2010-11-23
Madam Speaker Aagaard took the Chair at 10 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table a letter from the Opposition Whip dated 2 November 2010 notifying the discharge of the members for Port Darwin and Katherine from the Council of Territory Cooperation.
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 167 petitioners praying that cyclists be permitted to ride on the Tiger Brennan Drive extension. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Madam Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 514 petitioners praying that the left turn road closure into Marjorie Street be stopped. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Madam Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from122 petitioners praying that the Nganmarriyanga/Palumpa store be returned to the community. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Madam Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members a response to petition No 42 has been received and circulated to honourable members.
Petition No 42
Presented by: Mr Giles
Date response received: 9 November 2010
Response:
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Year 8 Dripstone Middle School students accompanied by Ms Liz Easton. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr HAMPTON (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I present a bill without notice, entitled the Water Amendment Bill 2010 (Serial 137).
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr HAMPTON: Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
Madam Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to amend the Water Act to confer powers to grant waste discharge licences, and to validate existing and expired waste discharge licences following legal advice on the proper operation of section 74 of that act.
Since becoming minister, I have indicated a number of times my intention to ensure compliance with our environmental laws, and to drive reform to modernise our regulatory frameworks. The bill I present today is one small component of that body of work. The bill reflects my commitment to ensure our environmental legislation works and, if it does not, to fix it.
I have previously indicated, in the context of recent issues surrounding the water quality of Darwin Harbour, I have not been happy with the content of waste discharge licences which regulate discharge into water bodies from activities such as sewage treatment plants. I have given a commitment to review and improve the conditions for existing waste discharge licences for sewage treatment plants, and to develop a new licensing regime for high-risk activities. Work on the new licensing regime is well under way, as is the review of discharge licences.
It is during the course of these reviews, prompted by my commitment to improve regulatory practice, that legal advice from the Solicitor-General has been received indicating serious problems with the operation of section 74 of the Water Act, under which waste discharge licences are issued. The advice indicates, except in very narrow circumstances, section 74 must be read with the effect that the provision, as currently drafted, precludes the issuing of waste discharge licences for actions which cause waste to enter a natural body of water such as the sea or a river. This is clearly at odds with the way section 74 has been thought to operate and has been implemented since the passage of the Water Act over 17 years ago. As a consequence, current waste discharge licences, or those issued in the past, are invalid to the extent they purport to licence discharge of waste to a natural water body. Furthermore, no waste discharge licence to discharge to a natural water body can be issued in the future.
There are circumstances where waste unavoidably needs to be discharged to a water body. In such circumstances, appropriate water standards need to be developed and the conditions of a licence should ensure any potential environmental risks are regulated and litigated. Until recently, that is how section 74 of the act was thought to operate, and that approach has been taken by successive administrations since the passage of the Water Act. Currently, 20 waste discharge licences are in place and eight are in negotiation for activities such as sewage treatment plants I have already mentioned, aquaculture, dredging, and release of waste water from mines.
The recent legal advice is unequivocal: section 74 of the Water Act does not sustain the practice that has been followed since the act was passed. Section 74(1) of the Water Act states:
Section 73(2) of the act under the title of Water Quality Standards goes on to say:
There is a nexus between sections 73 and 74, and the legal advice received indicates the nexus limits the operation of section 74 such that section 74 does not, despite its heading, generally authorise the granting of a waste discharge licence. In particular, the advice indicates, whilst section 74 provides for a licence to be issued for an action which would otherwise be an offence under section 73, that is the only circumstance in which a section 74 licence can be issued.
The practical effect of section 73 is to impose a standard condition on all other licences to be issued under the act, with the effect that nothing in those licences should prejudice a declared beneficial use or water quality standard. Those other licences in the act are many and varied but include, for example, licences to extract water.
I have spent some time clarifying the background to the recent legal advice, because I am bringing this bill before the House for passage on urgency. I am doing this because the failure of section 74 to authorise the grant of licences, except in the narrow circumstances I have explained, creates significant risks for industry currently holding such licences and for the ongoing protection of the environment.
I now turn to the provisions of this bill that will rectify the problems with the current drafting of section 74 and avoid the risks identified.
This bill seeks to do two things. First, it seeks to create within section 74 of the Water Act sufficient power for the Controller of Water Resources to issue a valid licence to discharge waste that may enter a natural body of water subject to conditions that can be enforced. That is, the bill seeks to restore the workings of section 74 to the manner in which it has been implemented since passage of the act. The reasons for this are obvious. While every effort is taken to avoid discharge to the environment, there are circumstances where this cannot be avoided. As I have already indicated, such an activity needs to be regulated properly to protect the environment. Without a legally valid mechanism, our environment will be at risk.
Second, this bill seeks to validate existing and expired licences issued in good faith under section 74 in order to minimise disruption to licence holders. Thus restored, those licences can then continue to be reviewed as part of my absolute commitment to bring them up to scratch where they are found wanting. The restored licences would also be capable of being transitioned to the new licensing regime I intend to establish in a considered fashion over the coming six months.
I wish to emphasise validating existing and expired licences is proposed to ensure licensees do not face detriment from the need to fix section 74; however, it does not in any way infer that the process of driving change and improving environmental outcomes will halt. As I have indicated already, some of those licences are separately under review and, once validated, can be updated and improved.
I also wish to emphasise nothing in the amendments brought forward today alters the existing operation of section 73(2) of the Water Act which, in effect, provides that all licences issued under the act are subject to the condition that, except to the extent the licence provides otherwise, nothing can be done by the licensee which prejudices a declared beneficial use or water quality standard or objective.
Issues of interpretation of legislation crop up from time to time when an act is placed under greater scrutiny, and sometimes that scrutiny reveals the operation of a provision is not as first thought.
It gives me no great pleasure to bring this bill to the House, particularly on urgency, but as a responsible minister concerned about achieving better environmental outcomes and good governance, I have a responsibility to ensure when issues arise and they are serious, I fix them quickly and decisively. That is the action I am taking.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and table the explanatory statement to accompany the bill.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Twice the minister has mentioned he is seeking urgency. The only leave given by this House was for him to introduce the bill without notice, which he has done. There is no motion before this House which seeks urgency for the passage of this bill. In discussions prior to coming into this House - and we on this side of the House appreciate the reason the minister would be seeking urgency - we were give certain undertakings, not one of which has been met. I ask, if the member wants to seek urgency he moves so accordingly, or does so through the appropriate systems allowed for by standing orders.
Dr BURNS: Madam Speaker, speaking to the point of order, a motion will be moved tomorrow in relation to urgency.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Why not move that motion today? There were certain statements and suggestions made during a briefing we received prior to this that the process would undergo a series of chronological events. Why are we suddenly seeking urgency tomorrow on this matter and not today?
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I am not party to any of these discussions. I suggest the Leader of Government Business and the member for Port Darwin have a conversation outside the Chamber and come back with a resolution.
Mr ELFERINK: That is a very good idea, Madam Speaker.
Debate adjourned.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the Speaker’s Gallery of Jawoyn Board members and Nitmiluk Park Board members in Darwin for the renaming of the Nitmiluk Lounge. In particular, I acknowledge Mr Long John Dewar, the artist who has donated a very beautiful painting for the newly-named Nitmiluk Lounge, which I must say is now a particularly beautiful room.
Thank you very much to Long John, and thank you very much for allowing us to use the Nitmiluk name for this room.
I congratulate Nitmiluk Tours and park for winning the major tourist attractions at the Brolga Awards on Saturday and confirming our choice of the work Nitmiluk for the lounge in Parliament House.
On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Continued from 27 October 2010.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, it is the intention of the opposition to support this bill. I appreciate the briefing received outlining the need for the bill. It is quite specific in its application of monitoring the movements of certain individuals who cause widespread community concern. These changes are necessary due to changes in technology and to ensure the reporting requirements for offenders interstate align with the Territory capacity. This amendment would provide that alignment and hence provide greater security for our community in monitoring the movements of offenders. Madam Speaker, with that, this bill will be supported.
Mr VATSKALIS (Child Protection): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister and his bill. As the Child Protection minister it is my role to ensure legislation is in place to protect our young, and these legislative amendments seem to do so.
This legislation, which commenced operation in 2005, assists police in ensuring those previously convicted of a sex offence continue to be closely monitored to protect the community from further potential harm. This is so very important in keeping our community safe.
The proposed changes to the legislation seek to strengthen the efficiency of the act and allow more monitoring by police. One of the recommendations of the Board of Inquiry in the recent Growing them strong, together report was for greater interagency communication. These amendments seek to ensure this by allowing important information to be passed between government departments. At the same time as allowing this information to be shared, measures have been put in place to ensure the personal information they share is limited as much as possible to protect the privacy of individuals. By allowing the disclosure of the reportable offender’s personal details to another agency, albeit in limited circumstances, these amendments seek to further protect our community and our children.
As the Chief Minister has already stated, the bill has been widely circulated and these amendments have been carefully discussed with the legal fraternity to ensure they meet the aim of keeping our community safe, and can be upheld in a court of law. As Minister for Child Protection, it is important my agencies have access to any information which would protect our children. Another important part of these legislative amendments is the updating of the act to require reportable offenders to provide their telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, or Internet provider information to police.
As it currently stands, the legislation does not require this information to be provided and these amendments are a timely update. In recent times we have seen a rapid increase in the use of telecommunications in our society, especially our young people using telephones, Internet and e-mail to communicate constantly, not to mention texting. Our youth participate in information sharing on a daily basis over the Internet through websites such as Facebook. Although this information sharing is done innocently and in a fun, social context, some in our community prey on the information provided. These amendment updates require reportable offenders to provide their e-mail, phone, or Internet providers to police. Police can use these laws to appropriately monitor reportable offenders; however, as the Chief Minister has already outlined, for them to monitor an individual they require a warrant under the law. This legislation strengthens the power of police to protect our community, especially our youth. These amendments also seek to provide police with improved powers to ensure offenders can be easily tracked when travelling. The changes to report travel intentions are trying to strike a balance between protecting our community and being an overburden on our system.
Previously, intra-Territory travel did not have to be reported. This meant a reportable offender could travel to a community and be mixing with children without police being aware. The change requiring reportable offenders to report intra-Territory travel to police is designed to further protect our community. A neighbourhood may be unaware a breach of the act has taken place in allowing a reportable offender to have unsupervised contact with children. By informing the police of intending travel, they can attempt to ensure a breach does not take place.
There is, in the act, strict provision for certain elements of travel, such as repeated travel to a location not to be reported every time to the commissioner. This change to travel is designed to protect Territory communities and our children. The reporting and registration amendments are designed to update our legislation to ensure it is properly protecting our communities in the Territory into the future.
Madam Speaker, I strongly urge the House to support these changes and vote in favour of these amendments.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I would like to say a few words on this amendment bill, which I support. Reading through this bill, it is the government’s intention to reduce what is sometimes called ‘jurisdictional shopping’ by offenders - a major problem throughout Australia. The government has amended various sections of this bill by making it a requirement offenders report and give their telephone details, their e-mail addresses, etcetera. It has also made changes requiring people who make a significant change to their personal appearance to report that; changes to a birth certificate or other documents; and also important changes to travel, especially intra-Territory travel; and in relation to what seems a loophole - some offenders said they were travelling to their new place of residence and used that as a reason for not reporting. I believe these amendments have covered that loophole so it cannot be used as a means of getting around the law.
The idea of these changes is to have uniform legislation throughout Australia so reportable offenders are not looking for a place where the conditions placed on them are less onerous than elsewhere. It is good to see the government has brought in these changes.
There are two areas the government needs to carefully look at. I have raised them with the government and I am hoping, at a later date, these changes will occur. The two examples of inconsistency which need to be looked at are in relation to section 37 - the length of reporting period. The inconsistencies in this section mean people who have committed a Class 2 offence, and commit a subsequent Class 2 offence, and were found guilty before this bill was introduced, have to report for life. The anomaly is people who committed a Class 1 offence before this act came into effect, and are reporting due to a Class 2 offence, do not necessarily have to report for life.
You have a case where an offender committing a more serious offence, then a Class 2 offence, due to the way the act is written, does not have the same reporting obligation as a Class 2 offender. It is an important area which needs to be looked at, especially in light of what I said before: these offenders shop around for a better place to live in relation to their reporting obligations. I hope the minister will give some consideration to fixing this - not necessarily a loophole, certainly an anomaly - which would mean the Territory’s reporting obligations may not be as onerous as in other states, which means we could be getting offenders coming to the Northern Territory, which I do not think people would appreciate.
The other area which needs looking at is the issue of mandatory DNA testing for reportable offences. My understanding is in New South Wales they have the capacity to do this. Part 7B of the Crimes (Forensics Procedures) Act 2000 in New South Wales provides for carrying out of certain other forensic procedures, including carrying out buccal swabs and taking samples of hair other than pubic hair on persons required to comply with the reporting obligations under the act. They must be an untested, registrable person.
Queensland has amendments to this legislation under way; Western Australia is progressing amendments; and South Australia has the capacity to do it. However, the Northern Territory does not do that. If we are to be uniform with the rest of Australia, government has to look at mandatory DNA testing for reportable offenders. This is a gap in our data. I note if reportable offenders come to the Northern Territory from New South Wales and re-offend, the Northern Territory cannot force DNA testing, and there is potential they cannot match the New South Wales database.
There is a range of issues I ask the government to follow up. Obviously, the government intention is to ensure we are not only in line with other states, we are ensuring offenders are restricted as much as possible evenly across Australia, as I said, to reduce jurisdictional shopping.
I support these important changes to the bill. Even though it is called Child Protection (Offender Reporting and Registration) Legislation Amendment Bill, people may think it is to do with some of the other matters we are discussing. This is to deal with the very serious matter of adult offenders against children. We all have grave concerns about this type of behaviour. We need to ensure those people who have orders carry out those orders throughout Australia, because children need to be protected from this type of behaviour. We need to ensure there are no loopholes or anomalies. No matter where a child lives in Australia they should be protected equally. This bill before us is attempting to do that. However, some important considerations need to occur: the inconsistency in section 37, which is the length of reporting period; and the requirement for mandatory DNA testing for reportable offenders.
Madam Speaker, I support the bill.
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I thank the opposition and the member for Nelson for supporting this important amendment bill. We all agree that, of all crimes, sexual abuse of children is up there amongst the worst offence people can commit. For adults to take away the innocence and trust of children through sexual abuse is an awful abuse of an adult’s power over children.
When this legislation was introduced in 2004 it sought to provide a regime for offenders who had been convicted of these types of offences, either at conviction or on release from prison, with a requirement to report where they live, and a whole heap of other details, to police on a regular basis for a period of eight to 15 years, or for life. The reason why all the states decided to introduce this legislation is because, tragically, people who are convicted of these types of offences tend to be predatory and tend to re-offend. All the states came together and decided to introduce a national register. The whole idea of that register, and picking up on the comments from the member for Nelson, was to have uniform reporting requirements across the nation to ensure people who commit these offences are not allowed to jurisdiction shop for the weakest reporting regime.
For police, this means that in the event of a report of a predatory offence against children or specific monitoring of children, or of adults hanging around schools or other places, police can immediately go to the register within that area, knock on a person’s door and seek to determine their whereabouts when incidents occurred - to either rule people in or out of suspicion in further investigations.
This bill seeks to pick up on a number of issues. The existing legislation does not require reportable offenders to report their telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, or Internet service providers. Of course, with the advancement of social networking sites such as Facebook and others, we all understand that predators roam the Internet seeking to groom children for liaisons and encounters. This is a significant new strength in the legislation requiring reportable offenders to register those details.
Another anomaly in the act is that it does not compel reportable offenders to report to police any significant change in their personal appearance. On registration, marks like tattoos and other distinguishing features need to be on the register. Over time, though, people might decide to grow a full beard or to shave their head entirely, change the colour of their hair, and look like a different person. A new requirement is any significant change needs to be reported to police, and police would add those details and a photograph of the change onto the register.
There are other requirements regarding travel intrastate, interstate and overseas which I outlined in the second reading. There is also an additional capacity to provide for the Police Commissioner, when there is duty of care considerations for other agencies, to be able to advise other CEs of the presence of someone on the register, and those issues have been worked through.
I pick up the specific anomalies in the reporting requirements identified by the member for Nelson, and congratulate him on his eagle eye in picking up those anomalies. They were also brought to my attention. Without going into the technical issues of Class 2 offences and not being able to take into account, prior to the act commencing, a Class 1 offence, I acknowledge, member for Nelson, there is an anomaly. The proposal I have to restore uniformity to the register across all states is I will ask our Police Commissioner to take the issue up formally as an agenda item for the next meeting of police commissioners. Those meetings feed into the agenda items for police ministers, and the intent was to have a uniform regime across the nation. I understand some of the states have moved already on this anomaly. I believe all states need to resolve this with the same amendments to legislation so we have a uniform register.
We will pick up that issue, member for Nelson, and bring further amendments to the House to clarify it. It is not significant; it would not affect many people, having required them only to register for eight years as opposed to 15 years or life. We will look at this and seek national consideration to return uniformity to the register.
The other issue regarding a requirement to collect DNA from reportable offenders, both current and future, could be considered by the Police Ministerial Council. The issue of legislation across Australia for the collection of DNA and the sharing of those samples across the jurisdictions has been quite contentious over the years. I understand there is now the ability, and I stand corrected if I am wrong, for all states to share access to DNA collected in other jurisdictions for criminal investigations. The collection of DNA from reportable offenders on this register is something I will take advice on and get back to the member for Nelson.
Madam Speaker, this further strengthens the register in the Northern Territory. Since the act commenced operation, around 209 reportable offenders have registered with and reported to police. This strengthens those requirements and serves to further protect children in the Territory.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from 27 October 2010.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, looking at the very brief second reading speech and accepting the argument this amendment is needed, on the face of it, one could be persuaded by the sense of the amendment. However, I cannot help being distracted by another issue starting to take shape over this government.
We have in this amendment what they call ‘streamlining’, and ‘we do not want duplication’ and so on, when it comes to the Police minister being advised whether interception has occurred, or when the requirement for it has ceased. It is explained away by saying: ‘The federal minister will get to know about that’, and ‘I can find out about that from time to time’.
It may make sense in how these things are managed - we do not want duplication, for heaven’s sake. What we want is accountability and a government which takes responsibility for the things which happen under its watch. That is something we do not have with this current administration. Press conference after press conference, issue after issue, you are left wondering what is the role of this Labor government? What is its position? What does it do? All it does is exempt itself from responsibility. We have a minor issue, as evidenced by the substance contained within the argument in the second reading speech. Effectively, there is no requirement for the Police minister to be advised by the Police Commissioner of the surveillance of a Territory citizen because it will go to the federal minister.
You can argue it away with your legislation and you may say the minister would get to hear about this. However, we have the reinforcement of that ongoing theme of exemption from responsibility - taking itself out of the frame which leads further to what the community is starting to form a very clear view of: there is no point in having this government because it does not take responsibility for anything. We see this theme reinforced here.
More disturbing is we had the leak of a Cabinet document which went public. It was to do with boat registration and the identification schemes of boat registration and revealed things which were obviously embarrassing to the government. You have the community looking at the government and thinking: you did not tell us this; you have not explained this to us. Instead of occupying the public space and explaining yourself, a police investigation is commenced to discover who leaked this embarrassing information. That is very disturbing, and sends a message to the community that this government, once again, whether it is child protection or the release of a document for the consideration of the Labor Cabinet which is embarrassing to government, will turn its forces onto discovering who leaked that information.
I will not go to the protection of children. Even in that area this administration would turn its attention to investigating those who have caused embarrassment rather than minding the affairs of good governance and protecting the sensibilities of our community, and protecting standards and values. No, do not worry about that, we have to find out who it was. We then have a journalist reveal a conversation. We have a detailed investigation into who leaked, what material was made available to this journalist, and an investigation of journalists. To me, that makes it difficult to say this is tidying up; it is an amendment. We are going to find out anyway. The Police Commissioner does not have to tell the Police minister because it is going to go somewhere else, and I will find out from time to time perhaps.
