern Australia. What is the Liberal visionary plan to grow northern Australia? To provide incentives for people to come here. That is what Mr Abbott is proposing, ‘Let us create innovative incentives to get people to come to northern Australia because it is going off’.
We are in a very good space. The Labor government set that up before we lost the lot and people crossed borders. Before we lost our skilled workforce we were releasing land, and that land is still rolling out. There were 2000 units approved in the CBD that I see stepping out of the ground every time I drive into town; the Marine Supply Base; the new correctional services multi-classification facility; the INPEX project; and do not be surprised when Woodside back up next to INPEX - and on the list goes. This is what we did economically to set it up so the private sector could kick in and take over. The Labor government had a planned and calculated fiscal step-out strategy.
You need incentives to get people here. Tony Abbott is right and minister Lambley agrees with Tony Abbott yet, in practice, she puts together a plan with the Chief Minister, being led by the Renewal Management Board, with a wrecking ball to smash everybody, hit them with a big hit and take it all now. ‘We want to solve it in four years because we have to go to an election. We have heaps of roads and bridges and infrastructure to deliver like Labor did, but we do not know where it is coming from because our promises were way bigger than what we can deliver.’
It is interesting to cut them down to another level and talk about what happens in a regional area and a regional town like Tennant Creek.
I am a member of parliament; I have never earned this much money in my life. I used to be a teacher and, traditionally, my lifestyle took the family on a Christmas holiday, invariably, one holiday a year. When we got back we had blown all the dosh on the holiday; we had a great time seeing family.
Then, I got hit with the car registration, the power bill, the other associated expenses. As the member for Port Darwin said, I used to whack them on the credit card. That was the only way I could manage it. I had a fiscal step-out strategy where I used to pay it off during the year so we could go on another holiday. A Wet Season power bill in Tennant Creek, for me in a three-bedroom home, average lifestyle, used to be around $900. Now, I am paying $1200. That is a bit of an increase. The old 1986 Toyota Hilux registration, as I said the other day, has increased by over $100. I get whacked $20 at the counter. I can go on and on about my expenses, but what I would like to tell those …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Mr McCARTHY: Thank you, member for Fannie Bay and members.
The critics allege, in this wrecking-ball approach, I am now in a position as a member of parliament earning a good salary where I can still manage my credit card. However, in the regions and remote, areas the majority of the constituents I represent are on fixed incomes. Nothing has changed for them. I hope one day I have somebody elected from the regional and remote areas of the Barkly to do this job. I will be working towards that. However, at the moment, I am lucky I have a new job and an increased salary. I can cop an increase in charges with rego, power, water and sewerage. All the other local supermarket prices have become very challenging and I am copping lots of heat over that. The small business owners, Tony and Heather, have outlined that model. I am going to absorb that. I am going to squeeze my budget.
However, the majority of my constituents are on fixed incomes. There is a good example here of a constituent who is a pensioner, a retired nurse who served the community outstandingly. Her son comes in and gives me regular advice; we have great political dialogue. He is a very intelligent guy, Gary Sullivan. He brought in a power bill from his mum, and said, ‘Gerry, this is what I want you to know, and this is the hurt for a person on a fixed income’. Normally, her Wet Season bill would be around $650, and the bill that just came in - as mine came in - is $1045.88. That is a big hit. The difference between me and my family and this constituent is she is on a fixed income so she is going to hurt.
It is reverberating in the regions and remote areas where people are starting to talk about the cost of living. I was on the road for a couple of weeks before getting to Darwin. I was particularly interested in the dialogue in the regional and remote areas. It started to kick in around the cost of living, and the first cost is power, water, and sewerage.
The member for Araluen, the Treasurer said, ‘You guys would not roll it back’. She makes all her really immature remarks that are nervous and show stress and tension because she realises she has been led down the garden path by economic rationalists who are really hurting Territory families. The Leader of the Opposition has said - both in government and now in opposition - the plan to tell Territorians is there. We know we have to invest in power, water and sewerage infrastructure.
As a matter of fact, the Treasurer also said in her mini-budget to this House and the Territory that one of the strategies she is going to use is to defer capital works projects. Once again, we have been having a lot of power outages in Tennant Creek. One of the reasons which was explained to me is we have very old transmission gear. We have very old switches and the infrastructure that transmits that electricity is over 30 years old. We can all share a bit of blame there, shall we? Let us go to this bipartisan approach. I have been involved in that town for 33 years. We need to replace it.
How do you replace it? You borrow money to replace it and you pay back the loan. Like the member for Port Darwin outlined with his house. I am paying my house off over 25 years because I cannot afford to do it any other way. It is a managed debt.
We need that infrastructure in Tennant Creek. The big fear is we have a Treasurer who is grappling and struggling and getting more nervous and insecure. I fear she will cut the capital works project at Tennant Creek’s power and water supply, and that will affect everyone. That will affect small business and families. It will also, once again, dish out the killer blow about jobs. It is about building the regions.
I have developed a new mantra for many people who are coming to me – many Liberals are coming to me wanting to discuss what is happening in the Northern Territory. All I can say to them is I will continue to fight in opposition. I will continue to add to this debate and try to rationalise this debate.
We will be okay because we will probably get a gold mine. We will probably get three or four gold mines and they are going to produce copper. Then there will be phosphate. Do not talk about the gas and oil coming out of the Beetaloo Basin and the Georgina Basin. The whole philosophy of a Labor policy is to build the regions, to set them up so when this stuff hits we are back in action. We used to be the power house of the Northern Territory. We produced more gross state product than Darwin in the 1960s and 1970s. We are coming back.
However, the business owners and the contractors are really concerned about this wrecking-ball approach: whack the consumer, destroy the business confidence, destroy consumer confidence, contractors lose work because capital works are deferred, maybe even in a conspiracy targeting a Labor member. We will wait and see if that plan comes to fruition from the Country Liberal Party. However, if we do not support the regions, we will not be ready for when these private sector gold mines, copper mines, and phosphate projects start kicking in.
It is all about being balanced as the member for Port Darwin says. We have to continue to debate and challenge. The Country Liberal Party has the perfect opportunity to drive a bit of balance into what Territory families are saying outside, have been saying through the media, and have been saying over the water coolers at work; that is, Budget Cabinet sits in February and March. The Country Liberal Party will go into that room – and my analogy about the big cake? Well, they are telling me it is only a very small tea cake now. It is only a really little cake. However, they have the opportunity to start to wind back the wrecking-ball approach and to stage a fiscal step-out strategy over forward years that is more real and rational, that does not hurt Territory families as much, that continues to support the regions, and then we will all be fat on the biggest chocolate mud cake coming our way.
Yet, the trouble with the debate from the member for Port Darwin is that this wrecking-ball approach is the only way forward. There is no choice, he told us. There is no choice; this is it, and we are going to cop it sweet. However, there is a choice and you guys over there have that opportunity in the next budget and the budget after, just like Labor had a step-out fiscal strategy over forward years.
You can start this and get the goodwill of Territorians back. You can stop hurting the most disadvantaged and vulnerable people in the Northern Territory, the ones who are on fixed incomes, the lower socioeconomic groups who are struggling with what this is all about. When the power card that used to keep the fridge going with the baby’s milk in it for five days now cuts out in three days they are starting to buy into this debate as well.
Let us take everybody along with us. It is like your mantra on land release. Four years of your failed mantra on land release as the new suburbs are rolling out across the Northern Territory, in Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Tennant Creek, and Alice Springs. You are in charge now. You continue to use this dialogue. Take us along; let us do it sensitively and together. You have one last chance to regain Territory trust so you will be trusted. That will be in your Cabinet room and Budget Cabinet.
There are some real matters which have been mentioned by Labor members here who are voicing this on behalf of their constituents. The $1 bus fare for seniors? Come on! The $20 for me to stand and have a great conversation with a kid I used to teach at a counter? Come on! The Power and Water officer who is gone from Tennant Creek that the Minister for Essential Services, the member for Katherine, still has not had the decency, the honour, or the integrity to reply to me about, as a local member fighting for locals? Come on! You can do things. You can change this. You will engender the trust and support of Territorians, particularly those in regional and remote areas.
Thank you, Madam Speaker, for the opportunity to speak. I tabled that letter because if the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister do not want to believe me and continue to sledge me as a Labor member, they may take it from respected people in Tennant Creek.
Mr CHANDLER (Business): Madam Speaker, I speak not in support of this motion but to paint a slightly different picture to what the opposition has painted over the last few weeks and months. I have listened with interest to the debate on both sides of the Chamber and it has become quite clear to me that there are differences. Has anyone else noticed? There are differences in the way the Labor Party feels about the economy and debt. To his credit, the member for Barkly was probably the only member I have listened to tonight that did not talk down the Territory.
When we were in opposition we were always accused of talking down the Territory. The member for Barkly is right, there is a promising future for the Northern Territory. However, the clear difference is we on this side of the House, a conservative government, recognise what debt can do and debt is a reality, unlike the Labor Party which seems to think debt can be pushed to one side. I listened to some of the mantra yesterday and it was just, ‘Spend the money. Just go out there and spend the money.’ Where does it stop?
I have brought in a credit card statement. On this credit card is an opening balance of $12 298.23. There is a minimum monthly payment of $244. The interest on just this amount of $12 298 is $132 a month. Every four weeks that is $132 that cannot be used for other things spent on one credit card. It would be great if everyone in this country did not have more than one credit card but the fact is many people have many credit cards. The interesting thing about this, though, if you were to only pay the minimum payment to pay off this $12 298, it would take you 34 years and six months. If you only make the minimum monthly payment - this is what the Labor party seems to think when they talk about managed debt - to pay off $12 298 will take 34 years and six months.