Madam Speaker, I am concerned, and I believe many Territorians are concerned. This government is quick to exempt itself from responsibility, take itself out of the frame, and rushes happily to have an amendment like this brought before the parliament because it reinforces the modus operandi - I am not responsible, I do not need to know; I can investigate whatever I wish but it is not my business; the Police Commissioner did that, or someone else did that. We are not really responsible.
You are a government which does not seem to be very effective at all, and I am starting to form the view, as many Territorians are, this has to be the worst government we have ever had in the Northern Territory.
Members interjecting.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, they have started interjecting although they have not heard a word from me. They are already saying: ‘We do not want to hear it, we do not want to hear it. We are beyond criticism’. That is typical of the attitude of this government.
I listened carefully to what the Leader of the Opposition said, and I can add to that. This government tries to give an impression in the public domain that it is beyond criticism and in no way should be held accountable for the actions of its public service.
Mr Lawrie: Not true.
Mr ELFERINK: ‘Not true’, says the Attorney-General. Isn’t it interesting, the Chief Minister said a prosecution launched by the head of the Department of the Chief Minister has nothing to do with him; nothing to do with him at all. The Attorney-General who says: ‘Not true’, was quite happy, as Attorney-General, to enter a courthouse in Tennant Creek and have a prosecution pulled because she did not like the effect of that prosecution. What a double standard! For these people to sit there and say: ‘Nothing to do with us,’ is reprehensible.
Moreover, we have heard from the Leader of the Opposition about their witch-hunts through the public service. There was a dreadful leak about boat registrations and all of a sudden we are checking a journalist’s phone records. To the strains of Deutschland ber alles do we hear this government governing for the people of the Northern Territory! The government will go through a journalist’s telephone records - and whoever else’s phone records they so choose - if they do not like what they are hearing ...
Ms Lawrie: Not true.
Mr ELFERINK: Wrong! Absolutely correct! It is well established …
Members interjecting.
Mr ELFERINK: Picking up on the interjection, I invite another interjection. Have the telephone records of journalists in the Northern Territory been looked at or not?
Members interjecting.
Mr ELFERINK: Well, there you go! Nothing to do with them! It is funny that two days before Bob Collins attempted suicide, this Chief Minister - then Police minister - and the then Attorney-General, Peter Toyne, were briefed on the investigation into Mr Collins ...
Mr Henderson: You were briefed as well.
Mr ELFERINK: Guess what? Two days later Mr Collins attempted suicide ...
Mr Henderson: No. Wrong! Wrong! You are absolutely wrong on those time lines.
Mr ELFERINK: Where were the telephone interceptions of the conversations dealing with that matter …
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The issue of Bob Collins has nothing to do with this legislation. We are debating very specific legislation. I point out to the member for Port Darwin he had exactly the same briefing regarding those issues as I did ...
Mr Elferink: Not true! Not true!
Mr HENDERSON: Exactly! I urge him to return to the bill instead of the leadership speech he is now proposing to his colleagues to roll the hapless Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Elferink: Information was withheld …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, please! There has been a point or order. I remind you of Standing Order 67 in relation to no digression. I always allow a level of digression, member for Port Darwin, but you are getting to the end of my patience. Could you get to the point of the bill, please?
Mr ELFERINK: Where was the checking, using interception powers this government has, of the phone records of the fifth floor after that leak?
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! For the sake of accuracy and not misleading this House, I ask the member for Port Darwin to withdraw his comment. It goes to misleading the House. The government does not tap phones. The government does not access phone records, as he well knows. These are powers applied to the Police Commissioner, not the government. I urge the member for Port Darwin to withdraw his allegations. He is misleading the House.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Elferink: If you do not want to hear the truth why not suspend parliament?
Mr Henderson: The government does not have access, as you well know.
Mr Elferink: The government is beyond investigation though, is it not?
Mr Henderson: You well know, as a former copper.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, if you could keep to the bill, please?
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, this bill deals with the responsibility of government and reporting to government by police in relation to the telephone intercept warrants it obtains. Until now, this government has been receiving copies of those telephone intercept warrants, and now it will not because it can wash its hands of it. It can say: ‘We are clean, nothing to do with us’. Is it not funny how government switches this on and off whenever it suits?
Frankly, it is a despicable action it takes every time it washes its hands and says: ‘Not responsible’, because it is responsible. The doctrine of responsible government says it is responsible to this House. Government wants to shut down debate and not talk about things which embarrass it. I can tell you, if something embarrasses government, there is a witch-hunt. If something embarrasses government, who fronts the cameras? Is it one of the ministers? Hell, no! I raise an issue in relation to particular matters and, all of a sudden, the media is quoting someone by the name of Ivanovski. Who is minister Ivanovski? Will she or he be the person briefing this House at some point as to what government is doing?
Why is it every time some issue that does not suit the spin machine of this government gets pumped out by the media, this government heads for the hills? You do not see a minister explaining anything. Eight hundred cows died on Mataranka Station and where is the minister? Cannot be seen! Childcare is in disarray - where is the minister? No, we hear someone by the name of Clare Gardiner-Barnes, a public servant, explaining the political issues. Is Clare Gardiner-Barnes a minister of the Crown? Yet, she is on the radio explaining what this government is doing.
The government avoids being responsible at every occasion, and continues to do so by the pursuit of this type of legislation through the House: ‘We have nothing to do with it, they did not report to us. We changed the law, so nobody spoke to us’. Why are you a government? Why do you bother? Why do you get out of bed in the morning? You do not do anything when you get to work.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr ELFERINK: You find out what the bad news is and you trot out a public servant - what, human shield.
Ms Scrymgour: You need four more than Tollner.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr ELFERINK: Human shield. They can jive as much as they like and laugh as much as they like, but these are serious issues. This turns into a culture of bullying in the public service, and that is what is starting to transpire.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Honourable members!
Mr ELFERINK: You will find public servants investigating other public servants because ministers do not have the courage of their oath of office to be responsible to the people in this House and for the people of the Northern Territory.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr ELFERINK: They laugh and they joke, and they think it is the funniest thing in the world. Quite frankly, as far as I am concerned, they are bereft of responsibility. They will persecute any public servant who has the audacity to speak out against them …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr ELFERINK: Well, Sue Mansfield. Let us talk about Sue Mansfield on the Four Corners program, who immediately was being read the riot act …
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Relevance.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, this seems to be a significant digression. Could you could come to the point of the bill, please?
Mr ELFERINK: Will Sue Mansfield’s phone be tapped or her phone records checked as a result of the conversations she had with journalists prior to the interview on the Four Corners program?
Ms Lawrie: Just scaremongering, like you always do; pure scaremongering.
Mr ELFERINK: I am not scaremongering. These records are being checked by police. Police are going through people’s telephone records and they are asking questions as to who rang who, and the purpose of that is to persecute public servants who leak. That is the only thing you are interested in, driving an environment of fear throughout the public service, because you do not have the courage to stand up and do your job. If they genuinely believed they were being protected by their ministers, they would not be coming to talk to me about the increasingly dangerous environment they believe they occupy in the public service. They are scared, they are frightened, and they feel like they are being bullied.
Madam Speaker, I am spoken to by public servants who genuinely believe they are being bullied. Now we see that bullying going one step further and the phone records of journalists being checked so the government can prosecute people who are talking to the media. What a wonderful brave new world in which we live! This government stands condemned for its political cowardice.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I rise to support this bill and make several points. First, these amendments are being made in every jurisdiction around Australia and are not peculiar to the Northern Territory. What is peculiar to the Northern Territory is the ranting, raving and hyperbole of the member for Port Darwin …
Ms Lawrie: And the member for Blain.
Dr BURNS: ... and the member for Blain. These amendments are sensible. They go to streamlining the processes. They go to repealing the obsolete provisions of the act and updating various elements of the act.
A number of former police officers are sitting opposite; none of them have been Police minister. I will talk about my own experience as Police minister in relation to this matter. I was never comfortable receiving reports from police about surveillance activities. I did not think it was the purview of a minister to be privy to that information. It exposes ministers in a way they should not be exposed. As Police minister, you do not direct investigations and are not privy to various undercover operations by police. Why should you be privy to elements of that which include phone taps?
This is a sensible amendment for that very reason. Ministers should not be in possession of that information, or survey that information, because if something went wrong with a phone tap in an investigation there would be question marks about everyone involved, including the minister. Ministers should not be involved. Members opposite should apprise themselves of the Police Administration Act which clearly points to the separation between executive power and the powers of the police, and the roles and function of the Commissioner of Police.
To a large degree we need to be at arm’s length of investigations and other procedures occurring within the police force. I am quite comfortable with these amendments, and if any member opposite became Police minister they would appreciate these amendments giving them some cover.
Details of telephone intercepts should not be on a minister’s desk. What should be there are reports about the efficacy and results of the intercepts - what court proceedings and convictions have occurred as a result of the intercepts. That is what is important. A minister should not be involved at that level. To that extent I support these amendments and emphasise they are not being introduced solely by the Northern Territory government, but by every jurisdiction in Australia.
The members for Port Darwin and Blain raised several issues, notably that being canvassed by the print media in Darwin about phone records of a journalist being accessed by police. The police were not directed by this government to undertake those investigations – police initiated the investigations. I have carefully read what has been said in the NT News regarding freedom of the press and alleging a witch-hunt on their journalist, but I also heard the other side of the story from the Northern Territory Police Commissioner. In essence, his concern is - I am paraphrasing what he said on ABC: this is not about freedom of the press; this is about police proceedings being made available to the media before the matter goes to court. He felt that was quite inappropriate and potentially illegal. I listened very carefully to what the Police Commissioner said and it struck a chord within me. I understand the argument about freedom of the press. I suppose the challenge is where does freedom of the press finish and illegal activity begin?
As I understand it, the target is not so much the journalist but those who have leaked to the journalist. The member for Blain was very careful not to mention the matter involved Lord Mayor Graeme Sawyer, who happens to be a neighbour of mine. I felt for Graeme Sawyer when I read what had been leaked to the media. He finds himself in a family situation - we are all subject to it in this House, which is why you feel for someone - and it is splattered all over the press. Members opposite should try to put themselves in the Lord Mayor’s position and understand the anger he felt. He is not the only one; Mr Jon Tippet also expressed his anger in very eloquent terms on a matter involving his family which had been leaked to the media and splattered all over the front pages of the paper.
There are two sides to freedom of the press. Yes, I believe in freedom of the press, it is essential to our democracy; however, where does freedom of the press end and illegal activity start? That is the hard balancing act. I have a great deal of confidence in our commissioner.
The other issue related to Cabinet documents being leaked to the media. We are not talking about someone saying: ‘Did you know next Tuesday coming into Cabinet is a particular matter?’ A whole Cabinet submission was leaked to the press! No matter what members opposite say, that is not right; that is not on. In the whole gamut of documents coming to Cabinet there are issues which could give financial advantage to people. That is why, around Budget Cabinet, there is even more scrutiny and security around our documents, particularly in relation to revenue matters. There has to be security around Cabinet documents. I ask the opposition, in its brave new world - if and when it gains power – will you put Cabinet documents on the website? You are suggesting, through your argument, there should be no legal restriction around Cabinet documents. You need to explain yourself. You need to think about what you are saying because none in the CLP opposition have been a Cabinet minister, and there are a few things you need to understand about being a Cabinet minister.
I support this legislation; it has sensible changes. I have spoken from the perspective of a former Police minister who had to sign off on these warrants, and I can tell this House quite honestly I was never comfortable with it. In fact, I was quite uncomfortable about it for the reasons I have outlined today.
You can talk about taking responsibility, and I will stand up and take whatever responsibility I need to take as a minister, member for Port Darwin; however, I was never comfortable about that. If anyone thought about it, as a potential minister on the other side, they would understand what I am saying. It is a protection for the system and gives the right separation between politicians, ministers, and the operations of police, and that is quite appropriate.
Madam Speaker, I have also addressed a number of other issues raised by the opposition; however, in essence, I support the bill.
Mr HENDERSON (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, the member for Johnston, for his support. I am not sure if the opposition will support this or not. There was much rhetoric from the other side to say the government is removing accountability in regard to oversighting these warrants. Given they spoke in that fashion, I assume they will be voting against this legislation, maybe even dividing on it; we will wait and see.
I also point out, given the allegations that the government, and me as Police minister, was walking away from responsibility for oversighting these warrants, I am curious why the opposition did not seek a briefing on this bill - very curious given the allegations made. If it had sought a briefing it would understand the Territory government is reflecting changes which have been made to the Commonwealth act, the principal act that refers powers to the Territory in regard to the Commonwealth Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act.
This legislation declares the Northern Territory as an interception agency. There had been a review of the operations of the act by the Commonwealth. That review was oversighted by a Commonwealth parliamentary committee which would have had Liberal members on it, and passed through the federal parliament on the voices. The Commonwealth parliamentary committee system which oversights this legislation - with Liberal party members on the committee - was in support of the changes to the Commonwealth act.
The Commonwealth act is the principal act. All other states have to amend their legislation to reflect the principal act. That is what we are doing here, and maybe the opposition did not understand that. Had the opposition received a briefing, that position may have been clarified. The Commonwealth act, with the agreement of the states and territories, removes the requirement for Police ministers in the states to sign off on warrants and revocations of warrants.
In regard to the issuing of warrants under the act, police have to apply to the court. It is not only police making the decision to intercept and tap people’s phones. Police have to attend court, and the court authorises a warrant be issued under the powers of this act.
It has nothing to do with the government, in spite of the rhetoric from the member for Port Darwin. We know, every time he rises to speak it is a bit of a leadership speech. We know the Leader of the Opposition is swinging in the breeze, waiting to be cut down by his colleagues. There is an opportunity for the member for Port Darwin to jump to his feet and promote to his colleagues - who, sooner or later, will put the Leader of the Opposition out of his misery - his abilities versus the abilities of the member for Fong Lim. Unfortunately, we do not tend to hear much from the member for Fong Lim these days. My understanding is the member for Port Darwin has the numbers but is reluctant to use them. He is gutless ...
Members interjecting.
Mr HENDERSON: He is gutless; he is a wimp. He has the numbers and will not use them. We wonder why he does get up here and perform, because he is gutless …
Mr Knight: He has no ticker.
Mr HENDERSON: He has no ticker - thank you, member for Daly. He does not have the ticker to put the Leader of the Opposition out of his misery.
Anyway, getting back. That is where all the theatrics come from.
The Police minister will still be issued written reports about information obtained under the warrants. This is sensible in regard to the Police minister oversighting and understanding police are using these powers to effect; that these powers lead to charges being laid and prosecutions before our courts. That ensures the territory or state minister understands police are using these powers appropriately, and they are leading to prosecutions and legal access under our court system.
I also point out in regard to police power; the Ombudsman still retains the power to inspect all records. The Ombudsman is also required under legislation to report to this House on an annual basis, the appropriate use of these powers by police - not by government, as the member for Port Darwin and his theatrics would assert. There are checks and balances all through this. The Ombudsman still provides the independent oversight. The Ombudsman reports to parliament on an annual basis regarding police use of these powers. If the opposition had not been so lazy and had bothered to get a briefing on this bill, they would have …
Mr Elferink: We asked for one; you refused it.
Mr HENDERSON: Sorry?
Mr Elferink: We asked for one and you refused it. She asked.
Mr HENDERSON: I will take that on board because my advice is there was no request. With all due respect to the member for Araluen, briefings regarding legislation are provided to shadow ministers who have carriage of the legislation. My understanding is the Leader of the Opposition is the shadow Police minister, not the member for Araluen. There might have been a change there. This is a police bill. The very long-standing protocol in the Westminster system is the shadow minister is provided an opportunity for briefings on legislation. Maybe that is something for the member for Araluen to understand. In legislation she has carriage of she is entitled to those briefings, with briefings on any other matters on request. This is a police bill for the shadow Police minister to be briefed on.
Madam Speaker, with these comments, I thank colleagues for their support. I am interested to see if the opposition is going to vote against this bill.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time, and note it was nothing but theatrics from the opposition.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
WITHDRAWAL OF BUSINESS
Matter of Public Importance
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I advise I wish to withdraw the Matter of Public Importance presented to you earlier today.
Motion agreed to.
Continued from 26 October 2010.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I have concluded my remarks.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I rise today to comment on the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report 2009-10, and thank the Treasurer and Treasury staff for the briefing provided to me last week.
If you take what the Treasurer has said over the past weeks on face value, the Territory is in pretty good shape, and certainly, on the surface, the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report reflects reasonable economic times for the Territory. According to the Treasurer, we have a surplus for the financial year of $66m which is an improvement from the estimate of a deficit of $137m in May.
The estimate figure from the 2010-11 budget papers is an improvement from the 2009-10 budget, which indicated a deficit of $196m. So, from the 2009-10 budget delivered in May 2009 - in the estimate provided as to the budget bottom line to the end of June 2010 – only 13 months have elapsed and the overall bottom line of the Territory has, according to the Treasurer, improved by a whopping $262m. Given such a short time frame, I am not sure how there is such a disparity between those figures - $262m-worth of disparity.
This improvement to the bottom line has not been brought about by the sound economic management of this government. It has been due to some very significant windfalls brought to the Territory courtesy of the federal government. I will go into this in more detail shortly.
The other side to this pretty picture painted by the Treasurer is some rather poor …
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! This is not a pretty picture painted by the Treasurer. These are the audited accounts signed off by the Auditor-General. I caution the shadow Treasurer in his attempt to paint this as records which have not been audited by the Auditor-General or, indeed, that do not meet the Fiscal Integrity and Transparency Act. They do. This is not a general debate. This is a debate on audited accounts.
Madam SPEAKER: Treasurer, resume your seat. You will have an opportunity later.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Where was I? The other side to this pretty picture painted by the Treasurer is some rather poor economic management which feeds into the rhetoric of the supposed record infrastructure spend, as the Treasurer has been quoted many times; the $1.8bn announced during Budget 2010-11.
We have a surplus as outlined in the TAFR tabled; however, it comes heavily conditioned and is certainly not the result of good economic management, but through additional federal money and the lack of spending of committed funds by this government. My concerns were raised upon reading the Overview on page 7 of the TAFR which says in part:
Looking at that in more detail, page 10 of the TAFR details the variations of operating and cash flow statements. This is where we get a snapshot of the increases or decreases in both the revenue and operating payments of the general government sector. The first thing which leaps out on this page is the additional $170m in GST revenue which came the Territory’s way in 2009-10. The GST rivers of gold were running hot for the Territory in 2009-10, an additional $170m …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member for Katherine has the call.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: … which is great news for the Territory; however, how that additional GST revenue has been utilised is the question which needs to be asked. Nett debt currently stands at $719m - a drop of a $118m from the same time last year. The question is: could our nett debt position be better given the additional GST revenue received in current and past financial years? The answer is yes.
Our debt position has improved. However, it could be much better if this government exercised a little more fiscal responsibility and used more of those funds to further pay down the Territory’s debt position. The role of responsible government is to ensure the debt of the Northern Territory is kept to a minimum, and the excess – much of the GST dollars is money not anticipated by the government. This is the birthday present government was not expecting and has not used to pay down debt more significantly. Rather, it has either stashed it away or done what Labor governments do so well, which is spend.
There is an overpayment of GST to the Territory to the tune of $26m, which will not have to be paid back per se, but will amount to a decrease of inflow of GST over the course of the next 12 months. This will offset any future increases in GST should there be a continuation of additional payments flowing into the Northern Territory as a result of good economic times across the country.
I note in the variations an additional $190m in other Commonwealth revenue through SPPs and the national partnerships arrangement funding which has translated into a number of forms, and is on the books in contributing to the bottom line of the Territory, which comes back to how we managed to arrive at a surplus. This funding is translated as: housing largely through the failing SIHIP program; education through the Building the Education Revolution program; other money brought forward to the Tiger Brennan Drive extension; Alice Springs Transformation Plan; and a few other things which have been provided by way of extra revenue through those sorts of grants.
There has also been a reduction of $16m from mining royalties compared with what was expected from the May 2009 budget, and in the TAFR this is attributed to global economic conditions, lower commodity prices, and movements in exchange rates. There are other variations across the board in the TAFR regarding additional funding received from Commonwealth sources.
There is another facet to the budget surplus, and that is the apparently deliberate delayed expenditure of some of the Commonwealth funding which, if I heard the briefing correctly, is around $75m during that financial year. This goes back to a point I raised in my reply to Budget 2010-11 earlier this year of the so-called record infrastructure spend in this current financial year. The Treasurer trotted out a record $1.8bn infrastructure spend, which sounds very good. However, upon further examination of this record spend I discovered $845m, or around 52% of the entire infrastructure budget, excluding repairs and maintenance, was work revoted or brought forward from the previous year. That 52% eclipses any previous year. Revoted work during 2003-04 was 35%; 35% the next year; 30% in 2006-07; 37% in 2007-08; it climbed to 45% in 2008-09, and 52% in this budget. There appears to be a trend by this government to revote work year upon year. I posed the question why was that happening? I will quote from the Hansard of 8 June 2010:
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! If the member opposite wants to make an allegation of misleading he knows he must do so by way of substantive motion.
Mr ELFERINK: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker, he made the general assertion government was not lying - a particular member was.
Madam SPEAKER: I would like you to re-word that please, member for Katherine.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: That was a quote directly from the Hansard of my budget reply earlier this year. It was not pulled up then.
Ms Lawrie: Did you make a budget reply?
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I did a budget reply.
Madam SPEAKER: I do not know what happened in the budget; could you re-word that please, member for Katherine?
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Madam Speaker, I cannot re-word a quote from Hansard.
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Is the member for Katherine using the word ‘fraud’?
Madam SPEAKER: ‘Lying’, I believe.
Dr BURNS: He used the word ‘fraud’.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Katherine, if you could withdraw and re-word please?
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr WESTRA Van HOLHE: Madam Speaker, I will withdraw the quote, and reword what I want to say without the quote.
I postulated at the time there was a reason the government spoke about the budget in such glowing terms to give a false indication, raise some false expectations in the people of the Northern Territory by providing them with the truth but not the whole truth - and certainly not in context. I hope that gets around the use of any words members on the other side of the House find offensive, Madam Speaker.
I am discovering, by extension, the same story; by not spending much of the money from the pervious year - the revoted work - it becomes unexpended, largely Commonwealth funding, represented in the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report. That contributes to the budget bottom line, which gave us a surplus this year. Simply put, by not spending the money you roll the money forward into the next financial year and claim credit for sound economic management by bringing a Northern Territory budget to surplus, or keeping it in surplus, when all you are doing is rolling already committed money forward which should have been spent in the previous financial year.
At the time I gave my budget reply I noted some issues regarding the growth of the Northern Territory. Last year, the Northern Territory’s growth was predicted to be around 2%. Yet, using the government’s own figures, growth was 0.4%. If the government had spent a large proportion of the money from the previous financial year on infrastructure, we could have achieved a growth rate beyond the 0.4% figure provided by government. It might have taken us back to the 2% growth rate, which seems to make more sense than bundling it into 2010-11, and spread out the capacity of the Northern Territory.
Looking at how this plays out on the street, if the record infrastructure spend of $1.8bn for this year is all utilised, there will not be enough tradesmen, contractors, or people who work in industries where the money will be spent to achieve that spend. It is like putting a chokehold around the Northern Territory for a year then unleashing the floodgates some time after that. That will create quite significant variations in activity which is not good for the Northern Territory. It is much better to have a stable environment. I shall not belabour the point any further.
The member for Port Darwin will canvass issues around the Treasurer’s Advance - very interesting points raised in discussions he and I had recently. I will leave that to him, and not do him any disservice or discredit by stealing his thunder.
Madam Speaker, I conclude my remarks. It is difficult to be critical of the TAFR we have before us now, and it is not my intention to be critical for critique’s sake. The Northern Territory economy is in a reasonable position, yet we must look at how we got there and what could be done better. Reduction of the Territory’s debt is an area a Country Liberals government would take far more note of and apply greater fiscal responsibility to achieve that end.
Madam SPEAKER: Treasurer, in closing debate.
Mr Elferink: Hang on!
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin.
Ms Lawrie: Wakey, wakey. Asleep at the wheel!
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): I am asleep at the wheel. Do you know why I am asleep at the wheel? Because there have been variations across all government departments and not one other minister is rising to explain to this House why those variations have occurred and what decision-making process was put in place. Goodness gracious me, what a fulsome endorsement of this Treasurer’s Annual Financial Statement - a deathly silence on the other side of the House with a government that could not be less interested in the results of the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Statement. Why would they not be speaking about these things? Because their departments will not let them. Have you ever seen such a jolly bunch of housetrained pets in your life as the members opposite?
Madam Speaker, yes, I was caught unawares. I was naive enough to believe a minister of the Crown, perhaps even the Chief Minister, would have something to say about a budget which, in the general government sector alone, operates at around the $4.5bn mark. This Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report before the House is the usual report on the accident which occurs every year when the Treasurer walks into the middle of Cash Street and is run over by the biggest cash truck in town, namely the Commonwealth government.
One of the tricks with a budget is to stick to it and make the results look planned. At the beginning of the financial year when the Treasurer brings down the budget, one would hope that at the end of the financial year the annual financial statement looked something like the original budget. No. We see shifts of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of income, projected deficits magically transform into surpluses as the dust fairy, Wayne Swan, sprinkles his magic dust over the Northern Territory. This government is not fiscally well run. This government falls into a swimming pool and boasts about its capacity to get wet. It is unremarkable in the least.
Over the last few years the budget of the Northern Territory has more than doubled in size. This is partly due to a GST this Labor Party chose to resist at the time it was introduced. It ran scare campaigns to resist it; however, it loves it now, and what I really like about this government’s approach to budgetary management is the cavalier fashion in which, during the last estimates process, the Treasurer of the Northern Territory announced $690m-odd was not that much money at all. Well, $690m-odd was the amount of the extra GST we did not expect to receive over several years. Wow! Her dismissive approach: ‘Oh, it is only about $690m’, could have wiped out the Territory’s debt if government had chosen not to spend it. We could have a debt situation in the Northern Territory which is a big, fat, blobby zero!
The Western Australian Labor government managed it during the good times, but not here. This government accepted the GST that came in and spent it at the very first opportunity. It is like a little kid in front of the candy store who has an extra 20 and is going to get more jubes. That is the approach of this government. It talks about its financial management plan and fiscal strategy, and you read about it in these documents - it is a genuine expression of things it is going to achieve. Here is a thought: stick within your budget.
If government had taken the unexpected component of the growth of the GST it received every year and squirreled it away, it would now have enough to eliminate the debt of the Northern Territory. There are several things operating here. One, it receives more money every year and it knows it will receive it. Two, on top of that it receives extra bonuses from the federal government for specific purpose payments and national partnership agreements - which essentially puts it into the role of project manager, and I cannot blame government for that. Three, at the end of the financial year, most years, there is a little extra GST in the kitty, the bit government did not expect.
If I was running my household budget, yes, I would have a house debt; government has debt. Some people have credit cards; I do not have a credit card debt, thank the good Lord, and some people have a car debt. There you have the basis for government spending. It is the same as a household budget in so many respects. If I, during the course of the year, know I am going to receive a raise, rather than spend it, I will squirrel some away. Not all, some of it, and then if I receive any extra money, like windfalls - like a community chest in Monopoly where I get an extra $15 from the bank teller for a bank charge in my favour - I receive those extra amounts of money and I have a choice to save it or spend it.
I can save it in two ways: I can stick it in a bank account for a rainy day; or I can pay off my credit card. That is not such a difficult thing to do. This government has chosen to spend it. Friday night comes around, the pubs are open and off we go, we are going to spend it. We spend money on all sorts of off-budget spends.
I will give you an example, the $400 000 decision by Cabinet to bring on the interlock devices because it was a good media release at the time. How many of these interlock devices have been fitted now we have spent the $400 000 off-budget spend? Many court decisions say you can get them; how many have been fitted? Two have been fitted, at $200 000 each because they could not wait until the next year to introduce the policy. That is called responsible fiscal management? No, we have to spend it now; we have to keep touching the budget and here is this hoary chestnut, the Treasurer’s Advance …
Ms Lawrie: The Treasurer’s Advance.
Mr ELFERINK: Yes, the Treasurer’s Advance. Here is a clever thing. For the folks who do not know, the Treasurer’s Advance is like pocket money we give the Treasurer. She hates me talking about it because it does not suit her. I have to accept the two paragraph explanation by Treasury of what is essentially a piggy bank, and unless I quote it parrot-fashion back, I am wrong. Well, I am not wrong. This is a contingency liability which is built into every budget and it is …
Dr Burns: You are going to do away with it, are you?
Mr ELFERINK: In the perfect world, if the budget came back properly, we would see positioning for a $40m surplus every year. That does not happen because we keep on raiding it, and the funny thing is, year in year out, government raids it; it is a $40m fund but historically you see as much as $130m extra come out of that $40m fund. One year, government raided it to the thousandth dollar so it could go to the brink of having to come back into this House and ask for more money. This year it contained itself.
When I put these questions to the Treasurer during the estimates process, the Treasurer assured me only the $40m would be spent. I asked her at that stage: ‘Are you going to spend any more?’ ‘I am not going to talk about that’. I asked how much would be spent: ‘I am not going to talk about that’. Sure as eggs, it was raided to the tune of an extra $27m more than budgeted for, which is typical of this government. It has gone to the little piggy bank and drained it, then runs off to the Administrator and gets more and drains it again, year in and year out. This is not good fiscal management. This is a government which has more money than it knows what to do with and finds ways to produce new spending initiatives.
Madam Speaker, this is an unremarkable government. It is the worst government the Northern Territory has ever had. It could have paid off its debt by now, it could have been providing services if it chose to govern rather than run the fifth floor of this building like one giant media release.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, what an appalling response from members opposite. I can see why there was some reluctance for the shadow Treasurer to step up to the role. I can equally see why the opposition sacked the member for Port Darwin as shadow Treasurer after that curious contribution to debate.
I will start where we finished because the sacked former shadow Treasurer, the member for Port Darwin, has a ground zero vision for the Territory - ground zero. Do not welcome any revenue from the Commonwealth - the GST - despite it being our entitlement, despite the fact any Treasurer worth their salt in the Territory would argue for as large a slice of the GST pie as possible. The consistent argument from the member for Port Darwin is we should not be getting the GST dollars in the Territory, it is simply a windfall, and if we are getting it we should not be spending it.
If you were to follow that line of argument to its logical conclusion, we would not have the doubling in the revenue growth we have seen over recent years. You would not be able to employ more doctors, more nurses, more teachers, more police, and more child protection workers into those key areas of service delivery. Following that logical argument down the path further, you would not be propping up the Territory’s economy, post-global financial crisis, through a deliberate decision to increase spending on infrastructure to ensure our construction and engineering sectors had the jobs it needed to make them well positioned for major projects as they come forward. We have seen in gross state product figures released recently that an increase in government spending has contributed to growth in our economy. Without that government spending we were in great risk of contracting through that post-global financial crisis period, particularly the 2009-10 financial year we are debating.
Where the government ensured, through expenditure, payments of $1.5bn - if the member for Katherine wants to understand the TAFR, they were payments of $1.5bn made in the infrastructure program. That directly correlates to recording the all-important GST growth of 1.3% announced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Yes, we expected a tight economy post-global financial crisis where we saw private sector investment stripped away from the Territory, stripped away everywhere because the financial markets had frozen for a period, and when they recovered enough to see some movement in the global financial market, the purchase of credit to invest in private infrastructure was prohibitively high.
If you listen to business it will say it is too high; it is still above the margins at which you would normally purchase that all-important credit into investment. This is why the International Monetary Fund said governments need to spend; spend significantly and spend swiftly. It made it very clear governments needed to respond to the worst financial crisis in history since World War II by spending significantly higher levels than usual, and swiftly. The 2009-10 year shows the success the government had in doing that.
The members for Katherine and Port Darwin do not understand that we are not on an island on our own, cast away at sea, not suffering the effects of the global financial crisis. They are in some bizarre fantasy, Gulliver’s Island world of their own.
The government responded swiftly and strongly to the global financial crisis in the 2009-10 budget by announcing a record infrastructure spend of $1.3bn. The TAFR we are debating today shows us we spent more than that; we stepped it up to a $1.5bn spend.
The member for Katherine wanted to kick around in the land of the revote. Clearly, he does not understand major infrastructure delivered in the Northern Territory is always over financial years. Projects like Tiger Brennan Drive and the Victoria Highway bridges are of such magnitude they are constructed over financial years. The main construction period for the Northern Territory, particularly in the Top End - no surprise to most people – is in the Dry Season. Guess where the Dry Season falls? It straddles financial years. Any government of any political persuasion in the Northern Territory will have its infrastructure revote straddling financial years. That is the reality of the construction cycle in the Northern Territory.
Our Northern Territory companies do better than anywhere else at constructing during the Wet Season. They are very good at ensuring their infrastructure program and the roll-out of their project gets as much momentum as possible in the Wet Season, but they go gangbusters in the all-important Dry Season. The revote out of the program in 2009-10 was at 53%. Now, that is sitting around average. The year before it was 58%; in 2000-01 it was 55% - not unusual; reflecting the realities of the construction cycle in the Northern Territory.
However, successive opposition members bury their heads in the sand and pretend there is something dastardly being done with this revote to try to obfuscate and pump up the construction program for the following year. Nothing could be further from the truth. They only embarrass themselves in continuing to run that spurious line that everyone in the development sector, particularly the construction industry, would find entirely laughable.
I am delighted we had a record infrastructure spend in the 2009-10 financial year of 1.59% because the ABS gross state product figure shows that 1.3% growth in the 2009-10 year backs up our government’s decision to lift our public spend by around 50%-plus. In real terms, that equates to about a 3% increase in GSP. You can do the sums yourself. If we had not stepped up our public spend as the International Monetary Fund advised all governments to do, we would have seen a contracting economy.
What does a ‘contracting’ economy mean? In real terms, it means high unemployment. It means Territorians are in the jobless queue, lining up to get a job which does not exist because under the ground zero economic direction of the member for Port Darwin, the jobs would not be there. You would not be pumping into your infrastructure spending, and you would not be providing opportunities in the public service in core service delivery areas of police, nurses, doctors and teachers. The jobs would not be there and you would see an environment, as has happened globally, of high unemployment as opposed to our low unemployment. We are tracking at about 3.1% unemployment rate. In the 2009-10 period we were tracking even lower, about 2.6% to 2.8% unemployment rates - a significant success story the Territory has delivered, quite deliberately through decisions we made as a government to support jobs and have jobs as the underpinning deliverable coming out of the budget in those key growth areas of health, education, law and order and, critically important, infrastructure. Infrastructure not only in the urban centres, but infrastructure in the bush to improve the living conditions of Territorians regardless of where they are.
In the shadow Treasurer’s first foray into economic matters, he chose to challenge Access Economics Business Outlook in his media release in response to the TAFR. This is despite his media release failing to declare he is shadow Treasurer. You have to change your shadow titles on your media releases guys - a bit of a tip. The shadow Treasurer claimed the respected economic commentator, Access Economics, was mistaken in its reference to land release contributing to economic growth. It appears the shadow Treasurer does not understand the effect of land release across civil construction, essential services and the building industry, and the fact Palmerston East is under development at Johnston, and construction is under way at Bellamack.
I refer the shadow Treasurer to the ABS data. It reports in the month of August 2010, there were 149 residential building approvals in the Territory in trend terms. This is the highest number of trend residential building approvals since December 1999, and the number of residential building approvals in the year to August 2010, at 1506, is tracking at near decade high levels. The shadow Treasurer also claimed Access Economics erred in its reference to work under way on a condensate processing plant. He failed to mention Access Economics, in its commentary and forecast, had not included the $US1.1bn Kitan project in the JDPA, of which $US550m-worth of activity will be attributed to the Territory. It is a bold, new shadow Treasurer who attacks Access Economics. It shows how truly off track and bewildered the CLP currently is.
After the March 2010 quarter publication was released we highlighted that area to Access, which informed us they would be reviewing their database of major projects in the Territory. The Kitan project is significant. Access Economics is a very credible economic forecaster. It takes far more than a couple of projects into account and, while their forecasts are just forecasts, they are worth taking into account in any policy formulation.
The Leader of the Opposition put out a media release titled: ‘Henderson Fudges the Figures’, stating:
This is an interesting statement from the Opposition Leader. If we look at the facts, those numbers do not relate to NT government policy. The period of time the Opposition Leader refers to is November 1999, where there was a spike in approvals due to - wait for it - Defence Housing Australia spending an estimated $350m, in 1998 dollar terms, for housing related to the Army Presence In the North scheme, and reconstruction activity following the 1998 Katherine floods, neither of which were driven by NT government policy.
Compare that to the current data released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics: 1505, tracking near decade high levels. This is the highest number of trend residential approvals since December 1999. You heard me talk about the high month of August return in trend terms. They are directly as a result of our government’s policy to fast-track the release of around 6000 blocks of land over a five year period, covering those four new suburbs in Palmerston East, with Bellamack and Johnston already under way. This is on top of activity by Defence Housing Australia in Lyons, which we see is fully committed, and the new development coming ahead in Muirhead.
In addition, this government has seen the approval of 2300 unit developments across Darwin CBD since 2006. Where the Leader of the Opposition would like to claim credit for Defence Housing Australia’s activity, we are simply claiming credit for our own government policy activity of fast-tracking land release in Palmerston East …
Mr Mills: That is ridiculous.
Ms LAWRIE: I note the interjection by the Leader of the Opposition. They are the facts, Leader of the Opposition …
Mr Mills: Fast-tracking! Talk to some of my constituents.
Ms LAWRIE: You may have been misled by your advisors and you may want to check before you stick your neck out and repeat …
Mr Mills: Come with me and we will talk to a few people with young families.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms LAWRIE: We heard the member for Port Darwin talk about how he would run his household budget. I find this a curious analogy. You cannot run a jurisdictional budget on the basis of a household budget when you need to create the levers which drive economic activity. You are not doing that in your household budget.
Household budgets are mainly ins and outs of revenue and expenditure. You are not creating the levers in economic activity which drive revenue growth unless you are sending your kids out to do modelling and being paid for that. You can argue that is perhaps driving some of the levers of economic activity in the household; however, on the whole, what a curious analogy the opposition continues to follow.
If the member for Port Darwin had not been sacked as the shadow Treasurer, and if he ran the budget like his household budget, where would that land us? Would Territorians be taken down the path of economic knowledge of the member for Port Darwin?
We know he has steered, curiously, away from the debate around the Conditions of Service Report, COSR. He usually debates how we are tracking in financial liabilities and superannuation; it is curious the member for Port Darwin remained silent and chose to focus on the Treasurer’s Advance, which I will get to in a moment.
If the member for Port Darwin had his way, and the CLP followed his advice on economic directions, the Territory budget would be treated as a gamble. Members might have heard of Babcock and Brown, the global investment and funds management group. The member for Port Darwin has heard of them. According to his pecuniary interests, the Elferink super fund bought nearly $20 000 in Babcock and Brown shares at $1.65. Trading in Babcock and Brown was halted on 12 January 2009 at $0.32.5. He bought $20 000 worth of shares at $1.65 and within a few months trading was halted at $0.32.5. The Elferink super fund has lost at least 80% of its money on Babcock and Brown. It is probably even worse; Babcock and Brown indicated shareholders were likely to be left with nothing. I do not think you will be receiving your $0.32-worth.
Territorians can be thankful he has been sacked as shadow Treasurer because if he handled the Territory economy the same way we would be heading down the gurgler. That is a result of the member for Port Darwin’s financial management. It was the member for Port Darwin who said we should handle the Territory economy like a household budget: I am simply responding to it.
In stark contrast, under the Henderson government’s sound financial management the government’s total investments, at the same time, lost only 4% in the first half of 2008-09, while as at 16 April 2009 the ASX, Australian Stock Exchange, had fallen 27.5% over the financial year, and 31.4% the past year. This curious argument of saying we should handle the Territory budget like the household budget, surely - after the example of how badly they handle their own - would slip away into the ether and we could get back to the real debate about revenue and expenditure.