My youngest son, who is three, would be about 37 years of age at that time, and probably would have been working for 20 years. How would I feel as a father, as a politician in 2013, to think that he, as a three-year-old, might be working for 20 years after which he can sit down one afternoon and have a beer and say, ‘Hey, Dad, I have paid your debt off. I have been working for 20 years.’ A three-year-old today, when he reaches 37 after 20 years of working, has finally paid off the debt we have in the Northern Territory today. That is a stark reminder of what debt can do and how long it takes to pay off.
Every amount of interest that is paid off a debt is money that cannot be used for other things. That includes paying public servant wages, paying police officers, ambulance officers and firies. The money is not there because it is going to the big banks.
One thing I learnt listening to the crowd yesterday at the rally - and these are real people. Let us not beat around the bush; these are real people with real hearts and feelings. However, their attitude to the money and the here and now is very short-sighted if they do not respect what the debt could do to the Northern Territory if not managed effectively. By ‘managing’ I mean managing the debt and getting rid of the debt. Their jobs are in real doubt into the future if we, as a government, do not have the money to pay them. As the Attorney-General pointed out earlier, this is not about today, but about tomorrow, next year, five years and 10 years from now and, in fact, 37 years from now given it will take that long to pay off a $12 000 credit card.
The Mills government is tackling government’s debt and ensuring the Territory remains an attractive place to invest and create jobs. The Territory is a great performer overall: the second strongest economy in the nation. But, with all that has been said and put out in all these pamphlets and so forth, and the rhetoric that is going on, you would not believe that is true. However, these are actual figures.
We have potential to overtake Western Australia, today’s stand-out performer. The economy is expected to grow 4.4% in the next five years. Business confidence is at the highest level in the country. The most recent Sensis business confidence index shows 35% of business operators surveyed expected strong growth in the immediate future. Why is the Northern Territory a great place to do business? It is a stable place but, clearly, the Ichthys project is pumping investment into our economy. Of course, that brings contracts and jobs. The Territory has an enormous potential in its resources, particularly oil and gas.
This government is directly pumping time and effort in bringing more investment here. Recognising former ministers from the other side, much work was done to bring companies like INPEX to the Northern Territory. That also brings many challenges. For example, I have appointed a specialist in my office who is working on linking potential investors with investment opportunities - not working on spin, looking at real economic opportunities. These investors will feed into our three diversified economy hubs to ensure long-term stability and a thriving economy for the future.
We have been securing work for Territory businesses. Team NT is pursuing manufacturing opportunities with prime contractors. Direct engagement with relevant overseas and Australian head offices has been ramped up. Visits to Perth, Singapore, Thailand and Japan are planned in the near future. Investment needs workers and we are skilling up the workforce and attracting workers. The Territory has the lowest unemployment rate in the country at 3.9%, and a high worker participation rate. All this doom and gloom we hear from the other side is not mirrored in the statistics.
We need more workers as we grow the economy. We continue to hold successful national and international expos for skilled workers. I am pushing to get a worker migration scheme in place. Last week, I had the opportunity to meet up with Hon Chris Bowen, the federal Immigration minister. We both agreed on the way forward for the Northern Territory. I walked away from that meeting with an assurance from the federal government that both of us can work together to ensure we meet those needs and have migration policies and interstate migration policies which suit the growing needs of the Northern Territory. It soon became clear to Hon Chris Bowen, when I used analogies like if INPEX was to come to Sydney it might cause a ripple; because it is coming to Darwin it will cause a tsunami. We have history with the ConocoPhillips plant of what it did for local businesses and how we need to prepare, as a government, to back up those businesses to ensure we have the right mechanisms in place to provide that support.
Apprenticeship training is under way. Incentives help soften the initial cost of having apprentices and trainees. We have developed a list of priority jobs with industry tailoring workers for jobs. These will be the focus of our training activities.
The Territory boasts the lowest level of tax liability on a medium-sized business in the country due, in part, to its lack of land tax and low payroll tax regime. That is an attraction in itself.
We do a great deal to support our businesses. We have a wide range of stimulus programs. There is a suite of business development programs available through the Department of Business. Business management skills, business planning, professional development, and environmental performance programs are all available through the Department of Business. Yes, many of these programs are previous government programs. Unlike some people, it does not matter - as the Attorney-General mentioned earlier - what political stripes one may wear, if it is a good program, it is good, if it is bad, it is bad. You keep the good and throw out the bad.
There are many things the Mills government has done since coming into office. We promised and have appointed the Chair of the independent Planning Commission. We were fast off the blocks on this. Not only did we select an expert, Mr Gary Nairn, to take the role - he has been out and about in the community talking to all stakeholders for months – but we selected all members of the commission and they have had their first meeting. The commission has been looking at new ideas for land release, getting an overview of all current projects all over Darwin, including Wanguri and the regions. Mr Nairn has just had two fruitful days of discussions in Katherine. The commission is quickly identifying the way to use parcels of land - whether it is suitable for housing, commercial interests, agriculture, etcetera.
We have appointed Dr Freeland to our new EPA. Dr Freeland’s skills, knowledge and experience make him eminently suitable. He brings a wealth of experience to the NT EPA, having worked in senior positions with the Northern Territory Parks and Wildlife Commission and as a senior environmental consultant. Dr Freeland will be an excellent Chair of the new Environment Protection Authority.
If we do have this all wrong and Labor has this all right, it would just mean we would be going into debt further and further into the future. As I said before, with this credit card statement I could not bring myself to have to say to a three-year-old that, at the age of 37, after working for 20 years, we have finally paid off the Northern Territory debt. It is not fair for the next generation to have to worry about the debt of today. We should be taking responsibility for that debt today.
At yesterday’s rally, I heard people yelling out things like ‘Just spend the money, just spend the money’, and ‘It is not our debt, it is government’s debt’. That is the simplistic argument many people are using. It shows clearly a difference between the Labor and Liberal sides of politics. We take debt seriously and we understand the harm debt can do. For every dollar you are paying in interest, you are supporting those people Labor does not want to support. Labor does not think you should be supporting business. Labor does not think you should be supporting anything but a very unionised public service. I profess to have been part of a number of unions. I was a member of the ASU. I was a section counsellor for the CPSU. I got far more in those days of being part of the unions by working with the business or the departments than by trying to work against them.
The reality is debt is serious; it needs to be dealt with, and quickly. With this perception that you do not want to support business or the big end of town - one of the biggest ends of town is the banks. Every bit of interest you are paying on this debt you have racked up is supporting the banks. You are supporting the big end of town. All that money that could be spent on firies, police, schools and hospitals is going to the banks …
Mr Tollner: And the shareholders.
Mr CHANDLER: That is right, and the shareholders. However, this money that goes in interest payments could be doing all those things you say you stand up for. You say you want to deliver these services. Well, think of the services that could be delivered if we were not spending over $1m a day in interest.
It would have been beautiful to be able to come into government with no debt whatsoever. That would be the dream of any new administration that comes in. One might imagine how you would get into an administration if there was no debt, because the previous government would have been re-elected for managing so well.
It would be lovely to have been able to roll out all the Country Liberals’ policies with plenty of money in the bank and the ability to be able to do it very quickly. The fact is we have come in and have some damn good policies, but we are restricted. It is like we are sailing on this boat and there are these huge buckets hanging over the end dragging us along so we cannot get up to speed as quickly as we want to.
There were also some interesting tidbits the other night on Facebook. People are spinning these lies and mistruths. I heard the Leader of the Opposition earlier saying that I said all of this action is spurred on the back of hatred and lies. Much of it is. I have had the opportunity over the last few months to sit in my office with people one on one and tell them what the issues are, what the truth is, and why we have had to do what we have done. I have not had a person walk out of the office without a changed point of view because they have been able to see the truth. I have often put in front of them media releases and they have said to me, ‘Why the hell do you not get these media releases out to the people?’ I told them that they go through a filter, which is called our media. Media releases go to the media, the media then do what they do, and then you are presented with a version that is often twisted. We have seen it time and time again. As a government, if we have done something so bad, so wrong, so painful that we should be held to account, well, that is fine. But when it is twisted and the mistruths - as we see in the first 100 days document that has been put out by the Labor Party - you are stirring the pot, twisting the truth. You are putting out inaccurate information and then you wonder why the community is getting angry. They are getting angrier but they are getting angry about mistruths.
I am not angry at the community for being this way because I have read some of the articles in the news and seen articles or presentations on television. If I did not know any better, I would get angry. I would get so frustrated if I did not know what the truth behind that was. I understand the sentiment in the community at the moment, but much of it has been driven by hatred and lies.
My family has met the Opposition Leader at social events and so forth and they always find that she is a nice lady. Yet, I have one son in particular who watches parliament live - probably watching now - watches the nightly news and cannot understand how bitter somebody is. He said to me, ‘Why do these people change so much in this Chamber?’ We are supposed to be the leaders of our society. What do we expect from our children if we act like monkeys in here? We saw a lot of rabble going on yesterday. We talk about democracy, and unions stand for democracy and their right to free speech.
We went out there as a Cabinet. Other members of this side of the government were out there to listen to what the people had to say. Was the same opportunity given to the Chief Minister to speak? No, it was not. There is something to be said about that. My son said, ‘Why do you get on like this? What happens in this place? Do you all seem to change as people?’ I said, ‘Mate, the thing is sometimes we have differing views and it can get heated from time to time’. He said, ‘No, no. There is a bitterness through someone. It is like …’. I will not say what he actually said, but it was along the lines that someone has not got over the fact they have lost and now they are on the losing team.