The Treasurer’s Advance argument is led, and at the same time, and several times throughout the year, by members opposite, particularly the member for Port Darwin who is somewhat fixated on it - his way of dealing with it is ground zero …
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker. I move an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: Treasurer, I note it is lunch time.
Ms LAWRIE: I am about to wrap.
Treasurer’s Advance - ground zero approach by the member for Port Darwin, do nothing between the May to May period despite the fact the CLP used up its Treasurer’s Advance through the growth periods of the 1990s. If you look at the cycles of Treasurer’s Advance expenditure you will see you tend to rely on Treasurer’s Advance more through your growth periods.
The Treasurer’s Advance in 2009-10 was used on the roads network - $22m, community infrastructure projects and the Darwin Waterfront. It also went to fund the Alice Springs sittings; legal fees associated with East Arm Port and the Alice Springs Hospital; $20m to support the new nurse/patient ratio; the Buildstart costs as part of the stimulus project; new Police Beat offices and staffing; major events around the waterfront launch; a Street to Home initiative in the area of local government, housing and regional services; and tourism support in promoting new airline services. The member opposite would have none of this activity occur. Do not use the Treasurer’s Advance, stay frozen between May budget to May budget period; it is a nonsense argument.
We were upfront that the final cash outcome in 2009-10 of a $66m surplus was an improvement of $262m from the May budget 2009 estimate, and $203m from the revised estimate May 2010. We were upfront that that improvement included the provision of late Commonwealth funding and the timing of Commonwealth expenditure. However, and this is significant, there was an underlying budget improvement of $53m during that period. We kept growth restraint to 3% compared to the normal 12%. The levers and tools of this government with wages restraint, with a staffing cap, and other measures of efficiency dividends delivered an underlying improvement of $53m by taking away the accounting of the Commonwealth timing of payments which occurs every financial year for every government of the Territory regardless of their political construct.
Hoarding of Commonwealth dollars is a nonsense argument. We are being funded for specific projects. For example, the Alice Springs Transformation Plan and Tiger Brennan Drive were key areas where Commonwealth funding timing affected the outcome of the 2009-10 budget.
Madam Speaker, we were upfront about it; I issued media releases and talked about it at media events. This whole construct that the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report is a pretty picture painted by the Treasurer is arrant nonsense. I refer members opposite to the Auditor-General, who goes through these accounts collated by Treasury – yes, I sign off on them as Treasurer, as I ought to. I ought to be able to sign up to the accounts, and I go through them in great detail with my Treasury officials. I sincerely thank David Braines-Mead and his staff for the hard work they put in to the TAFR. The Auditor-General signs off and has a letter sitting within the TAFR - this is an unqualified audit by our Auditor-General.
I congratulate the hard work of Treasury officials in compiling the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report for the 2009-10 financial year. Yes, it records another surplus, the eighth consecutive surplus; however, what we clearly have been flagging is the tough times continue. Our deliberate decision to step up public expenditure to support the growth of our economy during the post-global financial crisis period means we are going to be delivering budget deficits going forward. They are deliberate decisions made to support the growth in our economy to keep Territorians in jobs. In stark contrast, the CLP would go on a wholesale sacking of public servants, would withdraw the spending in infrastructure, and we would watch our construction sector collapse ahead of major projects. What a ridiculous direction from the opposition.
Motion agreed to; paper noted.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of former Deputy Chief Minister, the Honourable Barry Coulter. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr WOOD (Nelson)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that General Business Notice No 2, referring to 5-star energy efficiency ratings, standing in my name be postponed until General Business on 1 December 2010.
Motion agreed to.
MOTION
Proposed Censure of Government – Management of Child Protection System
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I move - That this House censure this government for its appalling management of child protection.
Madam Speaker, I rise to censure the Henderson government over its failure to protect the children of the Northern Territory. Labor has allowed a crisis to develop in the child protection system during the past decade. Last month, the Growing them strong, together report into the crisis in our child protection system was released. It should have marked a watershed in Labor’s approach to child protection; it should have shown a significant change of attitude. It should have been marked by a sense of urgency, some humility at least, and an acceptance something needed to be done which we had not seen before: a government take direct responsibility. It should have seen this government hang its head in shame and vow to do much, much better.
Indeed, the opposition held off censuring over the tsunami of need Labor had allowed to develop in the hope things would finally change for the better. We held back. There was a call for us to move a censure in those early stages, as we had done in the past. It is the efforts of the opposition and, principally, the former member for Araluen which have managed to get this government to the position where it has conceded action is required. However, still no responsibility has been afforded to this very important issue of governance. It is a blaming of everyone else.
To see the Chief Minister on Four Corners doing everything but create the impression the government is responsible was a shameful broadcast - that abdication of responsibility in the face of something broadcast nationally and the person who the buck stops with has not accepted responsibility. It is a systemic problem. You have to ask: what is the role of the Labor government? The opposition held off censuring because it hoped there would be change, but that hope was in vain.
Since the tabling of the child protection inquiry report we have seen a continuation of the evasion, denial and deceit which has characterised Labor’s approach to child protection. This arrogant, cynical and empty government continues to place its political protection - we just saw it during Question Time - before the protection of children.
Consider the case of Susan Mansfield. It is hard to imagine a more dedicated public servant, a servant of the best interests of the community. Whilst working at Royal Darwin Hospital, she repeatedly sought to prevent the dysfunctional child system from placing a child in grave danger - made a valiant effort. In spite of her real warnings that child was placed in danger and, sadly, came to great harm. In her efforts she was bullied and intimidated by senior bureaucrats. Recently, she appeared on Four Corners detailing her efforts to save that child, telling Four Corners she felt guilt about the fate which had befallen that child. For her honesty and integrity she was again bullied by senior bureaucrats. That is shameful! I cannot think of anything more chilling than a person who has been motivated out of the best interests of a vulnerable child who needed protection, needed a system to protect that vulnerable child, raise the warning, those warnings went unheeded and instead there was a move on the one who raised the warning - to carry that sense of guilt that perhaps she could have done more. Why doesn’t that sense of guilt pervade the actions and attitudes of this government, which is more interested in changing the deck chairs than it is in changing the direction of the ship?
The person making the public call through Four Corners for everyone in this nation to see, still received an approach from her senior which could only be described as bullying - a discouragement from speaking. Why? Because it may embarrass the system; it may embarrass the government. What about the child? The purpose of the system is to protect the child; that is what it is there for. The role of a government, as we say in the mornings, is to protect and advance the best interests, including that child.
Where do the senior bureaucrats get their written instructions from? Why do they feel they can do that? They get it from higher up the chain, from those sitting across this room - this disgraceful and deceitful government. When Susan Mansfield was bullied again for appearing on Four Corners our worst fears were confirmed. This tired, arrogant, cynical government will continue to put the protection of itself above the protection of children.
That is why we move to censure today. We held back last time, hoping against hope there would be a change. This changes all of that. There has been no change in the way this government operates. The Henderson government will continue to conceal what it can, deny what it cannot conceal, and bully anyone who dares speak the truth.
Another example post the inquiry’s report concerns the shocking revelations in the NT News that up to 500 child protection cases were closed without an investigation. How does the minister respond to this news? It is there for all to see. What do we hear? Nothing, silence, no defence, no explanation, and no reassurance to the Territory community that this government takes the matter seriously enough to provide an explanation right then and there. He is concerned. Does he initiate an investigation to ascertain if these children have come to harm? No. He describes a system in chaos, yet says the system has provided him with that assurance. The very assurance you have been provided with is illogical because it does not stack up. How can you provide us with the assurance of a system you have described as being dysfunctional?
The minister turns a blind eye and hopes the problem, which in government’s mind is a political problem, goes away. That is precisely the attitude which allowed the crisis in child protection to develop. This minister has learnt nothing from the parade of failed ministers before him. Why so many ministers? After the inquiry he continues to peddle the lie that the Henderson government spends $130m on child protection whereas the last CLP government spent $7m as though that is an explanation. As an explanation it is false. He imagines repeating a lie will make it true. He knows, I know, and interested observers know, his figures amount to simple-minded deception. How could you lower yourself to the point of running out something like that?
Those who have an interest in these matters are educated and astute enough to know if someone is telling the truth or not. Why would you go down that path? The only reason is a desperate attempt to solve a political problem by throwing a lie at it, hoping it will go away. This is about the protection of children, which is a lesser importance to this government.
The inquiry into child protection also made a series of urgent recommendations, and put a six-month time frame on their implementation. Yet, as another indication that nothing has changed in this government, it has created a Child Protection Reform Steering Committee to report on the implementation of the inquiry’s recommendations - which will only be reported on an annual basis. There is a commitment the urgent recommendations be implemented within six months, and a reform steering committee which says it will report in 12 months. That is six months after the most urgent recommendations are meant to implemented, and only once before the next Northern Territory election - just one report. I understand the next Northern Territory election is 14 August 2012. There will only be one report before that date.
Conceal what you can and deny what you cannot conceal. Nothing will change whilst government puts protection of itself against and before the protection of children. We are drawing on almost 10 years of this government’s failure to protect Northern Territory children. The astonishing thing, even in this session of Question Time, is they have a greater fixation on that which happened 17 years ago, but little interest in that which happened 10, nine, eight, seven, six, five, or four years ago. We have had five ministers, but there is a greater preoccupation of that which extends beyond the reach of their own responsibility, such is the poverty of this government to reach back 16 years. We had that as an explanation - an astonishing explanation - the current problem goes back 17 years.
Those kids who were protected by that system vote today - they are that old. Why do you not look straight at your own patch where you have responsibility? No, that is not within the capacity of this government, which is more geared by the need to defend and protect itself and a system which protects its ministers rather than children.
Since 2001, there have been numerous reports damning the management of systems and processes designed to protect the most vulnerable children. Each time a Labor government minister rises, hand on heart, and swears: ‘This time everything will be fixed. More money will be diverted to the cause. More childcare workers employed. Internal policy and processes will be improved; this time no children will fall through the cracks’. We have heard it all before; those good words spoken as though that will create an impression, a sense that things are different.
In a couple of months, or a couple of years, we are back again with a new report about systemic failures and a system in chaos, with a different Labor minister swearing government is committed to closing the gap in a system riddled with maladministration. That is where we are after 10 years - another minister saying failures of the past should be ignored: ‘Do not worry, good citizens who are concerned about children, we are going to spend money’. That is all we hear from the Labor government; the spending of money –no changing of culture, no changing of attitude, no accepting responsibility, and no changing direction. No. It is going to spend money, it is a systemic problem, and if you look back 17 years you will see it all make senses. It does not make sense.
As local members, I cannot understand how you could endure this when you have people telling you these stories. Yet, you explain it away and off you go to a function. Explain it away happily and deceive yourself. People are crying out for help; they have lost faith in the government protecting children. Off you go telling great stories, hand on heart - it is all going to be different this time.
The government tells us it is committed to shedding light and fixing the flaws of the current system. It says that because it sounds good. However, have we seen anything heroic which requires a real decision and real leadership to take it head on and change the direction of the system? No. We have talk of money being spent, but no care being given. We are told it is not the government’s fault. Well, it may as well exit stage left as far as I am concerned. What is it being spent on? Let us be specific.
What are you spending the money on and what has that spend produced which is measurable? Something real, something that can be measured, seen and explained, in real terms - we do not have that. After a decade in government, the Chief Minister still claims it was the system’s fault. The Health minister looks back 17 years and says: ‘Well, there you go’. It is 2010, Labor came into office in 2001, and we are told today it is a systemic problem. Who has been responsible for that system for a decade? It is as if the minister has no responsibility for the child protection system his government has run for a decade; as if ministerial accountability simply does not exist - it evaporates and counts for nothing. If you can explain it away it does not count. If not for the opposition, we could have allowed this to cruise, could we not?
But for those good people like Susan Mansfield who spoke up - and her voice could be echoed in this Chamber - you would have cruised on. I know the house where the young Melville girl came to grief; it is in my electorate. I know that neighbourhood. That has an effect on a community. That has an effect on people, on families, who lose their confidence in a system there to protect them, for those good people who live next door to houses such as that. One lady comes to see me again and again and again, saying she is observing these things, and she is calling out for help and is fobbed off with an explanation: ‘You need to go to this office, you need to go to that office, you need to write, you need to do this’. She is distraught. She is seeing something which is clearly wrong and the system will not respond to her. I go into bat for her; go to the school to see if I can get someone to at least provide additional information so the system will respond to that which is happening right next door. An elevated house, looking down into the backyard and seeing what is going on. The hardest part was trying to get someone in the system to pay attention. It went on for months, and yet we had assurances one after the other - it is not our responsibility, it is the system; the system is at fault, we are going to spend money on it. Do not worry, we have an inquiry.
I feel for that good citizen who has lost confidence in the system, and an appalling government which stands here and gives an explanation as though it is satisfactory. I saw the Chief Minister on Four Corners treat it as a political problem; let us see if we can bat through this one; bat it out, soon it will be over. Probably got off camera and said: ‘Did I do okay? Did I get through that one okay?’ I can see what is going on here. You are so desperate you will reach in any direction for whatever you can to distract from that core responsibility. I want to see a community with its faith and confidence restored in a system. I am not saying this is going to be fixed, but what has to be fixed is the attitude government brings to bear and the risk and responsibility carried by government rather than the excuse making, the moral vacuum we have for a government that will not accept the responsibility. That is what is so concerning.
There is a hole where the government should be. Every time another crisis is exposed - check this out, the community can see this - the minister responsible is shifted sideways to avoid having to answer for their incompetence. We have seen that. How dare you reach back 17 years and tell us lies about the amount of money spent compared with the money spent now as though that is an explanation. That is a lie, and is deceitful and evasive.
The ministerial merry-go-round has seen ministers Aagaard, Scrymgour, Lawrie, McCarthy and Vatskalis come and go like second-rate generals in a serious war. It has seen report after report into child protection commissioned, praised, and then ignored. After a decade of record government revenue, a record tax take, child protection has gone backwards in the Northern Territory. This government counts the spending of money as an achievement rather than the increased protection of children as the real, lasting achievement. Once again, we have another report demanding this government takes responsibility for the crisis it has created and tolerated for the last decade.
The latest pledge is $130m over five years will be spent to improve child protection services. This is supposed to be new money, not allocated from other health spending or other agencies. Yet, this is at best a guess because at no stage in formulating that figure did government sit down with Treasury and put a dollar figure to the response to each recommendation. Yes, we had the response, understandable in the circumstances, but in further inquiry to see whether we have a serious government - when it determined $130m as the amount which would create the impression something was happening, did government consult Treasury regarding the amount of money required? No. Let us come up with a biggish number to create that impression. Once again it is a political response to a real situation. Where is the analysis? Where is the capacity to make a full admission you came up with that figure on the basis of some sound and verifiable analysis which demonstrates you are serious?
It is a commendable increase, make no mistake, but increased spending has repeatedly failed to answer the question. The solution has been demanded in report after damning report. Spending more is not the answer because the government refuses to listen to the question; the question is about improving the processes, information collection, information sharing and hand over procedures and systems within the departments and between agencies. Will that happen itself? It will not. It will not happen if the minister is absent; it will not happen if there is a vacuum where a government should be; it will not happen if the executive arm of government is not requiring and demanding this and forcing the system to do what is required in response to the problem.
If you have the system in control and carry the political risk, because government refuses to carry the risk - it sets up expensive processes to throw money at and say it has processes, but the political risk is not being carried by the minister, it is carried within the system. The system becomes so large it looks after its own interests and is unable to care for the child. The hole where government was has to be filled, to accept that responsibility and authority which comes from the top, and make those things happen. It is a change of attitude, culture and direction and the acceptance of responsibility.
Sadly, as demonstrated by the 2007 Bath report and the 2010 Growing them strong, together report, increased spending, legislative changes and statutory bodies, although welcome, are not enough to improve the Territory’s child protection system. I doubt creating another committee with inadequate reporting time frames was what the board of inquiry had in mind when it released its recommendations. It is imperative the government - by that I mean the 12 members sitting opposite - take responsibility for the actions of their public servants and take responsibility for giving their public servants the resources and tools to carry out the recommendations of report after report after report. Get some skin in the game and have some real buy in.
Nothing has been done to address the lack of protection for workers within child protection programs exposing maladministration and gross failures of the existing internal processes. Indeed, the whistleblower process has been utterly swamped in its first year of operation. A total of 10 public interest disclosures were expected to be made in the 2009-10 financial year. Madam Speaker, 78 were received. That is an increase of 680%, yet, in the 2010-11 budget, the public interest commission was cut in half. I wonder why? Is it all about saving money? No, protect the government.
The government creates independent statutory bodies as part of its rhetoric in creating an open and accountable government. It hamstrings them by refusing to provide adequate resources so they can carry out their functions. It has done this to the Ombudsman, the Information Commissioner, the Children’s Commissioner and now the public interest commissioner.
Introducing mandatory reporting increased the reports of child abuse and neglect by 68%, but reports of abuse for 500 children were ignored. The government has dodged and weaved around giving a straight answer on why these 500 cases were closed without investigation. The answer is simple. The government created the legislation, put out the media release, patted itself on the back as having put in place measures to reduce child abuse, and then neglected to ensure the system was capable of handling the increased reporting. It is, for all intents and purposes, mere window dressing on a condemned building - a building which ought to be torn down and rebuilt from the ground up.
It introduced funding for new child protection systems, 23 new positions from memory, government was busy recruiting experienced child protection workers from the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Canada, yet has not managed to fill these positions. It will not fill them because prospective employees are turned away by the lack of support and protection for other child protection workers, like Susan Mansfield, who has been bullied and vilified by senior bureaucrats for doing her job protecting the interests of those most vulnerable, serving the public - people who endeavour to protect children rather than their political masters who call on family to take responsibility for the wellbeing of children, yet refuse to take up that same responsibility by ensuring departments are in order.
The board of inquiry was quite clear. The system is broken and needs fixing from the ground up. The government’s response, sadly, is just as clear. It is not government’s problem; it is not government’s fault. I disagree; the government is responsible. The hole needs to be filled where a government should be. Failure of the system resulting in harm to children is a fact, and there is still unwillingness for this government to accept that responsibility and promote the required change.
Madam Deputy Speaker, it is for that reason we bring this censure. We held back in the vain hope there would be some change. What we have seen since the release of that report leaves me, and the opposition, with no option but to censure this government for its failure to protect the most vulnerable in our community, our children.
Mr VATSKALIS (Child Protection): Madam Deputy Speaker, what can I say? What a performance. I refute everything the Leader of the Opposition said, and will continue to because he has no credibility at all. He said we went back 17 years to prove our case. No, we went back 17 years to show the CLP was never interested in child protection. The facts and figures speak for themselves. That was the workforce under the CLP, and under the Labor government. Starting with Hatton, finishing with Dunham, the most junior MLA, the number rotated around 100. Since coming to government there has been a significant increase in the number of people working in child protection.
How much was spent was not a lie. We say $7m was recorded in their budget books and their reports. Again, it hovers around $10m. The only serious increase we see is around 2003-04. I challenge the Leader of the Opposition: if you want to find out look at your own books. I am sure you have them in your office and you will see the real picture.
This government has addressed the issue of child protection seriously. This government has shone the light on the very uncomfortable issue of child protection over the past nine years. If you think child protection is only a government problem, some of us will be here in 10 years’ time still talking about it. It is a problem of our society; we have to work together to address it as a society. Government, and government departments, do not make good parents. It has to be addressed by society, and the government has a role to play.
The reality is the CLP turned a blind eye to children protection. How could it address child protection issues with a $7.8m budget a year? How could you address the child protection system when there was no one in the bush to address the issues with Aboriginal kids? There was no child protection after hours. In 1993, the CLP established two units, one full-time in the north, and one part-time in the south. That is their record. There was no reform of the welfare act. No children’s commission was established, and there was no Child Protection minister and, when the CLP had one, it was the most junior in their ranks. The only thing they did in 1994 was put on five additional people. In 2001, we found just over 100; today there are 500 people employed in the child protection system.