I thought the best way forward after talking to my son was that there needs to be a blessing or a prayer said to this lady. We have one here; it is an Apache blessing that we found and we thought we might read it out for the Opposition Leader:
- May the sun bring you new energy by day. May the moon softly restore you by night. May the rain wash away your worries.
May the breeze blow new strength into your being.
May you walk gently through the world and know its beauty all the days of your life.
Back to some of the matters we have here. The fact is we came into government and found a huge debt that needs to be dealt with. We have already demonstrated today there is a difference between the way this side of the House and the Labor Party views debt. I am all for going into debt to buy a house that will appreciate in value over the years, or building a railway or a bridge that will have long economic benefits for the Territory. But when you are racking up debt on things like water parks and sporting grounds - admittedly, much of this is good infrastructure, particularly the sporting infrastructure - it does not turn a dollar as far as future economic benefit is concerned. If the previous government had put more money into the port facilities in Darwin, think of the opportunities which could have come our way. It is okay to go into debt if it will create some economy, but to spend it on - talk about pork barrelling, and we have been accused of doing some pork barrelling lately. There is a difference between what you spend the money on and how you spend the money.
One of the biggest and highest costs of living ,..
Mr STYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I seek an extension for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Mr CHANDLER: We know the reality is that had the Labor Party been elected in August 2012, they would have had to do something about the debt. One of the only ways they would have been able to do that, particularly with Power and Water, was to put up power and water costs. The reality is we know - we have seen the letters - what the intent of the Labor Party was. It was to do just that.
No one, at the moment, seems to attribute any blame for the debt we are in - and what we are trying to actually take responsibility for and deal with - to the previous government. It has all been attributed to what we are doing. The reality is, politics is a popular sport. If you do not do the right thing by the community, you are not going to be elected next time. So, I put to you: why in the world in a game like politics would we be doing what we are doing, making some of the decisions we are making, if it was not absolutely necessary? You know what? There is not a person here who wants to lose their job. There is not a person on this side who is a fool. There is not a person on this side who thinks outside the square to the point that they want to throw everything away. This game, as we all know, is a popularity game. I put it to you again. We would not be doing this if it were not absolutely necessary to rein in the debt and to maybe, put all that money in the future that is going into interest rates and into interest, back into our community, which will directly benefit our services. That is what the strategy is.
Lately we have seen much spin from the Labor Party, and we know we are in the lead-up to an election. Let us face it, we are all adults here and we know how it works. But, some of the things in this document put out by the Labor Party are just so wrong. We have heard arguments to say that you are taking bits and pieces out of our information, and then you are putting your own spin on it and you are not reading things in context; you are not reading the whole thing. We understand that. Goodness gracious, when we were in opposition, we probably did the same thing to you guys ...
Members interjecting.
Mr CHANDLER: Well, there might have been a bit of that.
The reality is we know what we are doing here. The reality is there is a serious situation ...
Mr Wood: Remember the puff pieces.
Mr CHANDLER: I know. The puff pieces and all those things, member for out the other way, outer Darwin …
Mr Wood: South Palmerston.
Mr CHANDLER: Yes, south Palmerston.
The reality is, there are things in here that are just wrong. ‘Six hundred public servants sacked’. There it is, guaranteed that 600 public servants will be sacked. If anybody was to read that, they would think straightaway we must have sacked 600 public servants. Have we? No, we have not sacked 600 public servants. No one has been sacked. In fact, figures from the Commissioner of Public Employment say there were 19 989 full-time equivalent public servants in the December quarter:
- While being 50 fewer than the record high of 20 039 full-time equivalents in the September quarter, it is still 63 higher than the June quarter, which was the last full quarterly report before the August election.
We have believed in the last four years, we have heard time and time again from the Labor Party which was in government, that our public service is spot on with everything they do. We have not sacked 600 public servants. That is the truth. We have heard the Education minister tonight, talk about schools. There are, in fact, more teachers teaching and greater job security, because many of the teachers who were on contracts before have been moved to permanent employment, which was one of our election promises. I fought for years, when I was shadow Education minister, as I really wanted to know why we had so many teachers on contracts. Again, we have taken more people off contracts and put them onto permanent work.
There have been no sackings at the hospitals where 93% of staff are considered as front line, and are quarantined from the budget measures. We have heard the Minister for Health say as much in the Chamber. Police stations are in the process of putting on 120 additional police officers. This stuff - ‘600 sacked public servants’ - is just so wrong. If I was someone in the community who had nothing to do with politics and I picked that up, I would say, ‘You buggers’. I would be angry too. I would be really angry. But be angry with the truth, do not be angry with the lies and vitriol that has appeared in recent days.
The one here about $1m to employ their mates. I had a look at that and thought, goodness gracious, it was as if you wanted to attack seniors’ wisdom. I hope when I am a little older I will be wiser and someone will be calling on that wisdom. There are many older people in the Northern Territory and across this country who can still provide a valuable contribution to the community. To suggest you should not use that wisdom is astounding.
If you want to play the truth game, how much did Labor spend on consultants and spin doctors over the years? We could bring out some figures if you want to add some real flare and fairness to this argument.
This document is full of lies and it confuses. I heard Francis earlier say the community is confused. You are damn right they are confused because they are getting so much spin, so many lies are being told in the community today they do not know what to believe. You can have a mob mentality when you get so many people upset. I point out again: every time I have had the opportunity to sit down with someone and give them the truth they walk out with a completely different opinion. When I hand them a media release from any one of the ministers of the government they say to me, ‘This is the first I have heard of this. Why is this stuff not getting to the media?’ Of course, the media releases get to the media, but it is what they choose to do with it and how they present it and, of course, how Labor presents it.
The reality is we have a problem and it is debt. The longer you leave, it the bigger the hole - and that is the truth.
More evidence was pointed out by the Minister for Transport earlier. All the figures for registration are wrong. That is misrepresentation and you wonder why people are upset. I am not wondering any longer why people are becoming upset because of misinformation. As the member for Arafura pointed out, people are confused, and rightly so, when you see this kind of information put out.
I become frustrated in what is a difficult job, as did the members of the Labor Party in the previous government. The member for Barkly saw a pile of files on my desk and was thinking he was here a few months ago doing exactly the same thing ...
Mr McCarthy: It made me homesick but I am coming back.
Mr CHANDLER: It made you homesick. It is a difficult job to get through everything you need to as a minister. Everyone on this side would agree; everyone on that side who has sat in the chair before would agree. However, you become very disappointed when you are dealing with people who are angry.
It would not have mattered who was elected in August, power and water prices would have gone up, let us not beat around the bush. No one likes it.
However, the debt needs to be dealt with. We are taking the responsibility and, at the moment, 100% of the blame has been attributed to this side and no portion of that blame is being put to the people who put us in this position in the first place.
Madam Speaker, there is a difference between the Labor Party and the Country Liberal Party; that is, we see debt in a completely different way. Debt can be managed, but managing a $12 298.23 credit card paying the minimum balance every month will take 34 years and six months to pay off. That is not a legacy I am prepared, as a minister of this government, to hand over to my three-year-old.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I will try to get through what I would like to say in the 10 minutes we have before GBD finishes at 9 pm.
Obviously, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for bringing this motion before the House. Members have spoken on many different things in the course of this debate in the last couple of hours. I will focus on one part of what has happened to the cost of living as a result of members opposite driving up power prices by 30%.
The Leader of the Opposition talked about people packing up and leaving the Territory in droves - as we know they are - because they cannot afford to live here. However, there is an element of the community that will not pack up and leave; they will stay. I am talking about the Aboriginal population. I will talk specifically about issues in my electorate around the impact of the cost of living, and the terrible handling of communication to people on communities about the implications of the cost of living increases.
We had a bit of a crisis in Gove. Gas to Gove has been resolved. Around the same time I was dealing with that when the rally was on, I became aware of the fact that the community of Yirrkala and, for that matter, Gunyangara, had no access to power cards. There are a couple of reasons behind that. Let us keep in mind that businesses in Gove have been doing it incredibly tough. There are 140 or so retailers around the Northern Territory who sell these power cards to people who live in homes who have a metered power arrangement, as opposed to getting a quarterly power bill as I do. It is a sensible system which allows people to monitor their power usage.
In Nhulunbuy, the business that retails these cards makes no gain. There is nothing in it for them other than being a good corporate citizen. The local retailer is the owner of the IGA store, who owns stores in Nhulunbuy and Yirrkala, and two homeland stores in more recent times. This retailer has been going through incredibly difficult times with the downturn in business in gas to Gove. Why would he keep thousands of excess dollars of his cash flow tied up in power cards in anticipation of people coming to buy them? He has a very good idea of the volume of power cards he gets through on a weekly basis and orders in from Power and Water on a weekly basis on the strength of that.
Over the Australia Day long weekend, people ran out of power cards. I did not become aware of it until it was raised with me on the Tuesday morning. The owner of the IGA business, Mr Tim Broadbent, became aware of it. As the retailer, of course, he contacted Power and Water on Monday - I do not know what time on Monday of the long weekend - to request additional power cards be issued immediately. If this was in Darwin, Alice Springs, or Katherine - all of those places on the Stuart Highway, I might add - it would have been resolved within a matter of hours. For Yirrkala people, power cards did not become available until the Thursday morning. This is in northeast Arnhem Land where we have a major airport that has two flights in every day and charters coming in and out all of the time.