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr VATSKALIS: Contrary to what the opposition says, the Department of Health and Families has endeavoured to continuously improve services in the face of notifications, rising by 400% since 2001. Investigations rose from 744 to 3683 since 2000-01. Children on care and protection orders rose from 286 in 2001 to 696.
I will start at the beginning and highlight the reports and reforms this Labor government has commissioned and implemented, in contrast to the CLP. The Caring for Our Children five-year reform package of 2003 provided $53m over five years, which emphasised greater collaboration of government services and a review of legislation and FACS services. The key outcomes include: 119 extra staff to expand services, and an increase in the foster care parent payments by 4% in 2004 and 8% in 2007; establishment of Foster Care NT; increased funding for non-government organisations; introduction and implementation of new child protection legislation, the Care and Protection of Children Act in 2007; establishment of a family support service, and preventive services around parenting and education; and establishment of the Central Intake and Child Abuse Task Force services. The Northern Territory government, the Labor government, commissioned the inquiry into child sexual abuse in Aboriginal communities, the Little Children Are Sacred report, in 2006.
In August 2007, the Northern Territory government introduced a five-year $286m Closing the Gap package as the Northern Territory government response to the Little Children Are Sacred report. The plan extends beyond the 97 recommendations of the report to tackle legislative reform, governance, economic development and employment, remote area policing, health, and housing. $61m was allocated to Families and Children over five years. Thirty-nine of the recommendations relate to Northern Territory family services. Some of these involve action by more than one agency – it has to be a whole-of-government approach. We cannot fix everything. It is not the sole responsibility of Children’s Services; Housing, Education, and Health have to work together.
Of the recommendations made in this report, 22 are complete and 17 are ongoing. Key changes include the establishment of the Remote Aboriginal and Family Community Workers Program, which currently employs 25 workers and two team leaders in Alice Springs and Darwin. The program covers 17 Aboriginal communities including Borroloola, Daly River, Ntaria, Oenpelli, Galiwinku, Yuendumu, Papunya and others. The government expanded the sexual assault referral clinic to remote areas, and provided a mobile outreach service in partnership with the Australian government. The government established, in 50 remote communities, 20 safe places. This constitutes 12 women’s safe places and eight cooling-off places.
The Child Abuse Task Force is now a permanent team in Northern Territory Family and Children Services with a CAT North and CAT South team – full-time teams, not part-time. Aboriginal Community Resource Workers now work alongside CAT to initiate community development strategies on communities, and raise the level of safety for children in these communities.
We established employment screening to include working with children checks. We established the Ochre Card for a Working with Children Clearance Notice which will be mandatory from March 2011. We established a Children’s Commissioner in 2008, and the Child Health Review and Prevention Committee. None of these had been done under the CLP government. The Safe Kids, Strong Futures community education and training has been rolled out by the department in more than 15 remote Aboriginal communities. We established therapeutic services for victims in Darwin, Alice Springs, and Katherine.
In 2007, the Northern Territory government commissioned the high risk audit report by Dr Howard Bath. His report focused on the assessment of risk management strategies for high risk clients within the community service portfolio, including alcohol and other drugs, mental health, family and community services, and aged and disability services. Thirty recommendations were made and accepted for implementation by the government; 21 recommendations have been implemented, and nine are ongoing.
Key outcomes include: the introduction of structured decision-making, screening and priority tools to improve assessment and decision making; shared case management framework and practice guidelines implemented to include collaborative practice across departments; the development of secure care initiatives in Darwin and Alice Springs; establishment of internal quarterly review processes; establishment of two new emergency care offices in Darwin; the continued implementation of the Palmerston and Alice Springs Youth Action Plan; and, development of the primary responsibility program to support young people with antisocial behaviour and their families.
The Northern Territory government also commissioned the internal review of Central Intake in 2009. This review was conducted by external consultant, Jay Tolhurst. The purpose was to identify and find solutions for inefficiencies and risks within the intake and assessment process. The key outcomes include: the introduction of the intake event to streamline the recording of client information at intake; the introduction of a new phone system to improve management of calls; and increased staffing at Central Intake.
In November last year, the Northern Territory government also sought the Children’s Commissioner to review the Central Intake and response procedures of the department. An interim report was publicly released in February of this year, and I tabled the final report. This review expanded on the internal departmental review by providing a transparent, public review of the department’s intake processes. Included within the review was a critique of the department’s capacity to undertake timely investigations. The key outcomes include: training developed in relation to the assessment of cumulative harm; development of a planning framework; policy and procedures reviewed to ensure special consideration is given to the views of medical and allied personnel who work directly with children and families.
Susan Mansfield, the whistle-blower, brought some of this to our attention, and baby Lemos was the subject of an internal investigation and also an investigation by the commissioner. Following this investigation, a number of processes have been implemented to avoid this unfortunate and extremely sad incident. We must also accept this commenced when the court ordered the child be surrendered to a relative. Some people in the department could not accept it. It was a court order. What happened was unfortunate and tragic; however, the department is bound by court decisions.
There have been coronial inquests for tragic events, and I would be the first to say, as a parent, I feel very strongly when a child, even if I do not know them, suffers. The death of the young girl, I believe, was the most tragic of all. I still cannot believe that …
Mr Bohlin: In your ministerial care.
Mr VATSKALIS: Member for Drysdale, it would be a good idea to read the legislation and discover children are now under the protection of the CEO rather than the minister.
Mr Bohlin: It is a very convenient change.
Mr VATSKALIS: I find it fascinating that we had the Leader of the Opposition preach about child protection; it took him four weeks to reach that point. In the previous parliamentary session when we received the inquiry report, five questions were asked about child protection, and numerous other questions about what the opposition calls boat registration. For them, boat registration was higher on the agenda than child protection. You only have to look at the Hansard and you will find what was more important for the opposition.
The other thing I would not accept from the Leader of the Opposition is his public statement about repealing legislation to protect young Aboriginal girls. That is not only distressing, I find it offensive. You can say anything you like, member for Blain, but the statement stays - not only the one on television, the one written by Camden Smith, who wrote ‘the CLP may repeal sex laws’. Opposition Leader, Terry Mills, and I quote from Camden Smith’s article:
The Leader of the Opposition cannot make accusations about ministers not caring for children when he did nothing less than procure young Aboriginal girls for older men to have sex with. I wonder what the member for Macdonnell, who is very vocal about the rights of Aboriginal women, would say about that.
As a minister, I take responsibility for my words and actions. One person who appears not to be responsible for what he says is the Leader of the Opposition. I find it offensive, and I reject being preached to by the Leader of the Opposition about child protection when he made a despicable statement.
It took the CLP four weeks to censure the government. The CLP asked only five questions about the children’s inquiry and the report and numerous questions about boat registration. To the contrary, our government responded within hours - not weeks, not months, not years - hours. Within hours we announced $130m extra and yes, that has been considered by Treasury, Leader of the Opposition. Today, I made an announcement highlighting a first down payment of $9.5m and you will read in the newspaper tomorrow where it is going to be allocated.
At the start of next year we will outline where this money will go. Thirty per cent of the population in the Northern Territory is Indigenous. Never under the CLP government was there a specific Indigenous child protection branch or department - not even a team or a unit. We worked with AMSANT to establish that team and we are working with NTCOSS. We funded a position to identify specific issues, especially in Aboriginal communities. We are now calling on the NGOs to be active participants in child protection. We went interstate and overseas to recruit people, and I am happy to announce 41 job offers have been created and accepted, and new people from interstate will start arriving in the Territory in the beginning of January. Ten New Zealanders will be arriving on 8 December. People from Tasmania are coming to help us, and New South Wales offered assistance to put child protection processes in place.
Within hours this government established a committee which will oversee the implementation of the 134 core recommendations we have accepted. This committee will report, via me, to parliament every six months, not annually.
We now have a group, under the CEO of the Chief Minister’s department, to work together because it has to be a whole-of-government approach. We are working with the Commonwealth government and the police. We have police officers in Central Intake to screen the notifications and, in spite of what the Leader of the Opposition has said, the department has new professionals who are screening every notification which comes through, and they make fully informed decisions on how to proceed with each notification.
The CLP is not serious about child protection. Its policy comes from the previous member for Araluen, who had the welfare of children at heart; she fought for it. All she could get from the CLP was $9m; that was it, that would fix the problem. A problem which, despite the fact we put $135m a year into it, still suffers under the workload and pressure of the increased number of notifications and the demand for children to be in care.
The only thing the CLP wants is to highlight the whistle-blower legislation. The reality is, we support whistleblowers following the process, and I personally gave assurances to people in my department to provide evidence and give statements during the inquiry.
Currently, the CEO of my department is investigating the allegation of Ms Mansfield to ascertain if it is true, who is responsible, and if any person pressured Ms Mansfield; that is quite fair. I feel for her. I worked as a public servant. Unfortunately, I worked during the CLP days when if you dared say anything you would be out of a job. I recall a person high in the CLP made a statement to one of my relatives just before the 2001 election that if I did not withdraw my nomination for the seat of Casuarina I would never have a job in the Territory again. That was the CLP days, and that was the policy on whistle-blowers or people who did not favour that government
We have made a commitment; we know the system is not at fault, it is broken. I said I am not going to build the system; I am going to take it apart and put it back together. It has to be done. We have to do business differently. We cannot apply a system which was suitable for Great Britain in the 1960s and 1970s to the Northern Territory of 2010. The Northern Territory is not a mainstream European country; it is a multicultural community with 30% Indigenous population with their own needs, wants and problems.
We have given a commitment to do anything to ensure children are protected. I cannot say the same for the CLP. It is not about changing child protection - $9m is not going to do much. Looking back at 2005, we allocated $10m for treatment of petrol sniffing and the CLP said we should not spend the money on kids who are sniffing; that money should go to support business instead. During the recent Araluen by-election the member for Araluen was suggesting the ‘fall down before sundown’ policy - selling alcohol earlier in the day was appropriate for Alice Springs. That is the worst policy you could possibly come up with if you are serious about child protection.
Madam Speaker, we want quick response times; we want more timely investigations, with more support for our people in the public service and more support for our carers. We want to make sure kids feel safe wherever they live in the Territory; not only in Casuarina, Nightcliff or Fannie Bay, but also in Yuendumu, Yirrkala or Ngukurr. We are genuine about changing the child protection system - we will change it.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I rise today to censure the Henderson government for the systemic failure of child protection services in the Northern Territory over the past 10 years, and the failure of successive Cabinet ministers to protect the children of the Northern Territory. The key themes of this government’s report card in child protection include: failure; cover-ups; negligence; maladministration; repetition of mistakes; impotence; poor leadership or, indeed, no leadership; and scandal after scandal, which has resulted in the suffering, deprivation and death of Northern Territory children.
It is a matter of extreme importance that I bring to you today the history book of the Northern Territory government’s failure to provide effective child protection services to the Northern Territory. First, I will respond to some of the comments made by the Minister for Child Protection. He mentioned it took four weeks to censure the government on child protection. We do not want to make this a political issue, contrary to the government’s views. We believe child protection is above politics, so we gave you four weeks to provide us with a report card on exactly how you would implement the urgent recommendations of the latest inquiry into child protection.
After four weeks we thought it was reasonable to ask the minister what was happening. What have you been doing? The minister was overseas I gather, in China, so the report card was probably a little delayed; however, he responded from afar and gave us some interesting facts on apparently what the government had been doing. Apparently is the word, because you cannot believe what this government says it has done because there is very little evidence to suggest it has done anything to further the safety of children in the Northern Territory over the last 10 years.
The history of the Northern Territory government’s child protection systemic failures over the last 10 years has been around the failure to recognise problems despite all manner of reports, complaints and clear indicators the system was at breaking point; the failure to provide leadership where leadership was required; and the failure to implement recommendations from the numerous reports into the Northern Territory child protection system. During this time we have witnessed a child protection system in meltdown, a child protection system that has lacked all of the above plus planning, an ability to respond, an ability to assess and implement strategies, to provide proper reporting mechanisms, to provide risk management strategies for children; a system which has failed from top to bottom.
It is beyond my comprehension how the Minister for Child Protection can stand before us and defend the government’s self-made debacle by comparing its track record to the CLP’s track record over decades gone by. It is unbelievable how this government takes no responsibility whatsoever for the mess we call child protection in the Northern Territory.
It is very important the people of the Northern Territory know what has happened in the child protection arena over the last 10 years. As mentioned by the Leader of the Opposition, we have had six changes to the child protection ministerial portfolio since 2001 – Jane Aagaard, Marion Scrymgour, Delia Lawrie, then back to Marion Scrymgour, Malarndirri McCarthy, and now we have Kon Vatskalis. Six shifts sideways, six wishful attempts to make the problems go away. This has not been very successful, as we have all borne witness to.
From 2001 to 2002, we saw the release of the report written by Julian Pocock 2002, State Of Denial, The Neglect and Abuse of Indigenous Children in the Northern Territory. It included 13 recommendations. Julian Pocock said in that report:
That was in 2002. Pocock went on to say:
The Northern Territory government did not start again; it continued to go along its merry way. This, I believe, is when the rot really set in. The 13 recommendations ...
Mr KNIGHT: A point of order, Madam Speaker! For the sake of Hansard, I believe the member for Araluen is too close to the microphone.
Mrs LAMBLEY: Sorry. Thank you.
Mr KNIGHT: You are getting a bit of feedback through …
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: They are very sensitive, member for Araluen. You do not need to be close. You have the call.
Mrs LAMBLEY: I go on to talk about the 13 recommendations of this State of Denial report which, I believe, is very aptly named. It includes recommendations about the Aboriginal child placement principle, which is very familiar - we have read about it in the latest report in 2010. Other themes we see in the 2010 child protection report include: community education and awareness; the focus on child neglect and the concept of cumulative harm; the need to expand Indigenous family support services; expand the amount of funding available to child protection services; and the need for an Indigenous child welfare policy statement. These are all themes of the latest child protection report - nothing new to us when we reflect on what was said in 2002.
These issues were raised in successive reports from 2002 to the latest inquiry written by Bath, Bamblett and Rosebery - all very familiar, repeated numerous times in child protection reports throughout the last 10 years. Apparently, nothing was done to address those recommendations. Interestingly, Recommendation 12 of the State of Denial report was about long-term planning. Pocock obviously saw the need to instruct the Northern Territory government to do some long-term planning in child protection, which I thought was very interesting:
The Northern Territory government plainly had to be instructed at this point to provide long-term planning into child protection services, in particular to children living in remote Indigenous communities.
From December 2002 to July 2005, we saw the Scrymgour ministry, which has to be characterised by …
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! I know the member for Araluen is new to this House and we are giving her a little latitude, but she should be referring to members by electorate rather than their name.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, Leader of Government Business. Member for Araluen, it is a convention of the Chamber and standing orders …
Mrs LAMBLEY: I am reading from Hansard. Yes, okay, fine.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: … that we refer to other members by their electorate.
Mrs LAMBLEY: Thank you.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: You have the call, member for Araluen.
Mrs LAMBLEY: This was a ministry characterised by apathy, which tended to permeate from the top down. During this time, there was a Caring for Our Children reform agenda in 2003, but the problems were not going away. Between 2005 and 2007, we saw many reports, and many landmark and distinguished events happened in child protection.
In 2005, the six-week-old baby referred to in the Four Corners program, Dangerous Territory, died in a car travelling from South Australia to Alice Springs. This was one of the main cases referred to in that documentary. On 15 May 2006, ABC Lateline featured Dr Nanette Rogers, the Northern Territory prosecutor, who highlighted the problem of violence and sexual abuse of children in Northern Territory Aboriginal communities.
In June 2006, the Chief Minister, Clare Martin, announced an inquiry into child sexual abuse in remote Aboriginal communities under the Inquiries Act, and, of course, during that time, we had the release of the Little Children are Sacred report. Interestingly, with the Little Children are Sacred report, the intention of the Northern Territory government at the time was to not commit to any course of action for three months, but the Commonwealth government stepped in, and control over how that report was to be released and used was swept away from the Northern Territory government and the Northern Territory Emergency Response was put into play.
The Little Children are Sacred report came out with 97 recommendations, and many of the current themes we saw in the State of Denial report were once again featured in this report. Recommendations were around the whole-of-government approach in respect of child sexual abuse; the need for more child protection workers with enhanced training and support; more strategic planned investment in local community workforces; better community services; education and support services in the community; and developing youth services and centres to support youth living in remote areas. The Little Children are Sacred report is of national significance, but many comments were made in that report referring to the impotence and incompetence of the Northern Territory government, even harking back to 2006.
Are there simple fixes, I quote: ‘Of course not’. Our conservative estimate is it will take at least 15 years, equivalent to an Aboriginal generation, to make some inroads into the crisis, and then, hopefully, move on from there. The Northern Territory government is working on a 20-year action plan. When will it start? I have not heard of the Northern Territory government’s 20-year action plan on child protection; I would like to hear about it from the minister. How is it going, and when are we going to hear about it?
The Little Children are Sacred report of 2006 also said: ‘The government must lead’. There is an opportunity to start something which can have a hugely positive impact on the whole of Australia. However, while everyone has a responsibility for the protection of all children, the Northern Territory government must provide strong leadership on the issue of child sexual abuse, and this be expressed publicly as a determined commitment to place children’s interests at the forefront in all policy and decision-making, particularly where a matter impacts on the physical and emotional wellbeing of children.
The report card of how the Northern Territory government has implemented the recommendations relating to it in the child protection system and protecting the children of the Northern Territory - it is not clear, but because many of these recommendations featured in subsequent reports, we can only assume the Northern Territory government has not been successful in its obligation to implement the recommendations of the Little Children are Sacred report.
Moving on in time, we come to the 2007 Northern Territory Community Services High Risk Audit. This report featured 30 recommendations and was written by Howard Bath. The Ombudsman was denied a copy of this report and sought to gain a copy by issuing a summons on Dr Bath. The Northern Territory government refused to make this report public at the time, releasing only an executive summary. An adequate explanation was never given as to why this was so. We can only imagine this marks the era of the cover-up of child protection by this government; the culture of cover-up began. The Northern Territory Community Services High Risk Audit of 2007 highlighted the poor assessment and case management which was being provided for children notified as at risk to child protection authorities in the Northern Territory. It examined 60 files from across the Northern Territory, 20 from Darwin urban areas, 20 from the Darwin Top End remote area and 20 from Central Australia; it was a fair sample.
Of those 60 cases, 52% were receiving case management, 43% had an assessment of individual need, 33% had an individual support plan, and 7% had a risk assessment completed. The figures are very unimpressive. Fewer than 50% were adequately serviced and provided with proper care plans and assessments. The recommendations of this report, 30 in total, focused on: case management practices; risk assessment; case loads; case allocations; staff recruitment and retention; and the need to adhere to time frames through responding and reviewing cases. All very familiar; we have heard it all before. These recommendations were alluded to in the State of Denial report, and we have heard more about these things in the subsequent reports. This was the era of cover-ups – in July 2007 we saw poor Deborah Melville die. On 19 July 2007, minister Lawrie announced an independent audit of child protection clients, which is what I referred to.
In 2009, we had the Review Report of NT Families and Children Intake Service. There were 41 recommendations. More recommendations which sound very similar; it talked about the intake system, backlogs, problems with report writing, improvement to work systems, problems with staffing, manageable workloads, allocation of professional staff, the need for better risk assessments and the need for much improved screening and assessment tools - the same sort of stuff, just a different report. The point is the problems were not going away. In report after report we are getting the same recommendations, the same themes and the same problems which were not being addressed as time went on.
In 2009, three coronial investigations relating to the deaths of children known to family and children services, Forbes, Johnston and Melville, were undertaken. The reports of those coronial investigations included 17 recommendations. In relation to the Deborah Melville case:
The interesting thing about reading the Deborah Melville coronial investigation report for me was the contribution made by Jenny Scott, who spoke on behalf of the department. Jenny Scott showed a great deal of courage and probably, in hindsight, felt pressured into not being as forthcoming about her position as she was; however, I will refer to that in a minute. The systemic breaches of FACS in the Deborah Melville case were well documented. The report outlined the statutory obligations of the minister which were breached. There were five key breaches of the act by the minister in the Deborah Melville case:
1. the requirement to visit the children at least once every two months;
4. the requirement to renew the registration of the carer every 12 months; and
5. the requirement to be satisfied every 12 months that the children were receiving an adequate standard of care as specified in the act.
The report also says that section 52 of the Community Welfare Act provided that, when a child was placed in the care or guardianship of the minister, the minister shall, subject to any limitations the court imposes, have the same rights, powers, duties and obligations and liabilities as a parent of a child. That should include the obligation to provide for the child the necessities of life, including accommodation, maintenance, education and recreation.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Araluen, your time has expired. I remind members there is no extension of time in this debate.
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support this censure motion. I draw members’ attention to the Four Corners program on Monday, 8 November 2010. It was another sad day for the Northern Territory. It showed clearly to the nation, and the rest of the world, how the Northern Territory Labor government, and Aboriginal members on that side of the House, have let down, in the most shocking way, the children of the Northern Territory. The program showed how, according to respected experts such as Dr Howard Bath and Professor Muriel Bamblett, there is a tsunami of need for Aboriginal children in the Northern Territory, most particularly in Aboriginal communities.
This tsunami of need has been accompanied, according to Professor Bamblett, by a complete absence of any action even though there are atrocious, demonstrated cases of child harm, poverty and neglect. In the chillingly horrific cases presented by Four Corners to the world, it was clearly demonstrated authorities knew these children were at risk but failed to protect them. There was the example of a mother having children so she could claim more welfare benefits to pay for her drug habit, who then starved her children to death. There was the example of a young Aboriginal girl dying in horrific pain in the dirt in the yard outside her home as her foster mother spent days and nights in the Darwin casino. These deaths occurred in the most shocking circumstances, despite the knowledge of child protection workers.
Had the authorities, including senior bureaucrats and ministers, seriously engaged with their responsibilities, these children would still be alive today. Had the Aboriginal members on the opposite side of the House worried more about their elected responsibilities and their constituents and made themselves aware of such situations, perhaps we would not be facing this tsunami of need in such appalling and degrading circumstances.
The case of Deborah Melville, a 12-year-old Aboriginal child who died in severe pain in foster care, can only have one outcome; that is, to demonstrate a comprehensive and complete failure of the child protection system in the Northern Territory under this government.
The Northern Territory Ombudsman told us on the Four Corners program she is currently investigating 52 cases of neglect. It is acknowledged these are likely to be the tip of the iceberg. Many of these are likely to involve very serious high levels of abuse. Her verdict is likely to bring even more evidence to bear about the serious incompetence and arrogance of this government, and the disengagement of Aboriginal members on the opposite side of the House with regard to their responsibilities. The Ombudsman tells us, at this stage of her investigations, of the cases she has investigated to date, 80% of the responses by child protection authorities – and, presumably, the responsible minister - have been inadequate. Of these, there has been no response at all in 50% of cases. This is despite the fact …
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! Is the member reading from a report from the Ombudsman? I do not believe that report has been published?
Mr TOLLNER: I am referring to the Four Corners program, and what the Ombudsman has said, and what I think is likely to occur.
Dr Burns: Thank you, member for Fong Lim.
Mr TOLLNER: I have not been in contact with the Ombudsman, minister.
Of these, there has been no response at all in 50% of cases. This is despite the fact a normal, balanced person would have found, in all the cases, the affected children were in risk-prone, terrible, and harmful situations.
This is a situation of great tragedy and is continuing to occur. Is it really too much to expect those elected to positions of responsibility, or placed in positions of power, exercise those powers to protect those who should come first in our society, our children? Is it not the mark of any civilised society to protect the weak and defenceless and, above all else, our future, our children? How, in the Northern Territory, can we hold our heads proudly and say we are providing examples to others in such crucial areas of government? No civilised society can afford to let such maladministration continue.
How do the Chief Minister, ministers, and this government respond in this crisis? Their first point of call is the CLP. We see ministers hold up graphs and say this is all the fault of previous CLP administrations: ‘Look how little previous CLP administrations spent in the area of child protection, and look how much we, the Labor government, are now spending’ - to say spending is some test or measure for a system that works. As we constantly say on this side of the House, spending is not an outcome.
I have been in the Northern Territory - I was not born here - for well over two decades now, and I remember previous CLP administrations. At no time, in my recollection, do I recall circumstances being highlighted as they are now though the Little Children Are Sacred report, the Growing them strong, together report, through various media outlets and, most notably, recently on Four Corners.
After blaming the CLP, the Chief Minister blithely talked in broad and meaningless generalities about building the system from the bottom up, whatever that might mean. He blames it on crushing caseloads, which is code and spin for blaming the frontline public servants. These are the people trying to deal with complete lack of senior management and ministerial support and understanding of the problems. Why was not something done about the caseloads by the responsible minister? One thing is for sure, there has been no top down level of responsibility and accountability shown from the responsible minister, or any of the Aboriginal elected members on the other side of the House.
The Chief Minister is now trying to pass the buck to someone else. Who will this be? No one knows who is responsible and who is accountable. The normal conventions of a Westminster system of government do not apply under this government in the Northern Territory. No one is accountable, no one is responsible. This system will continue to fail, children will continue to suffer. To make matters worse, there is clear evidence of senior bureaucrats trying to intimidate those brave, courageous people who are standing alone against such arrogance, incompetence and cruelty.
There is evidence of social worker notifications to child protection workers being ignored, and the responsible department refusing to follow up reported cases. Now, those who have brought this information to the attention of responsible authorities are being threatened, intimated and harassed for trying to do the right thing. What has the Chief Minister done about that? Again, he answers with typical meaningless generalisations, but what, specifically, does he intend to do? Is the senior bureaucrat responsible for the threats and intimidation to be disciplined? Of course, the Chief Minister will not answer that.
Madam Deputy Speaker, it is shameful the Chief Minister does nothing about this social and humanitarian crisis which confronts his government other than to talk in vague generalities. It is shameful not one minister or senior bureaucrat has paid the price for the obvious incompetence and neglect shown to the children of the Northern Territory. This shows how arrogant and paralysed this government is to matters of real importance to the Northern Territory. Sadly, the spotlight is again focused on the Northern Territory under this Labor government for all of the wrong reasons.
Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Madam Deputy Speaker, I speak on this censure motion which, of course, I do not support. Much has been said this afternoon about the Four Corners program, which I saw with my family. My feelings when I watched it were, although I had heard details and debate on those cases in parliament and the media, Four Corners is to be congratulated for that program. In many ways it was very fair journalism which tried to portray a true and accurate picture of what had really happened in a number of cases in the Northern Territory. Who could not help but feel for those children, particularly the two cases in the Northern Territory, and the cases mentioned beyond. The message from the Four Corners program was about the inundation of child protection services generally across Australia. There was mention of stresses on child protection services elsewhere.
Unfortunately, what we are seeing in our society is an increase in frequency of child neglect and child abuse. This is becoming a hallmark of modern society in Australia with many complex factors at play. Some have been mentioned; the case in Central Australia of drug addiction, and neglect in the case of Deborah Melville. I agree with much of what the member for Fong Lim said about society looking after the most poor, disadvantaged and powerless. As a member of this government, as a parent, as someone who can participate in the debate and have an effect from inside government, I am committed to this. Our government has attempted to act in a positive and effective manner in relation to this problem.
However, there is no doubt there is a tsunami of need - notifications increasing by 400% since 2000-01; investigations rising from 784 to 3683 since 2000-01; and children on care and protection orders rising from 286 to 696 since 2001.
I hear what the opposition allege: government is trying to blame the former Country Liberal Party for what was not happening in child support and welfare for decades but things do not happen overnight. This tsunami has not happened overnight; it has been growing over decades.
When I first came to the Territory there was evidence of child abuse and child neglect. When we first came to the Territory we socialised with the nurses in the health clinic - they were our next door neighbours and very experienced nurses.
They advised they had issues and were relaying them through the system and responses were tardy. The issues of child neglect and child abuse have been around for a long time. It was around before this government came to power in 2001. I can assure the House this government has endeavoured to do the best it can and put as many resources as possible into this problem.
Four Corners was, in a journalistic sense, critically reviewing the processes and performance of government and the child support system. That is quite suitable; however, I was wondering, particularly in the case of Deborah Melville, where was her father in all this. The program said he was 15 years old when Deborah was born, and my recollection is Deborah died at the age of 12 or 13. He must be 27 years of age. Where was he? He got off pretty lightly in regard to what Four Corners examined. I felt angry; anger, I believe, many members of our community felt towards her father.
It is not for me to judge; however, let us look at this problem. The government has been saying this issue cannot be solved by government alone - it needs a community and family-based approach. I was left wondering, along with many other people, about the carer who was found not guilty by the Supreme Court. I do not know the facts presented to the court; through thick and thin we need to have faith in our court system. We also talk about justice and the right thing being done. There are many elements to this and, not just as a government, not just as a Chamber, we need to take a good hard look at ourselves as a society and a community in the Northern Territory and Australia today.
Those are my feelings. I agree with much of what the member for Fong Lim said. However, I do not believe there has been maladministration on the part of this government, quite the opposite. This government has endeavoured, through the Little Children are Sacred report, to address those issues. We were criticised for being tardy in our response to that; the federal government moved in as the member for Araluen said - Mal Brough came in with the intervention.
When that occurred Rex Wild, and possibly Pat Anderson, authors of the report, said they were upset the intervention as proposed by Mal Brough and the then federal government did not really address any of their 97 recommendations. That disturbed them. Politics is interlaced with the issue of child protection and, as much as possible, we should find a bipartisan position because if government was to change tomorrow you would be faced with the same problems. We need more cooperation over this issue instead of politicising it. It is a major issue and the root causes are deep and complex. Let us get away from the blame game.
Following the 2003 Caring for Our Children reform, a five year package providing $53m including 119 extra staff, increased foster care payments - we can do more, we have heard the message from the Bath report and foster carers. We established Foster Care NT and increased funding for NGOs; we made legislative changes to the Care and Protection of Children Act around that time; established family support services and preventative services around parenting and education; and established the Central Intake and Child Abuse Task Force services, a very important initiative - a partnership between this government and the federal Coalition government. We saw trained investigators having interface between police activities and child protection workers really attempting to find and prosecute those involved, particularly in child sexual abuse.
Following the Little Children are Sacred report, the then government, of which I was part, introduced a five-year $286m Closing the Gap package. That was across a range of areas, including education, health and, of course, child protection. That plan extended beyond the 97 recommendations within the report, and more than $60m was allocated to Families and Children over five years. A great deal was done at that time.
However, the problems remain. I have alluded to the fact there is a tsunami of need, and as a government we are endeavouring to meet that need, and have done everything asked by these inquiries to change the situation. In 2007, the Northern Territory government commissioned the risk audit by Howard Bath, and a number of outcomes flowed from that: introduced structured decision-making; screening and priority tools to improve assessment and decision-making - that is an important step forward; shared case management framework and practice guidelines; development of secure care initiatives; and internal quality control initiatives as well. Flowing from that and other issues, government had the Child Protection Commissioner review the Central Intake and response processes of the department.
There have also been discussions about the coronial findings. Howard Bath and the child protection inquiry have taken up many of the issues the coronial hearings put forward including: recognising what amounts to cumulative harm; policy and procedures review; client information system further enhanced; and there is further support through Budget 2010-11.
Central to this is the department’s placement policy. As my colleague, the member for Casuarina said in no uncertain terms, if the child placement policy is properly applied it puts the safety of the child above everything else. That is a very important policy position. Wherever possible we want to place Indigenous children with Indigenous families. Ultimately, the welfare of the child comes first and should be the bottom line of where children are placed. Both sides of politics would agree. An important message to get out to the community and those involved in the field is that we support that position.
In relation to the Board of Inquiry, my colleague outlined an additional $130m has been allocated over the next five years. He also indicated there will be regular reports to parliament and that we are in the process of recruiting staff from Australia, New Zealand and other overseas countries. He has established the Chief Executive Child Protection Task Force, and project officers from interstate will start engaging with Indigenous non-government organisations in the provision of out-of-home services. We have a senior officer from DEEWR and experienced professionals from Queensland to review systems and processes related to the backlog. Much has been done by this government in the nine years since coming to power. We are focused on this issue.
I take the opportunity to place on the record my respect for the former member for Araluen and the way she brought this issue square and centre during her time in parliament. She was a very articulate person, very passionate, and very genuine in debating these issues. Of all members of the opposition, the member for Araluen was front and centre in this debate. We not only owe it to the children the member for Fong Lim spoke of, in deference to the member for Araluen, as a parliament we need to come together and take a more bipartisan approach to this issue. We need to resolve our differences and do our best for the children.
There has been mention of former child protection ministers in this debate, including you, Madam Speaker, and the members for Karama, Arafura and Casuarina. Some of the observations have reflected badly on those making the accusations. Each and every one of those child protection ministers had the best interests of children at heart. Each one has children of their own, their own families, and extended families, and is well aware of the issues. Each one has tried, to the best of their ability with their heart and soul, to make a difference in this area. It does not do any good to reflect in the way some people have today.
I do not support the censure motion; it took the opposition four weeks to bring it on. I have given my thoughts to the Chamber. We need to work together in a more effective way to resolve this enormous problem within the Northern Territory. People want us to work together to solve this problem, not politicise it.
The Assembly divided:
Ayes 11 Noes 12
Mr Bohlin Mrs Aagaard
Mr Chandler Dr Burns
Mr Conlan Mr Gunner
Mr Elferink Mr Hampton
Mr Giles Mr Henderson
Mrs Lambley Mr Knight
Mr Mills Ms Lawrie
Ms Purick Mr McCarthy
Mr Styles Ms McCarthy
Mr Tollner Ms Scrymgour
Mr Westra van Holthe Mr Vatskalis
Ms Walker
Motion negatived.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table the Northern Territory Electoral Commission 2009-10 Annual Report.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table, in accordance with Remuneration Tribunal Determination paragraph 3.15, the member for Brennan’s travel report for travel to Canberra from 2 to 6 November 2010.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I table the Council of Territory Cooperation’s Third Progress Report.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I move that the report be printed.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the report, and that I have leave to continue my remarks at a later date.
Leave granted.
Debate adjourned.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Jobs in the Territory
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, for a Labor government the most important economic indicator is jobs, which is why I rise to present an important ministerial statement on jobs in the Northern Territory.
In the nine years since the election of a Labor government, job creation has been one of the most outstanding achievements. Government has progressively cut the unemployment rate from the 7.4% we inherited from the CLP to 3.1% today. Since coming to government, around 26 600 new jobs have been created. That is 26 600 Territory families with a source of income. An increase of 26 600 means government has expanded the Northern Territory’s workforce by a whopping 27%. To give this some context, roughly the equivalent of the population of our second-largest city, Palmerston, has found a new job in the Territory; the population of Palmerston has been added to our workforce.
2010 has been one of the most successful years in the history of the Northern Territory in relation to jobs and employment. We have enjoyed unemployment rates at record lows, well below national figures. This year, the Northern Territory has consistently recorded unemployment rates at the lowest level since records began, and we have remained at record low levels. It is currently 3.1%, and compares with the national figure of 5.2%.
At a time when unemployment in many areas of the world is well into double figures, for us to continually record a rate of around 3% has been a remarkable achievement. It is not just around the world, it is reported youth unemployment in western Sydney is around 25%; we compare extremely favourably. Importantly, our workforce participation is high. At 74.1% it is the highest in the nation. This is because people know if you want a job in the Northern Territory you can get one. We have fewer people not participating in the workforce than anywhere else in the country, and whilst we still have a long way to go, we are growing our Indigenous workforce. From 2008 to 2009, the number of Indigenous Territorians employed increased by 6%, an encouraging figure which this government is determined to build on through our A Working Future strategy.
2010 being such a successful year did not happen by accident. It would not have happened without my government’s dedicated and unwavering commitment to job creation. It would not have happened without the following factors: responsible financial management; eight budget surpluses in a row married with a willingness to enter into a deficit position when required to protect jobs; record infrastructure spending - $1.8bn this year compared with $364m in 2010, a five-fold increase; record tax cuts resulting in the lowest taxes for small business in the country; consistent support for our major industries including, but not limited to, mining, oil and gas and tourism; aggressive and targeted investment attraction strategies, including our innovative China and Japan Minerals Investment Attraction Strategy; comprehensive training and education programs; building our workforce of the future, home grown is best; and successful implementation and delivery of Commonwealth stimulus programs during the global financial crisis.
I will talk about how each of these targeted initiatives has helped achieve the best employment outcomes in the history of the Territory. Whilst Access Economics has recently predicted we will continue to have the strongest jobs growth in the country over the next five years, it will not happen just because it forecasts it. I will also talk about the challenges we face to keep creating jobs, and the plans my government is putting in place to ensure we take our record jobs creation legacy into a second decade.
Since coming to office in 2001, the Labor government has sought to systemically strengthen the labour market in anticipation of projected economic growth, and in response to the challenges which have occurred for the Territory during this government’s time in office, not the least being the global financial crisis.
From 2001 to 2009, the Northern Territory economy has grown at an annual average rate of 3.7%. Currently, business confidence is the highest in the nation, and you simply do not achieve such strong economic growth and business confidence without having established a strong reputation for sound financial management. Eight budget surpluses in a row have provided that the government is financially sound and responsible, but equally, our willingness to enter deficit positions when required to protect jobs is a component of our strong financial management and is as important. The alternative view argued in this parliament, that surpluses should be maintained regardless of the financial crisis, is both irresponsible and hypocritical. The alternative policy position would have cost Territorians jobs, and was advocated by people who were members of the last CLP government so infamous for their budget black holes.
The Labor government has slashed taxes and we now have the lowest taxes for small business in the country. Low tax encourages business to invest, to take on employees and help them forge through the financial crisis, as did our record infrastructure program.
Last year, over $1.5bn was spent by government on infrastructure - not just budgeted for, spent. That is $1.5bn to business to create jobs and help grow the Territory, which compares favourably to the $364m spent in 2001, and goes a long way to explain the Country Liberals’ 2001 unemployment rate of 7.4% compared to today’s figure of 3.1%. The infrastructure investment continues. This year government will spend $1.8bn on job creating infrastructure, and will continue working with the Commonwealth on the stimulus package which has saved jobs and will continue to save jobs.
As Graham Kemp of the Master Builders has made clear on many occasions, the construction industry in the Territory faced oblivion without the stimulus program. It would have been wiped out! In particular, the Building the Education Revolution program is providing vital infrastructure building programs at every school in the Territory. There are many policy differences between the ALP and the CLP across many areas; however, in the last year there has been no more important or stark difference than the alternative approach to the BER. The CLP position that this program should not have been undertaken would have cost hundreds, if not thousands, of Territorians their job. Whilst building better schools for our children is a core belief of Labor, the CLP is opposed. The CLP has repeatedly claimed that Territory schools and Territory businesses have been rorting the taxpayer through the BER. Despite being challenged for many months, the CLP has not been able to give one example. The challenge remains: name one school, or one Territory company that has rorted the taxpayer through the BER.
The Commonwealth stimulus program saved Territorians their jobs. It saved their houses and their futures. The CLP will forever be condemned for its opposition to it.
Another area of policy difference between the ALP and CLP is investment attraction strategies, particularly in China. Our minister for Resources has recently returned from one of his regular mineral investment attraction visits to China. On these trips he always takes a delegation of Territory companies eager for Chinese investment. This is important. Chinese hunger for resources means jobs for Territorians, but only if we are in front of them promoting the Territory. Our minister does a magnificent job in promoting the Territory as an investment option in China, and it is paying big dividends with many Chinese companies investing money in the Territory. It was noticeable during his recent trip the CLP issued a media release accusing him of ‘swanning around China’. They do not get it!
Strong financial management, low taxes, investment attraction, and high infrastructure spends have been the most important aspects of our jobs creation strategy, but there are many more initiatives. Since 2001, government has initiated employment strategies and programs to support employment and business growth over a sustained period of time. Government’s vision is Territorians have the opportunity and capacity to participate in the workforce and invest in the economic and social future of the Territory. Government is working to ensure the younger generations can predict a future for themselves in the Territory, and our local workforce, which includes those who have come to the Territory as skilled workers, is encouraged and able to stay.