We had that issue with no power cards. The reason the power cards had ran out is, quite clearly, consumers were getting through them much quicker than they would previously. Had the owner of the business of IGA known that power prices had gone up, he would most certainly have ordered in extra power cards to make sure people did not run out. But, at no point was he told he needed to increase the number of power cards, otherwise he would have.
When I raised the issue through a media release I simply stated the facts around what had happened. The media release was titled ‘CLP drops the ball on essential services’. I highlighted the fact that people were there without power. I will quote a couple of lines:
- The problem at Yirrkala is that there has been little information available to residents about increasing power charges and how that affects customers using prepaid power tokens ...
Pre paid power tokens are being used at a startling rate and now PowerWater has had trouble supplying enough power tokens to keep the lights on.
Yes, true:
- The end result is that families, many with young children, are having to get on in hot and uncomfortable conditions without any power for lighting, cooking, and other essential needs ...
Yes, true. As a matter of fact, families without power cards on the Saturday before, on Saturday 26th:
- Terry Mills has said that one of the high priorities for his government to improve conditions for people living in the bush. It is increasingly clear the CLP won support in the bush based on empty promises.
Terry Mills and his team are failing to deliver anything but paralysed government, disruption to government services and a gloomy future for the northeast Arnhem Land.
I ended by saying:
- My question to Terry Mills is: would he and his family be comfortable living without power for three days, like families at Yirrkala?
For my efforts, I got a very nasty slap back from the minister responsible for Essential Services who dismissed the media release as a cheap shot based on lies and the misfortune of others:
- Residents were informed of the changes: brochures were distributed ...
No, they were not:
- ... on how to reduce power usage and at times, an interpreter was used ...
No, they were not:
- ... to ensure the message was filtered throughout the community.
The fact is that the Nhulunbuy store which sells prepaid power cards, failed to order an adequate amount.
It failed to order an adequate amount because Power and Water failed to tell it that it needed to do so:
- Unfortunately, the store ran out of the prepaid power cards and the locals went without.
PWC did everything they could to get more prepaid power cards to Nhulunbuy as soon as possible.
They were alerted on the Monday afternoon and they became available for purchase on a Thursday morning. I do not think that is good enough and nor do the people of Yirrkala who went without power.
What amazes me in all of this, and what concerns me, is the lack of communication to our remote communities about the fact that power prices have gone up by 30%. I eventually found - because somebody assisted me to locate it - the brochure. This is how people were advised their power prices were going up in communities. Photo of a football player there. For non-English speakers; they are probably thinking, ‘Oh, this is about football’. ‘Use less power and make your power card last longer’, it says, or as someone said to me, ‘Oh, that says useless power’. Too right it does! You open it up, there is a diagram - not bad. There are some illustrations about what people might do to reduce power. However, it is not until you go to the dense English text on the back that it says, ‘Tariff changes, as of 1 January, 30%’. Not only was that message entirely lost, but these did not turn up in Yirrkala. Do you know when they arrived? Last Thursday. The owner of the IGA store received a bunch of these and posters to display in his store to tell people power prices had gone up.
I am not talking about people who are whingers here. This is an e-mail I received. I sent a group e-mail out to as many Yirrkala people as I could think of. I will not say the name of this person as she is a public servant and, like most public servants, is a little fearful about her job. She said to me:
- Hi Lynne, I can say that with certainty I have never seen the flyer you attached and nor has …
the organisation she works for:
- Had I been asked to assist with distributing this information to the families that we work with on a daily basis, I would have done it.
I must also confess that I personally know nothing about these power prices and am ignorant as to why they have come about. I can also vouch for the fact that in recent weeks we have seen many Yirrkala families run out of power on a regular basis. We have literally had people come to our door for money for power tickets. I have not heard anyone mention the fact that this is due to increased power costs, and so I do not think there is any awareness about this.
I will speak to the …
- … this week to see if anybody else has heard about increased power costs and let you know the outcome of the discussions.
Which was, no, nobody had heard anything. What really disappoints me is the lack of communication. Where is the voice from the bush members on the other side? My phoning around tells me this is the case in every store. They are not necessarily running out of power cards but they are, obviously, chewing through a heap more than they had had previously. How do people make ends meet in this hot weather, without food security, lights or cooling? They are just forgotten.
As far as the member for Katherine is concerned, people are just complaining and I am telling lies. Where is the member for Namatjira who, in 1992, screamed from the rooftops when consumers had to pay for power in Papunya? That was 1992. She put up a stink, supported by Warren Snowdon, under the former CLP government:
- Papunya community administrator, Alison Anderson said the government’s decision not to reconnect power to Papunya was outrageous.
‘I reckon that stinks’ she said.
‘I reckon they should come back here and reconnect us because we’re the ones that have really stood up and fought the NT government on this issue’.
The Minister for Indigenous Advancement was happy to be a strong voice 20 years ago about what is wrong with power prices. In the current situation? Nothing; not a word. Where are the voices of the other Indigenous members of this parliament who represent constituents in bush communities? It is an absolute disgrace ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Nhulunbuy. The time is 9 pm. Do you wish to adjourn your comments?
Ms WALKER: I believe I have just about finished and, if I need to continue, I will do so in adjournment, Madam Speaker.
Debate adjourned.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr ELFERINK (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I stand to speak on behalf of a constituent of mine who has asked me to pay tribute to a great Territorian. Jim Dorling AO died recently in Queensland and for many years he was a great contributor to Northern Territory life and history.
I speak on behalf of our former Administrator, Ted Egan AO, who supplied the following story.
- When I was Superintendent at Yuendumu in the late 1950s I was pleased to meet a young cadet patrol officer, Jim Dorling, of the Northern Territory Administration Welfare Branch. As part of his training in Aboriginal Affairs, Jim was to spend the next six months with me, and what an asset he was. He was intelligent, gregarious, compassionate, and willing to participate in all matters. He worked to my direction for six months, then he was fortunate to be chosen to accompany Ted Evans and Dr John Hargrave on one of their famous patrols among the Pintubi, still leading a nomadic life in the desert regions around Lake Mackay.
I did not see Jim for a few weeks, as he then went back to the Top End and then to the ASOPA course in Sydney, another part of a patrol officer’s training. He passed the course with honours and, like a few other officers, got a taste for the law. Fairly quickly he transferred to Canberra where he did a law degree at the Australian National University.
Along the way, Jim met and married a talented young woman named Mary Berryman. They married and Jim returned to Darwin with Crown Law. Jim and Mary had two children, Allan and Anne, and they lived in various houses in Darwin. Jim became Parliamentary Draftsman. He was to remain in that post for many years and give the finest service to the Northern Territory, due to his acute drafting skills.
Jim and Mary were great contributors to the social life in Darwin. Interested in sport, especially sailing, and the arts, they fitted in so well and they loved the Territory lifestyle. Mary became a great participant in various welfare activities around the town, and eventually did a doctorate as she helped to establish the cause for recognition of the stolen generation.
Other tributes will be paid to the life and the legal drafting skills of Jim Dorling. Suffice though to say that his legacy will be the exemplary nature of his work and the skills that he passed on to many of today’s senior public servants. Jim and Mary Dorling survived Cyclone Tracy with dignity and resumed life in Darwin. Post-self-government in the Territory, the reputation of Jim Dorling as a parliamentary draftsman was prodigious and he accepted briefs to assist with legal drafting in many other countries.
The Dorlings especially loved Ireland, but his main contribution in life was to the Northern Territory in the emerging days of self-government. Born at Orbost, Victoria, Jim died at Cooroy in Queensland and is survived by Mary, Anne, Allan, and a host of grateful Northern Territory friends.
Vale, Jim Dorling, the man with the hardest handshake in the Northern Territory.
At this time our thoughts are with his family.
Ms FYLES (Nightcliff): Madam Speaker, the members of this parliament all have their own unique story, which is important to ensure we have a balanced representation of our Territory people. Tonight I would like to speak about two community groups that have provided immense support to the Territory community over a number of years and to me, personally, in fulfilling my role as a mother.
The Childbirth Education Association was formally established in 1983 and provides vital support to Territory families at one of the most important stages in their life journey: the birth of a new baby. It supported my mother and father and now supports me as a parent.
Run by volunteers from the Nightcliff Community Centre, the Childbirth Education Association provides information and support for women and their families, and promotes self-reliance and confidence in pregnancy, birth, and parenting. The education website explains that they offer, and I quote their website:
- Education sessions, wellbeing exercise classes and general resources that help women gain the knowledge, confidence, and choice they require to ensure the best possible birthing experience and enjoy the life-long process of being a parent. The association is also a key community advocate for birthing services and staff and members are passionate about the empowerment of women and thrive to ensure all women have access to quality care.
During the month of March, we will celebrate International Women’s Day. This day, thousands of events are held worldwide to inspire women and celebrate achievements. Childbirth Education Association has a proud history in Darwin of providing education and support in birthing and parenting to women and, as an organisation, CEA has also been growing the ground for women of Darwin as employees and board members with many skills. They will be celebrating International Women’s Day with a special morning tea event, open to the public, on 9 March at the Nightcliff Community Centre. There will be guest speakers and an information display. Everyone is invited to celebrate the strength, resilience and achievements of women worldwide.
CEA receives a small grant from the Office of Women’s Policy for International Women’s Day, for which I know they are most grateful.
The other event the association is hosting this year is a film fundraiser, Birth Story, about birthing rights and the movement in America in the 1970s. The winner of the Audience Award at the Los Angeles Film Festival, this film will take your breath away with its emotion as Ina May Gaskin and the Farm Midwives fight for women centred care and shackle themselves to their husbands to enable them to be present at the birth of their children. This fight for the empowerment of women during the birthing process will be held on 24 March at the Museum Theatrette. I encourage people to support these events and if you wish to attend, or would like more information, please contact the Childbirth Education Centre, or refer to its website.