Through our A Working Future strategy my government has an ongoing commitment to improving employment opportunities for Indigenous Territorians who are yet to access jobs. Similarly, we are committed to enhancing the position of Indigenous Territorians already engaged in the labour market to ensure a strong, skilled and available local workforce across the Territory, particularly in regions where unemployment is not at desirable levels. This government’s approach to employment, from 2002 to date includes: creating jobs; strengthening and building the apprentice market; building stronger relationships with industry in order to target employer needs; meeting the needs of regions; addressing Indigenous employment; growing the workforce; and increasing skilled migration.
A suite of Jobs Plans was released between 2003 and 2009. Their focus and aim was to create jobs to build our understanding of the labour market, and to provide all Territorians with a chance to participate more fully in the economy and gain employment. This foundation has put in place the steps for the Territory to grow and develop its skills base, maximise opportunities for all Territorians, and construct a highly-skilled and flexible workforce. The key themes of the suite of plans are focused on: creating jobs through skilling and training; staying informed, which translates to accurate relevant labour market research and analysis to provide a sound basis for decision-making by government to training providers and employers; building the apprentice and trainee market in identified occupation areas; strengthening partnerships by continuing to build our links and relationships with industry; focusing on regional and Indigenous economy development; and building better pathways, which is about options for school leavers and ensuring they are equipped to take up those options beyond school.
Throughout the life of the three Jobs Plans we built our research capacity to develop evidence-based policy to build the apprentice and trainee market and direct our training and workforce development efforts. Under the initial three jobs plans from 2003 to 2009, we have: provided over 2000 financial incentives to employers to take on apprentices and support their training; expanded the pre-employment program to get people job ready; created the Workwear/Workgear Bonus scheme with over 7490 apprentices and trainees accessing the bonus on their commencement; implemented the Build Skills NT program to upskill and re-skill workers in identified skill shortage areas; and released comprehensive Workforce NT reports in 2005 on the state of the Territory labour market to assist industry in developing its own strategies relating to employment and workforce planning and development.
In 2005, government set an ambitious target of 10 000 apprentice and trainee commencements to be achieved within four years. This target was achieved in 2008, and a new target was set in 2009. During the life of Jobs Plans, the Territory experienced the lowest unemployment rates ever recorded, economy growth rates had outstripped most other jurisdictions in Australia, and the number of Territory jobs increased from 96 700 in 2003 to 120 800 in 2009.
In early 2009, Access Economics forecast unemployment in the Territory to rise from 3.7% to 6% by 2010-11. I reiterate, the Territory’s current unemployment rate at October 2010 is sitting at 3.1%, with the highest being 4.2% in June 2009 during the global financial crisis, further demonstrating what this government has achieved despite the original forecast. The September quarter Access Economics employment growth forecast for 2010-11 in the Territory is 3.5% compared to Australia’s 3.1%, noting the five-year average annual employment growth for the Territory is 2.4%, the highest growth rate out of all jurisdictions in Australia.
We continue to be proactive in the Territory. Whilst low unemployment rates are enviable, we must also ensure we have the skilled workforce required to fill the forecast growth in jobs. Our focus is on having a plan for the future to move beyond the current labour market challenges so the Territory is well positioned during the national recovery. In achieving this, the Department of Business and Employment released a new employment strategy, Jobs NT 2010-12, in May this year. Jobs NT will position the Territory to address the challenges ahead, and will prepare workers and employers in the wider community to be best placed to contribute to and benefit from the opportunities associated with economic growth. Jobs NT provides an overarching policy framework, as well as a short-, medium- and long-term plan for growing, retaining and skilling the Territory workforce. Jobs NT aligns itself to and works towards the objectives and strategy targets of Territory 2030, A Working Future, Indigenous economic development and the Department of Education and Training strategic plan.
With government’s record commitment of $312m over the next three years, Jobs NT has something everyone can benefit from. This commitment aims to support a sustainable workforce, providing not only jobs and training, but also targeted help for business, employers and job seekers. This strategy outlines the comprehensive range of programs and initiatives within the action plan, highlighting inbuilt measures and targets which will deliver the vision of Jobs NT.
Retraining and retention of key skills in the workforce continues to be important, as well as supporting apprentice and trainee numbers to meet demand as new industries and major projects come on line in the context of the economic environment. Government is committed to supporting and developing our young people, particularly through the transition from school to work, which is underpinned by our own Vocational Education and Training in schools. Over $16m will be committed to support school students complete their VET studies and a new approach.
The new approach for VET in Schools provides an exciting direction for our young people in towns and communities to embark on training as part of their schooling, and to link them to jobs once they complete their education. Let me briefly outline some of the Department of Education and Training programs that will support improved employment outcomes in the Territory through more industry target responses: trade training centres in schools across the regions to allow students access to industry standard training facilities; the Get VET Get a Future campaign, which supports approximately 2600 school students a year to undertake VET qualifications; VET in the Middle, as part of the middle schools program to allow students to commence training in hospitality, engineering and manufacturing pathways; school-based enterprise grants to promote enterprise activities in schools; and youth business awards to engage students in the development of business plans.
With a commitment to business and young people, my government maintains a commitment to improving employment outcomes for Indigenous Territorians, those who are yet to access sustainable employment, and to enhancing the position of those already engaged in the labour market. A Working Future, which was introduced by this government in mid-2009, provides a framework for enterprise developments and jobs. A Working Future is a long-term approach to ensuring people living in remote towns and communities have access to employment and relevant training opportunities. Being able to participate in the economy is crucial. If Indigenous Territorians are to have greater control of their future, their families and communities, employment is fundamental to this outcome.
We are working across the industry sectors - government and the private sector - to develop and support responsive programs which can give Indigenous Territorians the best opportunity to achieve economic participation, whether that is a worker, small business operator, or other enterprise. Working-age Indigenous Territorians are a significant percentage of the potential labour force. As at 2009, over 19 500 were employed; however, a large proportion sits outside the labour market. It makes good business sense for government to support this significant population group to be job ready and skilled in response to current and projected employment opportunities.
Government has seen outcomes which demonstrate its initiatives are working. The ABS data released in June 2010 shows Northern Territory Indigenous employment trending upwards during the past two years, with an estimated increase of 1100 people from 2008 to 2009. This is an increase of 6% and compares favourably to the national growth for the same period. We are heading in the right direction. We continue to focus our efforts to increase Indigenous participation in the labour force through: the Jobs NT three-year action plan, which aims to deliver 3000 Indigenous Territorians commencing in employment through programs such as: job readiness programs at $7.8m; NT Public Service entry level Indigenous employment program - $1.3m; Indigenous Training for Employment Program to develop workforce strategies and support initiatives with direct employment outcomes - $4m; and, the Indigenous Business Development Program to assist in establishing Indigenous-owned business - $0.6m per annum.
Agencies are working cooperatively in the development of new employment-related initiatives such as the local jobs for local people framework, which includes a jobs pathway guarantee for successful Year 12 graduates from the Territory growth towns into the NTPS; a jobs compact to align training with local job opportunities and enterprise facilitation components to encourage business development; supporting Indigenous employment and Indigenous business and enterprise development through refinements in procurement policy; and supporting workforce planning and development with industry sectors, employers and shires to ensure pathways are in place for Indigenous Territorians to enter employment and advance their careers in the public and private sector.
As an employer, the Northern Territory government continues to progress the A Working Future strategy through the launch of the Indigenous Employment and Career Development Strategy in 2010. This strategy includes a 10% Indigenous employment target to be achieved by 2012 for the sector. Currently, the level of Indigenous employment is 8%; this compares to 4.6% in 2002. We are heading in the right direction. We are also supporting the roll-out of the Australian Employment Covenant in the Territory and I have committed up to 200 jobs in the NTPS under this initiative. Two new programs have been developed and are expected to deliver sustained employment outcomes for Indigenous Territorians to support this commitment.
The Strategic Indigenous Housing Infrastructure Program continues to deliver employment for locally employed Indigenous people and is well on track to exceed its 20% employment target. Indigenous employment for SIHIP is currently tracking around 30%, and we are working to ensure as people come off the SIHIP project they are transitioned into ongoing employment opportunities. Indigenous employment remains a priority for this government and we are working strategically and in partnership with the private sector to halve the gap in employment outcomes by 2018. The effort is constant and expanding and we are committed to meeting the challenge. With small to medium enterprises making up more than 90% of the Territory’s active trading businesses, supporting growing business is crucial to developing the Territory. It means more jobs and a stronger economy. The Territory government sees this as the way forward and has put in place a number of initiatives.
As part of our commitment to develop industry sectors, the Territory government is introducing a Jobs NT workforce planning program across the Territory for small to medium businesses which will achieve a workforce planning and development strategy which allows businesses to place themselves in a better position to address the current and projected competitive labour market needs. The new Jobs NT workforce planning program allows small to medium businesses to engage suitably qualified consultants to build a plan for their future workforce which leads to increased productivity, being better prepared to take up the opportunities major projects such as INPEX may provide, reduce the impacts of skills shortages and increase Indigenous employment.
The future workforce need of industry is supported through delivering workforce planning and development projects in identified industry sectors such as transport and logistics, child care, and oil and gas. This is about government supporting industry to develop industry-wide workforce plans which include skills needs and current and future occupations shortages, and identify options to overcome these. My government’s priority primary focus in addressing skills shortages will always be on training and upskilling local workers. However, we recognise with the Northern Territory’s unemployment rate being one of the lowest in the country and its participation rate higher than other states and territories, attracting skilled workers from within Australia and overseas will be necessary.
We will sell the message ‘if you want a job, come to the Territory’. It is vital if we are to build the Territory skills base to support our economic development and deliver services throughout the Territory. In 2008, the government established Workforce Growth NT which combined all elements of the Territory government’s national and international skilled worker attraction programs, and achieved a greater coordination of effort. The Jobs in the NT Campaign targets skilled workers through marketing and job shows nationally and internationally, and promotes the Territory as a place to live and work. The Territory Worker Database provides interstate workers an online opportunity to profile their qualifications and skills to Territory employers. It also allows employers to profile their job opportunities. We will continue to market the Territory to attract people whose skills are always in demand. We need doctors, dentists, nurses, social workers, welfare workers, and teachers to work in remote regional communities; and tradespeople in the electrical, plumbing, air-conditioning and refrigeration, and carpentry fields. Professionals in the hospitality industry, and building and certification fields are the major focus of our attraction campaigns. There is a shortage Australia-wide of many of these skills, and we need to continue profiling employment opportunities in the Territory to attract the skilled workers required by industry.
We are committed to continuing our partnership approach with the Territory’s private sector to match labour and skills developments and supply and demand to meet employers’ needs, particularly in the regions. This systematic approach has ensured job shows and skilled worker attraction campaigns initiated by government have been strongly supported by industry. For example, in March this year the Northern Territory was a major sponsor of the Reinvent Your Career job show in Brisbane, and our team, Territory Approach, included representatives from industry and business.
The Jobs in the NT Campaign 2011 was developed in partnership with industry and released earlier this year. The campaign includes innovative methods of advertising, including sponsoring national conferences in Darwin and Alice Springs. Underpinning national and international activity is the need to continue supporting local business through advice on business and skilled migration, helping to understand workforce developments, and the Australian government’s skilled migration programs.
Recent ABS reports show migration from overseas is making a significant contribution to growth in the Territory’s population. According to the most recent figures published by the Australian government, in 2008-09 skilled migration made up 72.5% of the Territory’s international migration intake. It is immensely important for us to continue to strategically promote the Territory as a place to live and work in those areas of migration which deliver positive outcomes.
The partnership between the Department of Business and Employment and CDU in delivering seminars and information sessions in key international student markets is one example of a targeted approach. Under the partnership between government and the university, intending students are encouraged to concentrate their studies in fields where occupations are also in demand in the Northern Territory. This means many of the students, on completing their Australian qualifications, make ideal skilled migrants to the Territory.
In 2011, international student markets to be targeted through these joint activities will include Indonesia, India, the Philippines and China. Many Territory employers are using, or have used, the 457 temporary work visas as a mechanism to address general skills shortages. Territory employers are now using a range of alternative visa mechanisms to gain access to the skilled workers they need. The Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme is providing one such conduit. This scheme, specially designed to facilitate regional employers’ access to suitably qualified and skilled workers, is becoming increasingly popular. The Department of Business and Employment is the Northern Territory’s regional certifying body for this scheme. In this role, as well as certifying Territory employer nominations, it provides information and support services to public and private sector employers to aid their understanding of the sponsorship process and their responsibilities.
In 2009-10, the department certified 516 employer nominations covering 1253 skilled workers and their families. This is more than double the number certified in 2007-08, and current nomination trends suggest this number will be exceeded in the current financial year.
Whilst there are changing trends in the way Territory employers are using migration for skilled workers, the policy changes have also required the Territory government to reassess its future efforts in attracting international migrants. There is now growing evidence the economic difficulties in some European countries are resulting in an increased interest in Australia as a migration destination. We, too, are seeing a greater interest in migration to the Northern Territory from traditional markets such as the United Kingdom and Ireland.
Seeking to capitalise on this, the Territory government, in partnership with industry, participated in a Skills Australia Needs migration exhibition coordinated by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship at Australia House in London in September 2010. This expo was invitation only, and attracted 1276 hand-picked professionals and tradespeople. Once again, the Territory’s presence at this international expo was strengthened by the support of representatives from the construction industry and the Chamber of Commerce. While we need to respond to international migration trends, the government will continue to work closely with our Territory multicultural communities in all our migration activities. The international networks of our communities will continue to be an extremely valuable source in attracting and retaining business migrants and skilled workers. Developing and maintaining these linkages has the potential to deliver quality students and migrants who have strong support networks in the Territory.
In conclusion, the Territory government will continue to focus on developing robust strategies to link all Territorians with employment opportunities across the Territory. My government is making every effort to retain the skilled people we already have and to connect workers with employers who need their skills. In facing the challenges of the changing economic environment, it is important not to lose focus on connecting, retaining and growing a skilled workforce in the Territory. Our recent Treasury forecast highlights Territory economic growth is projected to grow strongly to 3.6% in 2010-11. The Access Economics Business Outlook September 2010 also provides an optimistic projection of the future of the Northern Territory economy, with forecast figures of 4.8% of economic growth for 2010-11.
It is anticipated economic growth forecast will improve when a final investment decision on the future of INPEX is made. Territory businesses are experiencing the strongest trading conditions in the nation, and business confidence remains high. The Territory retains its position at the top with the highest business confidence of all jurisdictions. The Northern Territory government recorded the highest approval rating from small- and medium-size business compared with other Australian jurisdictions. Small and medium businesses believe the Northern Territory government was more supportive of small business and recognised its needs.
My government has an enviable jobs creation record. 2010 has been a high-water mark in the history of the Territory in relation to employment. It is an achievement all Territorians should be proud of, and is an achievement my government is determined to build on. We will continue to support jobs through low taxes, high infrastructure spends, and investment attraction. We will continue to build our workforce for the future through training and education.
As I mentioned to the Prime Minister last week, the Top End is the economic future of Australia and Darwin is the heart. We face enormous opportunities and challenges. My government has the runs on the board and is determined to continue to work together as a united vibrant government to deliver jobs and opportunities for all Territorians.
Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of the electorate officers from the electorates of Blain and Brennan. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I welcome the Chief Minister’s statement. There is no more important indicator as to the capacity, strength and vitality of a community and economy than to be able to produce jobs. To quote a phrase Peter Costello used in a conversation I had with him in 2004: ‘The best welfare program that could be devised is a real job’. I agree with that.
I support the thrust of this report and the recognition of how important it is to have a real job. That is a very valuable indicator. However, there are certain issues I am required to draw attention to which have not been focused upon in the Chief Minister’s statement to any substantive degree. They are important issues which require thoughtful responses rather than, in the words of the member for Fong Lim, ‘broad generalities’.
The first one is the recognition across the Northern Territory that there is no overarching strategic plan for land use which, as a result, produces lack of confidence for those who are going to make the decisions as to our economic development. To put in place an overarching strategic plan through making decisions is a core business of a government. Supply and demand is the core element that allows a marketplace to operate, and the core business of a territory or state government is to balance supply and demand, specifically in the issue of land release.
If we want to create meaningful employment, we need release of land in a timely manner. Government will react in any reply coming after this, saying: ‘Yes, we have fast-tracked’. They like to use words such as that. However, in the fast-tracking, which is a reaction to acting under pressure in the absence of a strategic plan, we have problems. Those problems would be best addressed now. Government should turn its attention to a properly considered strategic plan so after we have gone there will be a program of what is possible. That needs to be done because, with the global economic centre of gravity moving closer to our region, we need to be prepared.
Perhaps I am cynical; the Labor administration points to this, that, and the other regarding economic activity within the region as being something it is responsible for creating, and acknowledges its endeavours into China have caused all the good things they talk about regarding jobs created, confidence, etcetera, as though they are the centre of the universe. This phenomenon has had its impact upon all the resource-rich states. There are forces at play that are not wholly your creation, that being the resources boom. We are fortunate, like Western Australia and Queensland, to be resource rich. That is one of the factors.
The Australian Labor Party, when coming into office in 2001, did not create resources in the Northern Territory. Recognise now that we have the resources and there are global trends in play which give us the opportunity. The specific policies which should be put in place to allow our resource-rich status to be properly utilised and capitalised on goes back to the need for a strategic plan so we have the core business of a port, the use of land and space in the marketplace for those on modest incomes to get ourselves ready. Those things should occupy the mind of government, and we have not seen evidence of that.
We have the highest rents across the country; we have ABS figures indicating 700 more people left than arrived in the last two collection periods. The ABS identifies the reason for departure from the Northern Territory - the deficit of 700 - is directly attributable to the cost of living. I am hearing this is the worst situation ever with regard to home affordability, and the worst pressure on families is being experienced at the moment. People, particularly in Winnellie, are troubled. They are concerned about a number of things, largely around the capacity to recruit and retain workers. Right now they have a problem - because of the cost of living, workers are finding it very difficult to stay in the market.
Because we do not have a strategic plan, there is no sense of direction in what comes next in the marketplace, and increasing the capacity of infrastructure, particularly utilities, they will be under the pump when the INPEX project is finally confirmed. As with ConocoPhillips, it will draw workers to that supply of work, and they move away from the small businesses in Winnellie, Katherine and Alice Springs. They will be drawn to that place and it changes the marketplace. That type of preparation needs to be put in place now by being far more aggressive with the provision of places for people on modest incomes to live so there is security in the labour force.
I am sure government is aware of this, and it is a shame we are getting closer and closer to major projects being confirmed and we have the impending problem of holding onto workers, worrying about what comes next. It is hard enough to hold a worker because of the cost of living in the Northern Territory, but if they get an increased wage by going to work at ConocoPhillips or INPEX, how will they be replaced? That is a real issue. I hope members on the opposite side who respond will give us some detail of the thinking around that.
Another issue which needs to be well addressed and understood is the port. If high employment is the indicator of the strength of an economy then the key piece of infrastructure is a port linked by rail and fed by road networks to allow that which is produced, particularly in a resource rich phase, to be exported. There are big concerns about the port and there needs to be recognition of the existing problem and a frank admission of the impediments the port has to our capacity to respond. What is going to happen? The marine supply base has been mentioned for a long time and is still not in place. Some of the businesses I speak to in the East Arm area say that is well and good but it should already be there. We should have our mind on something else now rather than a marine supply base which made sense five years ago and should have been in place three or four years ago. We need to extend our capacity at the port so there can be a separation between the different operations on the port and a clear plan put in place so everything that happens is recognition of the problem and a response to the problem.
Turning to Indigenous employment - I read a recent report on the employment covenant. It is very interesting that when the employment contract covenant was launched at Kirribilli House, the then Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, announced the federal government would invest $20m in it and the Australian Indigenous Education Foundation would provide scholarships for marginalised Indigenous kids. Andrew Forrest put his weight and significant resources behind it, and Rupert Murdoch provided support along with Noel Pearson and a whole range of people. There is huge support for Indigenous employment, and the bold pledge of 20 000 jobs guaranteed under this pact was soundly supported and heartening to see. However, after several years we do not have 20 000 jobs. The jobs are there but have not been filled. We have 2800 jobs.