They also continue to have many new and old favourite activities at the association this year: birth preparation classes, breastfeeding establishment, monthly morning teas, and the ever-popular pregnancy stretch classes at Nightcliff and Palmerston, Bumps and Bibs, aqua aerobics, and the soon to be commencing mothers and babies gentle exercising classes. Again, I refer to their website if you are interested or call into the office Tuesday to Friday between 9 am and 12 pm.
I also acknowledge the Australian Breastfeeding Association, or ABA as it is more commonly known. Its support to our community is also vital and it operates under a small grant from the NT government. A great deal of time from volunteers supports ABA groups across the Northern Territory to ensure accurate breastfeeding information, education and support is available.
The ABA began as the Nursing Mothers’ Association in 1964 to support mothers, and today is Australia’s leading authority on breastfeeding. I now read from their mission statement to further explain their role:
- We:
educate society and support mothers, using up-to-date research findings and the practical experiences of many women
influence society to acknowledge breastfeeding as normal and important to parenting and the physical and mental health of babies, children and mothers.
The support of the ABA has been critical to me, as it has to many mothers, and I take the opportunity tonight to highlight its vital work and support to our community with our most precious assets – our children.
Royal Darwin Hospital is a baby-friendly accredited hospital which supports, respects and encourages the mother’s choice of infant feeding with the staff providing practical education and assistance to breastfeeding mothers as well as advice and support with resources. The baby-friendly health initiative was launched in 1991 by UNICEF and the World Health Organisation with the aim to create healthcare environments that promote breastfeeding. The support at RDH was vital to me as a new mother, and many other mothers have found support from the staff at Royal Darwin Hospital and across Territory hospitals essential in their breastfeeding journey.
ABA volunteers staff a 24-hour helpline parents can call for support when things are not going well. This is of immense support. While the Commonwealth government funds the helpline infrastructure, hundreds of women nationally give their time voluntarily to undergo extensive training and then counsel parents in need. They are available 24 hours a day to provide support and advice. As most parents of newborn babies know, it is often late at night when you need this advice and to have it a phone call away is most valued. I acknowledge and thank all these volunteers, particularly in the Territory. ABA also has a large amount of information online for families.
The benefits of breastfeeding are well known and, although it is a natural mother to baby experience, it is a learned skill and can be difficult at times for various reasons. ABA supports all mothers who wish to breastfeed, whether it is through advice, support or the hire of a breast pump. The association is run by a wonderful group of volunteers. In the Territory, ABA has groups in Alice Springs, Darwin, Palmerston and rural, Katherine and Nhulunbuy. These wonderful volunteers give up their time to support Territory mothers and families.
There is a calendar of events which provides support, information and social opportunities to families. Topics range from returning to work, milk supply, safety, and a broad range of mum’s health topics related to breastfeeding. Local groups work closely with other health and community organisations to create a supportive fabric for our Territory families.
Another valued ABA program is its baby care rooms and ‘breastfeeding welcome here’ venues. These programs encourage mothers and ensure they feel comfortable to breastfeed in public places as they are protected by the law to do so without discrimination. These programs are so important in supporting mothers to get out and about. They also ensure that mothers participate in our community and are not isolated once they have a baby.
My office is a ‘breastfeeding welcome here’ venue and I encourage other offices to do the same. I am proud to be able to work as a parliamentarian and continue to be a breastfeeding mother to a nine-month-old baby. I hope my journey encourages others to continue to breastfeed for as long as they can. The support I have received from the ABA has been wonderful. I thank them for their work and encourage other mothers to become involved in this association to support their journey.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I strongly encourage the government to ensure support through ongoing funding in their budgets to organisations such as the Australian Breastfeeding Association and the Childbirth Education Association.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the member for Nightcliff for a very important adjournment.
It is with a genuinely heavy heart that I speak about a wonderful, kind and generous man from Alice Springs, who tragically died on 14 January this year. Wayne Cullinane - or Wild Wayne as he was known around town - was just 50 years old. He was born in Mount Beauty, Victoria, moved to Alice Springs when he was just two years old and spent most of his life there.
Wayne was a butcher by trade and worked as a butcher until 1987 when he started the business Central Plant Hire. He started with one old truck, a bobcat, and a little desk in the corner of his mum’s lounge room. From there, with a little help, he built the business to what it is today: a successful, diverse business that has sponsored many clubs, organisations, and individuals over 25 years of operation, including the Arunga Park Speedway Association, Alice Springs Off-road Racing, and Alice Springs Karting Club.
Wayne lived for motor sport. As his son said to fellow mourners at the service, ‘If he could race it and get it to go, then he was into it’. He was heavily involved in drag and speedway racing and, in his later years, he became more involved in off-road racing and competed in the famous Finke Desert Race numerous times, including in the extreme two-wheel drive section.
Wayne was extremely well known around Alice Springs for his tireless work in the community and his willingness to assist others. He sponsored many events and individuals over the years and never missed an opportunity to help someone. He was a mentor and a role model to many juniors in a variety of sports from cycling through to off-road racing, and always made time to give junior competitors advice and encouragement in their chosen sport.
Wayne was a happy-go-lucky bloke who was a dedicated father and family man and will be sadly missed by the whole community. He is survived by wife, Sarah, and son, Scott, to whom I extend my deepest sympathy on their tragic loss. It was a tragic loss for the whole community of Alice Springs – someone who was a salt of the earth community member.
In Question Time today, the member for Nelson asked for an update on the quarantine waste process after the closure of East Arm Port incinerator. I undertook to provide additional information to parliament.
While the transition to the new process is not yet complete, I can confirm that the old incinerator was shut down on 2 November last year, and has not been used since. Prior to the close of the quarantine waste incinerator at East Arm Wharf, the Darwin Port Corporation provided the infrastructure to dispose of quarantine waste that was generated by ships arriving in Darwin.
Veolia Environment Australia was the contractor responsible for the removal and handling of quarantine waste generated at Darwin Airport and they engaged the Darwin Port Corporation to destroy the waste generated from the airport. With the closure of the waste incinerator, the Darwin Port Corporation has worked with Veolia to provide a suitable and approved facility to hold quarantine waste arriving in Darwin until an alternate facility to destroy the waste was commissioned.
Veolia subsequently invested in establishing a temporary autoclave waste handling facility at its premises in Berrimah. Autoclave is a form of solid waste treatment that utilises heat, steam and pressure to process the waste. After material has been autoclaved it is rendered sterile, and can be safety disposed of by burial or in landfill. It must be remembered that while autoclaves can be approved for processing materials up to biohazard status, the overwhelmingly majority of all waste collected at our port and airport is food scraps and materials left over from in-flight meals and related packaging materials. The Veolia facility has been approved by the federal government’s agencies, and now the independent NT Environmental Protection Authority.
The final commissioning and operation of the autoclave is still under way and, as a result, there are still a number of containers and waste bins at the port’s quarantine storage yard. Once the backlog of quarantine waste held at East Arm wharf has cleared, which is some 25 containers, the commercial arrangement between the waste generators and commercial waste disposal operators will be finalised. DPC will no longer have any role in destroying or storing quarantine waste awaiting processing. It is said that the Darwin Port Corporation, like the Darwin Airport, will enter into a commercial arrangement with Veolia or any other approved commercial operator for the treatment and disposal of any Quarantine waste materials.
The shutting down of the old incinerator at the Darwin Port created some difficulties in setting up an alternative process, but it was the right decision to make after Labor failed to take the necessary decisions to protect the environment. An environmentally safe, long-term waste processing and disposal was essential and it was disappointing that the previous Labor government failed to make the necessary decision and do the hard work in establishing an alternate process.
We are not yet at the final process but we will ensure that all quarantined material is continually handled and disposed of in an appropriate manner and in a timely fashion that presents no potential harm to Territorians, or to the environment.
Subsequent to that, following up on a query the member for Nelson raised, post Question Time, there are no plans to purchase another incinerator. This is the process we will use under commercial arrangements from here on in; and it will be not be the responsibility of the port from that point of view.
Ms PURICK (GOYDER): I wish to commend the people, and the Litchfield Council, who organised the Australia Day citizenship ceremony at Freds Pass Reserve, as well as the flag raising and the other activities that made the morning a very enjoyable time.
My compliments to the mayor, Allan McKay, and to the Litchfield Council staff for putting on the event; to the Rotary Club and to the Lions people for providing morning tea, and to everyone who made the morning a very successful event. We had people who became Australian citizens; we had Citizen of the Year; the Young Citizen of the Year Awards; the Community Event of the Year; and we also had a commendation and a special presentation.
Citizen of the Year was awarded to Rita Ardley. Rita lives in Goode Road, Humpty Doo, with her husband, Brian, and her daughter, Jessica. I know Rita very well; she is a delightful person and a good citizen. It was presented to her after her extraordinary contributions to many in the rural area and the Top End community for the last 15 years. Her volunteer services have benefited the full spectrum of the community from Aboriginal teenagers, students, the aged, to wives and families of soldiers deployed overseas. Her husband is employed in the military, and has been for many years, and also goes overseas on a regular basis.
Her volunteer activities over this period of time, and probably over a greater period of time, have included:
St Vincent de Paul Society in New South Wales, as well as in Palmerston
Caritas Catholic Mission associated with Taminmin College
NT Parks and Wildlife junior rangers
St Francis of Assisi Primary School
a member of the Queensland State Emergency Service, and the Northern Territory Emergency Service in Darwin, Palmerston and the rural areas
aged care volunteer organisation in Darwin
educating Indigenous teenagers at the Don Dale Juvenile Centre
from 2006 until the present time she has provided a reptile educational awareness program
involved with St Francis of Assisi Humpty Doo school, fundraising for the parish and the annual fiesta
a volunteer teacher associated with the church and the school
helped elderly people by visiting them and giving them rides to church on weekends, or on Sundays; and home, and visiting the sick in hospital
she has also donated and provided prayer books and rosary beads for Christian refugees in Darwin.
She is a delightful person and she gives a lot. She works in paid employment but, obviously, she makes a lot of time in her schedule to help many others across a broad spectrum. It was a much deserved award and I wish her well. No doubt I will see her again in the future. Sadly, she was not at that ceremony; she was interstate, but her husband, Brian, was there to collect the award on her behalf.
The Young Citizen of the Year Award went to a young fellow, Ryan Davis. He really is a true achiever and is a terrific sports person. I am sure he will go on to bigger and greater things in whichever sport he chooses to specialise in.
Each week, he juggles his schooling and a part-time job as well as training, umpiring and playing sports. This, for the beginning of this year, might be his first award, but he is no stranger to achievement and last year he was recognised for being:
Referee of the Year
Players’ Player
Most Improved Referee Award
Year 10 Academic Excellence in Physical Education.
In the past, he:
represented Australia overseas in European handball competition
was selected to play in the AIS challenge for the Under 19s
was selected in the 2013 newly established Centre for Excellence Program in Business and Enterprising
obtained Certificate II in Sport and Recreation through Charles Darwin University.
He definitely is a very worthy recipient of the Litchfield Young Citizen of the Year Award. I wish him well and am sure he will do well, not only in his academic studies but also in all the sports he clearly is excelling in, including refereeing the game.
The community event of the year for the Litchfield Council went to the Berry Springs Markets. You, Mr Deputy Speaker, would know these markets. They have grown from very small and humble beginnings to a market today that is closely rivalling the Freds Pass Market. It is a monthly activity which only started four years ago, but has grown into a venue for locals of the greater rural area. Many of the residents living around the area have commitments to work but they also are keen to put back into the community, so we see at the Berry Springs Markets plants, food, activities, crafts, Friends of Taminmin Library with their book stall every time, and I know that it is an award that is well received in recognition of the hard work they do.
So, congratulations to the organisers of the Berry Springs Markets and I hope those markets and the people associated with them go on to bigger and better things.
The other award for the day was a Commendation Award to Lyn Gerdes. Lyn was acknowledged for her contributions over many years to the rural area in the fields of Friends of Taminmin Library and the Darwin Rural Club. She is also a regular participant at the Berry Springs Markets selling second-hand books to whomever wishes to read them. She has been active along the way helping other people enjoy these activities; she is keen to share her knowledge and she, too, was a very worthy recipient being commended for her community service and activity.
At the Australia Day Awards there was a special recognition award given to Olive Frakking for her long-time contribution and commitment to organising the Australia Day activities on behalf of the Litchfield Council, of course, in association with the Freds Pass Management Board. Her expertise and organisation over the years have ensured that the celebrations on Australia Day outshone those in other areas of the Northern Territory, and people enjoyed their time starting with the fun run, which I know the member for Nelson participates in every year …
Mr Wood: Yes, more than the local member.
Ms PURICK: I am not sure whether he finishes the race every year. No, he does finish the race every year, and last year or the year before the Chief Minister came to Freds Pass and participated in the fun run – 7 am or 6.30 am is just a bit too early for this little bush duck, but I do enjoy going there.
I digress from Olive Frakking, who we are talking about. I apologise, Olive, when I send you this transcript, it is really the member for Nelson’s fault for making me digress.
Olive has not only been a great person, she is a delightful woman from a long-term Darwin family, and lives in the rural area with her extended family. Apart from making sure the Australia Day activities and the function of the day goes off very well and successfully, Olive has also been involved with the Freds Pass Show for many years. We know that is a very popular and successful show and that is mostly due to her working contribution. Organising agricultural shows and community shows is no easy task and she has managed, over the years, to pull it together and put on a good show, and she does it with such a smile. She has retired from that position and I wish her well. She is still around, she is not going anywhere. I know she is happy for people to ring and have a chat and seek her advice.
It was definitely a well-deserved special presentation. It was a mirror personally engraved to thank her for her efforts, and I know she will continue to contribute to the rural community. I wish her, and her husband, Harry, all the very best, and wish them well for the year.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand to correct the record on some issues raised in this parliament and, seeing as the member for Nhulunbuy had the gall tonight to stand up and talk about the power cuts situation in Yirrkala, it is time we got to our feet to correct a liberal use of mistruths peddled in this House.
Firstly, there are a couple of things which I agree with that the member for Nhulunbuy said. Yes, on the Australia Day long weekend the IGA stores at Nhulunbuy and Yirrkala did run out of Power and Water prepaid electricity cards. East Arnhem Trading is a Power and Water Corporation agent for power cards and operates the IGA stores at Yirrkala and Nhulunbuy. It is also true to say PWC was notified on the public holiday – Monday, 28 January - that the IGA stores had run out of cards. Households that were unable to purchase prepaid electricity cards, and had exhausted their emergency credit on their meter, were without electricity until the store restocked at 8 am on 31 January.
I should point out a few truths in all this. Firstly, agents for power cards are responsible for the stock holding and ordering of those cards. I heard the member for Nhulunbuy say tonight - I do not know if I have the quote exactly right, but it was something like this, ‘The IGA gets nothing out of it; he does it because he is a good corporate citizen’.
Unless the IGA has some special arrangement, PWC agents who sell these cards receive an 11% commission. Perhaps the member for Nhulunbuy would like to chase that up and come back to the House and advise if there is some special arrangement. Otherwise, she has been grossly misinformed.
East Arnhem Trading has a standing weekly order of 240 $20 power cards to a total value of $4800. This was reduced from a standing order of 300 cards in March 2012 at the request of the East Arnhem Trading Company. On 24 and 25 January 2013, Power and Water adjusted pre-payment electricity meters at Yirrkala and Gunyangara to accommodate the electricity tariff rises introduced on 1 January. At the same time, the emergency credit limit invoked on those meters was increased from $5 to $8 to take into account the increase in the tariff.
I can inform the House that Power and Water staff distributed - I know the member for Nhulunbuy has asserted this did not occur – the ‘Use less power and make your power card last longer’ brochures. Madam Speaker, I seek leave to table a copy of that document.
Leave granted.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: When it was being distributed to households in Yirrkala, residents who were home were spoken to by Power and Water staff, along with an interpreter who was used to explain the tariff increases.
On 28 January, the public holiday, when Power and Water were advised the IGA at Nhulunbuy had run out of these power cards, by 9 am on 29 January the Power and Water Katherine office prepared an order to send immediately to Nhulunbuy. They contacted Australian Air Express to arrange pick-up. Despite making contact with AAE on three separate occasions that day, they failed to pick up the order with AAE advising at 4 pm they had cancelled the pick-up as the driver had been busy.
Following advice of the failed pickup on Tuesday, 29 January, Power and Water organised an emergency package of power cards to be despatched from Darwin on Wednesday 30 January by diverting a charter plane booked by a Power and Water contractor travelling to Maningrida; regrettably, the plane was cancelled just prior to departure. Unfortunately, due to timing and the end of holidays, an alternative charter plane was not available from either Darwin or Katherine at that time; however, PWC arranged for the emergency package of power cards to be transported on the scheduled Airnorth flight from Darwin to Nhulunbuy which arrived at 9 pm on Wednesday 30 January.
Due to the delay in the delivery of power cards, Power and Water made arrangements with the IGA store, and the essential service contract holder, to enable the store to refer customers to the essential service contract holder, who was authorised to replace the meter with a temporary credit meter, restoring power until power cards could be purchased again. This arrangement was in place by midday on Wednesday 30 January. I have been advised no requests were received by the essential services contract holder for that service.
Later, on 29 January, the owner, Mr Broadbent, who has been already referred to by the member for Nhulunbuy in this place, committed to increasing the standing order of power cards by 40%. The increased order was received late on Monday, 4 February, following a conversation between Power and Water and Mr Broadbent.
The member for Nhulunbuy asserts no one in Nhulunbuy and Yirrkala knew about this power price rise. Does she honestly - after all the crowing the opposition has been doing about the increased tariffs - expect anyone in this House, anyone in the Northern Territory, to believe the people of Yirrkala and Nhulunbuy did not know that power prices were increasing on 1 January? You must be kidding me!
The member for Nhulunbuy is asserting that the people of Gove, Nhulunbuy, and Yirrkala are stupid; that is what she is suggesting. She is suggesting they did not get the message about power price increases. No one in their right mind could possibly believe that everyone in the Northern Territory would not have been aware that power prices were going up, especially given the ranting and raving from the other side of the House.
Unless, as I said before, the contractor for cards in Yirrkala and Nhulunbuy is on some special arrangement, they receive 11% for the sale of those cards, as do the 185 or so Power and Water power card contractors. I cannot believe any businessman - and I am not referring specifically to the IGA in Yirrkala - could not have figured out that an increase in tariffs would mean that people would use their electricity cards more quickly and would require more of them to be in stock. That does not make any sense to me. I have run a business myself, and if you are standing to make money - an 11% commission on the sale of something you know will be in demand – you make sure you have sufficient stock on hand.
The assertions the member for Nhulunbuy has made tonight in this House are either misleading or she has been terribly and horribly misinformed. I suggest the member for Nhulunbuy goes back to the people who are providing her with this information and re-check it because, clearly, she is not getting the message very well.
If the member for Nhulunbuy was a good local member she would have told these people that power prices were going up; she would have dealt with it in a proactive way as a good parliamentarian and a good local member.
The member for Nhulunbuy needs to get a briefing when these things occur, rather than leap to conclusions. I stick by the original comment that she is simply politicising this issue off the back of the misfortune of other people.
Ms FINOCCHIARO (Drysdale): Mr Deputy Speaker, I speak in this adjournment debate about the scaremongering of this Labor Party. I have spoken in adjournment before about this, and I will speak about it again. I find it absolutely and utterly offensive that the Labor Party continues to scare the people of the Northern Territory. My electorate deserves better than that type of behaviour, and their electorates deserve better than that type of behaviour. They need to think about that.
There must come a point when the Labor Party, as adults, as role models, as elected members of this parliament, cease peddling the lies, deception, and manipulation of information for their own political gain. We are here, as elected representatives of the people of the Northern Territory, to represent our constituents impartially and fairly, and in their best interests.
I felt sorry yesterday for the people who stood at that rally outside Parliament House. My colleagues and I stood there for one hour amongst a group of very angry people, and I felt sorry because they believe the lies being forced down their throats by the Labor Party. I do not know how Labor members could stand there, as proud as they were yesterday, and cause the rage, stress, angst and heartache their voters are experiencing.
I felt even sadder for those who attended and listened with great intent to hear the Chief Minister speak about the issues being raised, but he was drowned out by a tirade of abuse. The firemen this Labor Party professes to protect were silent in their protest and waited to hear our Chief Minister speak. Yet, they were robbed of that opportunity. It astounds me that Labor feeds on the fears of Territorians like fodder. It is unconscionable and downright unprofessional.
I am in my electorate every day engaging in as many activities and conversations as I possibly can. I have a deep respect for my electorate and I would not, in my wildest dreams, lead them down the garden path. When I speak to people about the reasons for our decisions they leave understanding the deplorable state of the Northern Territory’s debt crisis, the state of the Power and Water Corporation, and that Gove was abandoned by the former Chief Minister. People genuinely see how we have been left with very little choice but to make tough, excruciating decisions. You have to believe that politicians are heartless and careless if you think for one second my colleagues wanted to increase power and water prices, registration prices or anything else because we get some joy out of it. If you think that, you are wrong.
It is easy for the public to divorce politicians from the real world, but one must always remember that we, too, are Territorians and we have families and children. We have grandchildren whose futures we want to protect. We have friends who want to buy houses, want to have good jobs, want to go on holidays, and want to make savings. This new chapter in the Northern Territory’s history is being walked by us as well, and we are out there and we are listening to you.
The scaremongering by Labor is shameful. Constituents came into my office and blamed our government for the large increase in a gentleman’s power bill. On inspection of that bill, it was for the quarter ending 3 January. When my Electorate Officer explained to the constituent that the $400 increase to his bill could not be attributed to three days of operation of the new prices, he was confused. The fact is, Territorians are confused. It is not because of us, it is because of the opposition. Labor loves to talk about the housing crisis as if we are the cause of it – the hypocrisy!
They chant as if, in five-and-a-half months, we would miraculously be able to fix the endemic failure in the provision of housing - private, public or otherwise - for Territorians. My colleague, the member for Braitling, is on the job with infrastructure development. My colleague, the member for Brennan is on the job with land release, my colleague, the member for Fong Lim is on the job for public housing. But, if Labor thinks we can wave a magic wand to correct 11 years of irresponsible government, poor planning and mismanagement, then they have to be joking. Shame on you!
We have good stories to tell: the action the Chief Minister took with Gove. Labor sat on this for seven months and did nothing. I am yet to see any evidence from the member for Nhulunbuy as to what she did to compel the then Chief Minister to take decisive action.
Member for Katherine: Yes, that is the missing link, isn’t it?
Ms FINOCCHIARO: Absolutely. Our Chief Minister took decisive action and got results. Today, I received an e-mail from a colleague in Gove; I have no idea as to his political preference, but I suspect it is not our way. I quote from his e-mail, unprovoked:
- Great news and a huge effort put in by the Chief Minister. My feeling is that everyone is impressed by Terry Mills and what has been achieved today.
Further, the opposition have gone on to say that industry was screaming at our Chief Minister to hurry up and make a decision. I want to quote from Alice Springs ABC Radio 783 FM, the morning program yesterday with Nadine Maloney interviewing Drew Wagner, who is the Executive Director of the Minerals Council, and the reporter said:
- How do you think the government has handled this deal?
Mr Wagner said:
- Look, I think the government has handled this deal very prudently. I think they have certainly taken the time to fully understand what the ramifications are of all outcomes and all decisions, and I think, ultimately, we have ended up in a good place.
The reporter said:
- Certainly, taken the time, you say. Do you think they have taken too much time?
Mr Wagner:
- Not at all. I think this has been obviously a very large decision that the Chief Minister and his Cabinet have had to make on behalf of all Territorians. I think that the process has been undertaken diligently and whilst some opponents will say it took long and possibly took too many frequent flyer miles, but ultimately we have come to the correct decision at the correct time.
My case in point.
Today I received an e-mail from an Electorate Officer talking about power and water prices.
- I have just had a long conversation with my brother’s partner. They are a family of four living in Palmerston. Their power bill just came to approximately $1500. While this is huge increase on last year, I was also impressed to be told that a family in the same street, who are also a family of four, have been and do be very mindful of their electricity use, and are aware of what can be forgone for saving. Their power and water bill at the same time came in at $400.
Senior Territorians who I spend much of my time with tell me that they are glad we have put $1 fares on buses. A staunch Labor voter, and union man, told me, pre-election in the street, that we need to give a value to the public bus service by charging a fee, even if only nominal.
I have no doubt that Labor has lost its way and is desperately grasping at any skerrick of hope it can, but you are ruining people’s lives and causing unprecedented trauma to Territorians for selfish and self-serving gains. Instead of debating initiatives that advance the interests of Territorians and the Territory we spent hours this evening responding to the Wanguri book of lies.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): And now for something different, Mr Deputy Speaker
I will also talk about Australia Day. The member for Goyder has taken most of the information I was going to give to parliament so I will be quick. I will not repeat very much of what she said, except to say congratulations to Rita Ardley, Citizen of the Year, and Ryan Davis, who I know very well, Young Citizen of the Year. I have been to the Berry Springs Markets from time to time and it is a great community event. Lyn Gerdes, received a Special Commendation Award, and Olive Frakking, who has worked tirelessly in the community for many years also received a special award.
I thank the council, Rotary and Lions for preparing the breakfast and morning tea; Ken Brody for being the MC; Legs for playing the guitar and the national anthem; Waldo for doing his bush poetry; the member for Goyder for leading the thong clapping, and the Howard Springs Bakery for making the great lamington map of Australia - a big thanks to Rod for doing that.
In the afternoon we also have a free family Australia Day fun day at the Howard Reserve on Whitewood Road. It is a day when quite a few businesses donate food, soft drink, ice creams and that sort of thing. We had a huge turnout this year as usual.
I thank Maxine and the Howard Springs Volunteer Fire Brigade. I note the member for Goyder has mentioned her brother-in-law, Steve Russell, as being an all-round good guy because he is also on the Howard Springs Volunteer Fire Brigade. I thought I would put that in and I hope the other firies do not go crook because they were not mentioned.
Thanks to the Litchfield Council for providing the PA system and covering the insurance for the day. A big thanks to Arthur Hamilton from Shorelands, for donating the meat; St John’s Ambulance, Greg Payne and his crew, for looking after any injuries that might have occurred - thankfully that did not happen; Ralph Kobestein and Mary, who work at the reserve, for making sure everything was ready for the day; LoCastro Ice Cream which donates ice cream each year; Matty and Jenny Zebben from Matty’s Pies for donating the pies for our cold pie eating competition; and Kotch, who helps put up the Australia Day flag on the poles a week before. He borrowed a cherry picker at a certain cost – I believe a liquid donation was required. Thanks to his partner, Kim, my Electorate Officer, for helping organise everything on the day.
My thanks for the ice cups and ice cream which were provided free by Janet in the Howard Springs shaved ice van; to Southern Districts Cricket Club for helping with the cricket competition; Fin Bins for providing all the rubbish bins; Reidy’s Lures for providing prizes. To the Scouts, and all the women involved with the Scouts, for helping out and keeping the scores going, thanks very much. To my sister, Trish, and her helper, Narelle, for doing the speed scrabble; Phil and Di who come every year to help, even though they do not have much to do, it is always good that they turn up and give a hand when needed. Thanks also to Kim, Belinda, Glenys, Lisa, Annie and others I admit I forget; they will go crook at me but they know who they are, and I thank them all very much for making it such a successful day.
The idea is families can come on this day, they do not pay a penny, they get a meal - a good steak or sausages and bacon and eggs - they get soft drinks, ice cream and can play all these games and win prizes. We play boche, corner hole, speed scrabble and cricket, or if you want you can sit in the shade and have a lovely day. The idea is families can come one day of the year, not have to pay and just enjoy themselves.
We also like the day because it puts Australia Day where it should be; it is not a day that some people use it for - I call it the larrikin side, which is unfortunate. It is a day where we celebrate our love for our country by being together. There are no drunks all over the place, no using the flag for the, ‘I am better than you’, approach for which sometimes the flag is used these days; it is just a nice day. Thank you to everyone who helped out that day.
If people have a chance to go to the library at the moment - I love maps – there is an exhibition on between 11 February and 17 March. I was there while some of the debate was a little boring. There is a book called Mapping for the War in the North. The exhibition is brought to you by the Mapping Science Institute of Australia and the Surveying and Spatial Sciences Institute and it commemorates the contribution Australia’s military map makers made to the defence of Australia’s north in World War II. There is a great range of photographs, a great range of maps, and a great range of equipment which surveyors have used over the time going right back to just before World War II. There are a couple of pictures, one of Basil Stahl when he was much younger working with a surveying group, and I gather he was one of the official photographers allowed to take photographs at that time.
This is the first time he will not be able to attend the Bombing of Darwin ceremony. The book says he was expected to be here but, unfortunately, he is not well enough to travel on a plane. His son has come up and, I gather, has brought some very interesting photographs which will be displayed in the library. I recommend the exhibition to people if they like maps and like to look at the history of maps; it is worth seeing. It is on the top floor of the library.
I would like to talk about something which has been mentioned before. I went to the rally yesterday, and I have been to rallies before, and I agree with the Chief Minister in this case. I do not agree with some of the things the government is doing at the present time; however, it disappoints me that when he was asked to go to the rally the people would not give him a chance to speak. They did not have to agree with him, but Australia is supposed to be the land of the fair go and there should be an opportunity for people to be heard. As I said, people do not have to agree - people do not necessarily agree with me - but that would have been the proper thing to do. People asked him to listen to what the people had to say and the people who organised it should have allowed him to be heard as well.
I do not necessarily agree with many things the government has done; however, this is a democratic country, we have an elected government and it would have been fair and reasonable for the Chief Minister to have been given time to say what he thought. I take note that the firies wanted to hear what the Chief Minister said; that is an area that is important for me and for them.
It has been mentioned that Labor never faced a hostile crowd, well, someone has a short memory. Clare Martin faced a very hostile crowd in Alice Springs during one of the sittings there. I remember being at that protest and it was fairly hostile. We all know Alice Springs is CLP country, and the Chief Minister did address the people there. So, it has been done before.
The only other thing I will say is I did not like what the member for Port Darwin did yesterday when the letter said the previous Chief Minister had resigned. To have a dig at the former Chief Minister was not the right thing to do. We are talking about giving the people a chance to reply, but by gagging that debate and adjourning it, you did not give anyone else a chance to say they do not agree with that. In my case, regardless of the politics of the day, the Chief Minister was the Chief Minister, and we should respect that position. The previous Chief Minister is a very good man and I have always enjoyed working with him. That does not mean I always agreed with him, but he was a good man and a good Territorian at heart. He did his best, and that is all you can ask of someone.
You may not agree with the way he did things; obviously, the government of today does not agree with the government getting into deficit. However, we have not had the opportunity to thank the previous Chief Minister for all the good things he has done. I am quite disappointed that statement from the Speaker was used as an opportunity, to some extent, to stick the boot in by calling him ‘a dead man walking’. That was not good. As the member for Drysdale said, it was not professional. There was no opportunity for reply, which is the argument people are saying should have happened with the Chief Minister here. We should be able to debate issues and, at the same time, listen. It makes us a better country if we do it that way and do not just turn our backs on people because we do not like them.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to talk about spin doctors. Being elected in this parliament in 2008, I was thoroughly educated about spin doctors by the then CLP opposition. They used to throw continual abuse across the Chamber at the government; there were no holds barred and they used to attack hard-working Territorians working with government on the fifth floor. One of the regular, abusive lines they used was, ‘all about spin doctors’. I took an interest in what they were saying and learnt how government works and how the media works.
I learnt the only way government could get a clear message and some clean air in communicating with the electorate through the 24-hour media cycle was to learn the language of the media. The way you did that was to work with media advisors, and I worked with some brilliant people on the fifth floor. I love people I learn from, and I learnt heaps from those people; I learnt lots about the media.
Today, we have the Country Liberal Party government with their own spin doctors. I pay their media advisors respect as they are Territorians with real jobs who are doing exactly what they should be; that is, communicating between government and the media for the public.
However, I will be a little critical about some of the spin doctors on the fifth floor or, in this case, I am going to have my chance to respond to one Adrian Renzi. I refer to the member for Greatorex as the special minister for verbal abuse. One of his abusive lines in debate was, ‘Member for Barkly, I wish I got the chance with Renzi to get you on radio. We would have torn you to strips.’ I advise this House I did regular interviews with Adrian Renzi when he was DJ on AHA – a shock jock - he was a wannabe John Laws. He used some very interesting tactics to try to ridicule you and put you down. One he always went for was statistics. He used to try to drag them out, turn them inside out and make the minister look a fool in front of his audience. He had another irritable tactic where he used to cut you off, hang up, and then continue to make comments about you when you had no right of reply. But that was Adrian; he was a shock jock, and now he is a spin doctor.
I want to make a couple of comments on some of Adrian’s work. I was absolutely disgusted with a media release he wrote for the member for Araluen, Hon Robyn Lambley. It is a statement on a death in Alice Springs dated 31 December 2012. The paragraph down the bottom says:
- After only four months in government - it is the policies of the former Labor government that have failed to make an impact on the spiralling rate of violence against women.
That was absolutely atrocious. Adrian, you are a disgrace for writing that. You need to rise to the occasion and wake up because that attracted a lot of its own media. It was negative media for your minister, which she deserved, and it was a very bad reflection on you as a public servant receiving a good wage to work for the new government in Alice Springs.
I also challenge Mr Renzi’s media release for, once again, the member for Araluen, Hon Robyn Lambley, which states, ‘the best Christmas present is a strong future’, dated 19 December 2012. Your sentence structure, Adrian, is really poor and immature. I recently received some letters from Grade 5 and 6 at Murray Downs Primary School. They were sensational letters requesting a donation of flags for their school. They could give you some really good tips on how to correct your sentence structure, how to get some more meaning into your sentence, and how to use better grammar. For the kids at Murray Downs and, possibly Adrian if you are interested, a sentence like:
- This has been a major impediment to economic growth in this town for too long and we will sort this out in 2013.
I have not the time to correct it here, mate, but if you have the time, come and see me. Better still, go to Murray Downs because Grade 5 and 6 will straighten you out.
Another sentence I will send to them to give you some grammatical advice on is the sentence in this media release:
- Most of us have been hoping and praying for positive change for a long time. I am confident Centralians have a lot to look forward to.
Adrian, I believe I have got my message through. It is good to be able to have a fair crack at you because you certainly did your thing over many years on the radio and your mate, the member for Greatorex there, anytime, anywhere; I look forward to the opportunity.
Moving on to the media release from the Chief Minister, Hon Terry Mills, and the Minister for Sport and Recreation, Hon Matt Conlon, on the ‘Sport vouchers hit letter boxes’. That is not a bad media release by Danielle Lede. Good work, Danielle, but you guys have not much of an idea about Tennant Creek because, for a start, we do not have letter boxes. If you had spent any time in Tennant Creek or had come and asked me or sought a briefing, I would have given you a briefing and you would have realised our town does not have letterboxes.
More importantly on this media release, it has caused a bit of controversy because it stated that children enrolled in a region with little or no sporting organisations will have their $75 sport voucher allocated directly to their local school. That is very welcome funding for the school; however, we have many junior sports organisations and senior sports organisations in Tennant Creek. You need to be aware, minister. I will name a few sports organisations in Tennant Creek for you that would benefit from receiving the voucher: Little Athletics, the Australian Football League, Camp Draft, cricket, darts, eight ball, jujitsu, judo, netball, softball, and the famous Tennant Creek Swimming Club.
Minister, I ask you to personally contact Mr Wayne Green who is a parent, a great advocate for sport in Tennant Creek, the President of Tennant Creek Athletics and a great guy who does a lot of lobbying. He has taken up the fight to get the balance right so those $75 sports voucher hit the necessary junior sporting organisations in Tennant Creek. That is Wayne Green, minister, and he has been a great advocate for our kids. He has a beautiful family and he works tirelessly for the juniors around our town. Please contact him, get onto him, and make sure you sort it out because he is having a few dramas with the Department of Education and the Department of Sport and Recreation. Get off your high horse, rise to the occasion as a minister, and contact Wayne Green in Tennant Creek, because I am sure you will be able to learn from him.
There is another media release I would like to comment on, which is from the Chief Minister, Hon Terry Mills, on 17 January 2013. It talks about the Territory enjoying a surge in building, the benefits from major projects, the feeder lines to the economy, building Australia, the Territory record - a 47.4% increase in the year to September, according to the latest ABS figures. These are all Labor Party stories. It is well written by a Liberal media advisor and is a great story to keep boosting that confidence in the Territory.
The Territory Regional Weekly on Friday 25 January 2013 picked it up and ran the story:
- Building bonanza
The Territory is enjoying a surge in building as the benefits from major projects feed the local economy, Chief Minister, Terry Mills said last week.
‘While building around Australia declines the Territory recorded a 47.4% increase in the year to September ...
... according to the latest Australian Bureau of Statistics figures’, Mr Mills said.
He has reminded us tirelessly that he has only been in the seat for five months but he is crowing in these media releases about what the Territory is doing, how it is taking off and what we know will benefit Territory families.
Chief Minister, I love the media release but the message is: stop hurting Territory families. You have this month and next month to do it, we will be very much looking forward to Budget Cabinet and how you will start to support Territory families and not continue to hurt them.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016