This, in my view, highlights a problem. We have the desire and resources of the corporate world and major employers to employ Indigenous kids and the pact to guarantee 20 000 is solid. That is a good thing. How is it we only have 2800 places filled and have no data on the retention rates? The answer has to be the quality of employment being provided to well-educated and job-ready Indigenous kids. We need to sharpen our focus on what is happening in education away from that which is broad and speaking in general terms to something far more specific.
There is a demand but not a supply of Indigenous kids who are well-educated and job-ready. On the weekend I spoke to an experienced teacher who has worked in Indigenous communities for a number of years who said yes, there are kids who have graduated from Year 12 and are keen to work but need assistance to get ready for work. Getting to Year 12 is not the magical threshold where you will pass and instantly get a job. There is still work to be done, and the worst thing would be to go through the exercise with the expectation and hope something magical will occur when you pass Year 12, that you will get a job. Real life is far from that. For many of these people the worst thing would be to have that expectation destroyed. We need some response. How many go on to meaningful sustained employment?
Of the 2800 in employment across the country in this pact, we do not have retention figures. That is the real challenge around what is happening in the education space, how we could improve literacy and numeracy and add to those basic skills some work-ready capacity, apprenticeships, and then real employment. The work the Larrakia Development Corporation has embarked upon – I inspected the facilities recently - is encouraging. I will watch that with great interest, and I am sure government will provide support for those projects.
I would like to go back to the effect the cost of living has on an economy. You have to find places in the housing market for our key workers and those on modest incomes. A KPMG report, Spotlight on Australia’s Capital Cities, has identified Darwin has the second-lowest ranking against COAG criteria. The key issue is the space in our capital city, which is replicated across the Territory. The same applies in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine and Palmerston - it is difficult for someone on a modest income to find somewhere to live. On a personal note, my son is returning home because of that. How many choose not to make a commitment to the Territory because of that? We know 700 have left. This has a significant economic and social impact.
I urge the Labor government to be very careful when it comes to this issue. Suggesting Weddell is the solution is nave. Weddell is over there and far off. Right under our nose is the requirement and the more difficult challenge to find in the market for those on modest incomes.
Bankwest puts out the housing affordability for key workers index. The Northern Territory, Darwin specifically, is very low, and in 2009 the report said although Sydney was more expensive it had improved. However, it said Darwin had deteriorated significantly in its capacity to provide a place for key workers. We have reached a point where there is nowhere for a key worker - a nurse, a teacher - let alone those to service whatever comes with INPEX. We need childcare workers. If there is no space in the marketplace we will have a very different community. We have to move into that space now.
It has been a long time, and I remember the debates when the problem was denied and the assertion the opposition - a very small opposition at the time - was going to wreck the marketplace by requiring government to release land. Now, because of the delayed reaction from government, we will have economic and social dislocation into the future. That issue needs to be addressed specifically.
Weddell does not answer the question. Weddell is an answer to a different question. The place for key workers here and now requires urban redesign and some difficult decision-making. What is happening at Parap may be a step in the right direction. We are yet to see details on that. However, that is the place we need to go.
Madam Speaker, I trust the comments made will be of some value to government. I hope for detailed responses to this, particularly around the cost of living, the effect that has on the provision of jobs, and the need for a long-term strategic plan which will require some careful analysis and decision-making. The modest resources of opposition have provided a significant document for discussion, and we look forward to government’s thoughtful consideration. I accept the banter which may flow across the Chamber for political game playing; however, there is some good material, the purpose of which is to stimulate debate and discussion and, ultimately, decision-making. Much work needs to be done on the need for the port and basic infrastructure feeding into the port.
Concerns from business in the region and beyond are very real, such as what will happen to small businesses having difficulty today holding onto staff when there is increased demand by INPEX and ConocoPhillips. How are they going to cope? We need a response. The response has to provide a space in the market to have the cost of rent reduced by having other options.
There are issues around the employment covenant. We need to work harder and smarter with education because the supply of jobs is there. There are 20 000 guaranteed. Not even 3000 have taken up positions. Clearly, we need to provide to those ready to offer employment a far better supply of skilled, job-ready, young Indigenous kids. There is a challenge there. We are fortunate to have the supply of jobs, but we do not have the supply to meet that demand.
Last, the reference to China and the media release about the minister swanning around - it should not be construed as you should not go to China. The opposition recognises it is one of the things government does, and is pleased government is doing that work in China and, it appears, is doing a good job. The comments were around child protection, a minister needing to respond to certain matters, and being in a different place with competing portfolio responsibilities. It was not the fact he was in China; it was because there were pressing issues which needed addressing in child protection. That is where the comments were coming from.
I will finish with Asian Relations and Trade. The economic activity within the region is largely centred in China. We have been buffered because of the demand for resources by China; we are closer to China than any other state or territory and have benefited from that. The nation has been buffered against the global financial crisis. Opportunities come knocking on the door and walk straight through; it is fantastic.
The other matters I have raised are the real work. There will be much movement in the region, which is why continued focus on matters around Asian Relations and Trade, having a well considered and whole-of-government coordinated approach and linking all components of government together would put the Territory back in the position it once had. We are benefiting at the moment because of the demands within the region, but there is work to be done in linking all the components of government together to have a well-coordinated approach.
Now is the time to make hay while the sun is shining. If things change in the region, if China re-values its currency, if the demand drops slightly, if the dollar goes through the roof even more and the demand is modified - we need to be working now. It is not always going to be like this and the Labor government has had opportunities with GST coming its way, with the strength of the Australian economy being resource rich. The government is fortunate, but the real business of government is what I have referred to and which needs a response.
Madam Speaker, with those words, I look forward to a response from government members on the issues raised.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I congratulate the Chief Minister for his Jobs in the Territory ministerial statement today, because it underpins the strength of an economy to ensure you have people who are productive, people in jobs, and you benefit with enhanced social outcomes as well.
Job creation has been one of our government’s greatest achievements. When you go from an unemployment rate in the high sevens down to the high two percentage points in just under a decade, it shows a significant amount of effort is paying dividends for Territorians in protecting the jobs Territorians have and, all importantly, creating new jobs. Seeing 26 000 jobs created since August 2001 did not happen by accident. It happened as a direct result of our government creating a Jobs Plan. Previously, no plan had existed. We have ramped up each Jobs Plan through successive budget cycles, focusing on skills attraction, skills retention, and skilling up our own, with significant investment in education and training to skill up our own.
The Leader of the Opposition raised the effort of Twiggy and others, and government is very supportive of the private sector. This government is putting its effort into public sector training and initiatives. That is a real example of industry working with traditional owners. If you want to look at getting skilled job-ready entrants into the workforce, look closely at the trade training centre INPEX has invested in with the Larrakia Development Corporation. A good example of how successfully, with the support of industry, they are preparing people for opportunities coming forward.
An unemployment rate of 3.1% has more Territorians participating in our labour market than anywhere else in Australia. The Territory enjoys the highest participation rate in the country at 74.1%. Everyone knows if you want a job come to the Territory. That is what Manpower, an employment agency in Queensland, said last year. That holds true through this year if you look at our unemployment and job participation rates. It has been interesting to see the number of subcontractors’ utes around the streets of Darwin and Palmerston with interstate number plates. They have come to the Territory to get a job; our economic activity is vibrant in our large regional centres of Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs. Nhulunbuy is underpinned by the resource giant there.
The job numbers are all the more remarkable given we were able to create additional jobs post the global financial crisis. The impact of the global financial crisis was moving through the private sector and governments had to respond decisively, deliberately and swiftly. We took the initiative in Budget 2009-10 to deliver a record infrastructure spend designed not only to protect jobs in that important sector, but to continue to grow the jobs so our construction sector was as best placed as it could be ahead of major projects on the horizon such as INPEX and an expansion of the existing DLNG by ConocoPhillips. There is opportunity for an additional train out there.
We have seen the direct levers moved by government through its budget allocations, supported by the Chamber of Commerce and the peak construction body, the Master Builders Association. They recognise the critical importance of those two year-on-year record infrastructure commitments in the 2009-10 financial year. We saw actual expenditure at $1.5bn, and with the 2010-11 financial year a commitment of a $1.8bn infrastructure spend.
In stark contrast to those industry organisations, the CLP has clearly stated it would not have invested in the infrastructure stimulus. It would have kept a lid on spending, created savings as a result and stayed in surplus land. That has been articulated by the CLP; however, it stands alone in that. Even the International Monetary Fund has said to governments, post the global financial crisis: ‘Spend swiftly and stimulate your sectors’. We have seen the results of that. The gross state product figures announced last week for 2009-10 show a 1.3% economic growth through that tough financial year when we had predicted a moderate 0.4% growth in our budget predictions. Underpinning the growth was the public spend. We saw a 50%-plus jump in public spend to support what washes through to about a 3% GSP growth propped up by the public spend.
It is a clear result of our fiscal strategy that the stimulus is now showing through in the Territory’s figures where we are bucking national trends. We are saving and creating jobs. The Leader of the Opposition thinks this government is not doing anything but we are directly making the tough, brave and bold decisions to stimulate, create jobs and provide opportunities to keep unemployment at record low levels and keep labour participation high. It is not surprising in that environment we have the highest business confidence in the nation.
In the 2009 year alone we recorded the nation’s highest retail trade, the highest job growth, highest building approvals and the lowest unemployment of all states and territories. Our gross state product data for the 2009-10 financial year shows without the significant lift in the public spend the Territory economy would have been at risk of contraction. Contraction, in real terms, means high unemployment and a high jobless rate. We moved decisively and boldly against the opposition coming from the CLP and have seen the merits of that action going through in the GSP data recently released.
Our strong financial management has kept Territorians in jobs and, importantly, has created new jobs. In stark contrast, what do we see around the world? The United States and Europe are grappling with unemployment levels at 10%; the United Kingdom at 7.8%; Germany at 7.1%; and Spain at a high 20%. Across Australia, compare the unemployment rate of 3.1% to the 8.6% in far north Queensland or, indeed, the 7.7% in central western Sydney. We are punching above our weight, bucking national trends and delivering jobs, a critical economic indicator.
We all know a job not only provides an income, it provides a sense of community, belonging and achievement, and we are contributing to the future prosperity of the Territory by providing jobs for Territorians. A strong economy and a jobless market do not happen by accident. They are a direct result of the responsible economic and fiscal management this government has embarked upon since 2001.
We have seen eight budget surpluses in a row. We have the lowest taxes for small business in the country. We have training programs which have supported well over 10 000 new apprenticeships and traineeships. When we first went out publicly with our commitment to create 10 000 new traineeships and apprenticeships, we were hailed down by the CLP opposition; told we would never achieve it. We achieved it ahead of time and are going in for another 10 000 and supporting it through training initiatives like the Workwear/Workgear package which supports about 7500 apprentices and trainees to take up a trade. We have continued that record infrastructure expenditure creating the jobs for industry.
Small business is our biggest employer across the Territory, which is why we have maintained the lowest taxes for small businesses in the nation, creating an environment for small business to hire additional workers. Since coming to government we have slashed payroll tax and cut red tape. We estimate this has saved Territory businesses $291m. The Territory has a broad and diverse economic base. Mining is a significant driver to our economy and the largest industry contributor to our gross state product. Data released last week highlights the mining industry made up 25% of the 2009-10 GSP, adding some $4.2bn to the economy. We have over 3000 Territorians directly employed in the mining sector and thousands in supporting businesses.
We may be a resource-rich state but it is through the inaction or, indeed, action of government that you achieve the opportunities. When we came to government a backlog of 792 exploration applications were waiting to be processed because the ideology of the CLP said it would not give in to native title which exists across vast areas of the Territory. We have turned that around with strategies to attract international investment in mining ventures in the Territory and it is paying off.
Exploration expenditure in the Territory reached a record of $149.4m last financial year. Whilst the Leader of the Opposition recognised our close relationship with China and the good work being done by our Resources minister, the member for Casuarina, in China, he failed to recognise the attraction strategy we have embarked on with Japan, not only in the critically important area of LNG, also the opportunities presenting themselves in rare earth exploration. We have some very exciting exploration occurring in the Territory.
The role of government has been, through successive ministers and the Chief Minister, to spruik the opportunities of mining investment in the Territory, and we do not just go with rhetoric. We go with well-resourced and researched brochures which provide direct detail to potential investors in China and Japan around companies open for investment in the Northern Territory detailing the specific mining exploration occurring. The feedback from China and Japan is very strong. They say we are the most aggressive of all state jurisdictions in looking for investment opportunities and give the most information. That is why we have seen a dramatic increase in investment in exploration expenditure, hitting a record $149.4m last financial year. Talk to the embassy staff of China and Japan and they say we are by far the most consistent and aggressive in approaching exploration opportunities and investment in the Territory.
In the construction sector, a lifeblood of our economy, we see more than 13 000 Territorians in work. These people have benefited from our direct initiatives to invest in infrastructure. We have a strong pipeline of infrastructure spending which has allowed companies to invest in growing their business, growing jobs, and growing their trainees and apprentices. The construction and engineering sector has also benefited from the all-important national stimulus plan. Similarly, the retail sector, a critical sector in the Territory, has benefited from the stimulus spending with more than 18 000 Territorians employed across our retail sector.
Our tourism and hospitality sector is also a strong employer, supporting about 18 000 jobs. Some great work has been done by successive Tourism ministers and the tourism industry to respond to changing markets and market opportunities, and to go after additional flight and capacity opportunities for the Territory.
The Defence industry employs over 6000 Territorians, and we recognise the value of the Defence spend in the Territory. That is why we are developing a parcel of land near Robertson Barracks to enable Defence-related businesses to co-locate at the Defence Support Hub. We are also working very closely with Defence Housing Australia to ensure they are able to turn off Lyons and provide additional housing for officers and staff. Equally, we are working closely with the turn-off of Muirhead, and we have a memorandum of understanding for them to purchase into the new Palmerston east suburbs of Bellamack, Johnston, and Zuccoli, which are all in train at the moment.
It is interesting the Leader of the Opposition said: ‘Okay, you have your plans for Weddell but what are you doing right now?’ I know the Leader of the Opposition lives in Palmerston; perhaps he could go for a drive. Talk to anyone looking at the houses being constructed at Bellamack and the significant work under way at Johnston.
We have also attended to - and this is a very valid point debated in this Chamber from time to time - the need for affordable housing. This government has put in place an affordable housing policy. We are turning off affordable housing land packages at Bellamack capped at $140 000 for land. We created Bellamack Gardens, again with condemnation from the opposition, around using a smaller footprint to turn off affordable housing.
All those planning and construction levers to create an affordable housing environment and a market entry point, provided through Homestart NT, have been totally ignored by the opposition. It is burying its heads in the sand and pretending that has not occurred.
Innovatively, because it had not been done by any previous Territory government, we enshrined 15% of affordable and social housing in new land release. That has provided an opportunity in the marketplace for an affordable housing environment and the construction of additional public housing, which includes seniors villages. The importance there is recognising you need a range of housing styles in any new subdivision, and we are going to spread that through the marketplace.
Charles Darwin University’s Palmerston land release will set aside 15% for affordable and public housing. Equally, we have successfully negotiated with Defence Housing to have 15% of Muirhead for affordable and social housing as well, and the new suburb of Kilgariff will have 15% set aside for affordable and social housing. We are pulling all planning levers available to not only fast-track land, which is occurring through our direct investment in infrastructure in successive budgets, but also ensure there is an affordable element to the land being turned off.
Regarding forecast, independent analysts praise the enviable position of our Territory labour market. Access Economics has forecast the Territory will continue to outperform the rest of the nation over the next five years, predicting the Territory will have the strongest jobs growth in the country and the lowest unemployment rate. However, we are not resting on our laurels; we will continue to pursue the big projects to take the Territory’s economy to the next level.
I recently returned from Japan where I met not only with INPEX, but JGC, undertaking front-end engineering and design, and investment banks JBIC and Mizuho, as well as METI, the government agency. They are all excited about the INPEX project. Whilst we recognise there is a thorough environmental process under way, it was interesting to see the Japanese perspective and their support for the INPEX project in Darwin. We are not just looking at the opportunities in and around that, we are also exploring rare earth opportunities in discussions with Japan.
We are well positioned to be an oil and gas supply hub, which is why we went to the market with expressions of interest for a marine supply base. Six strong bids were received, and we have publicly articulated that we are short-listing. We are positioning Darwin to be the premier oil and gas hub for the region, which will cover a service opportunity for the entire Southeast Asia region. We recognise the oil and gas and mineral resource industries will underpin our economy going forward, and are aggressively undertaking the work to ensure we realise the opportunities and the flow-through effects to our economy.
We are investing in training in this sector. We have the Charles Darwin University initiative, and have also created a school of excellence in maths and engineering at Darwin High School. There is also great excitement about strengthening the science program at Dripstone High School. The projects mentioned will have a tremendous flow-on effect to a number of other industries, including retail and hospitality, which will fuel further job growth.
A Working Future is a significant area of effort for government. We are trying to turn around decades of neglect by past CLP governments which simply ignored Territorians living in the bush, consigning them to poverty and unemployment. Through the A Working Future policy, this government is committed to improving employment opportunities for Indigenous Territorians. We are investing in Indigenous education in the bush, with additional teachers as well as turning off new classrooms and, in some cases, new schools. Secondary education did not exist in the bush previously, to the eternal shame of the CLP. It now exists, and we are delivering high school education throughout the bush. Investment in the bush, hitting a new record of $980m this year, is focused on core infrastructure to support economic development, including housing, schools, roads, and power and water services …
A member: Interstate consultants, you forgot them.
Ms LAWRIE: Our Indigenous workforce is growing …
A member: What about the interstate consultants?
Ms LAWRIE: Our Indigenous workforce is growing …
A member: That would be a good one.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms LAWRIE: … it is up 6% in the year 2008-09. Since coming to power in August 2001, 26 600 jobs have been created, equivalent of a 27% boost in just nine years. We will continue to pursue jobs, job opportunities and protect jobs. We will continue to focus on broadening our economic base and foster economic opportunities across the Territory to ensure all Territorians, regardless of where they live, can benefit from our strong economy and have an opportunity to build a prosperous future.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend the Chief Minister on his statement.
Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support the statement on jobs delivered by the Chief Minister. The Chief Minister has always been a strong advocate of investment and training for Territorians in infrastructure. This investment is vital to a sustainable future for Territory families, businesses and workers.
I now turn to education infrastructure. Infrastructure investment creates jobs, provides training and career opportunities, improves our quality of life, and positions the Territory for future growth and prosperity. $550m has been allocated to the Territory under the Commonwealth Nation Building and Jobs Plan. The Territory’s allocation includes $205m to build or upgrade infrastructure in government schools, and a further $65m for non-government schools. This package delivered vital economic growth and jobs to the Territory in the midst of the greatest economic downturn in the world economy in 75 years. The Henderson government is committed to providing a quality education for every Territory child. Infrastructure is fundamental to providing students with the education they deserve.
Work is continuing on the $59m Rosebery Primary and Middle Schools in Palmerston. These schools will cater for 1450 students when they open at the beginning of the next school year. Our current program of works involves $246m in school infrastructure upgrades which began in 2008 and will be completed in 2012. Seventy-four government primary schools and large group schools will receive $300 000. A further 85 primary, middle and senior schools, community education centres and homeland centres across the Territory will receive significant upgrades. Special needs students will receive substantial infrastructure improvements with $30m over four years, including a new school in the Palmerston area.
The Australian government’s Building the Education Revolution has been a boon for education and industry alike. It is not just about bricks and mortar; it is about businesses, contractors, architects, engineers, suppliers, tradesmen and, of course, apprentices. In short, real jobs for real Territorians.
The Northern Territory government funds Vocational Education and Training, or VET, which supports present and future needs of industry and the community. Funding for skills shortages and capacity building leading to employment is a priority. Training provided is nationally recognised in accordance with the Australian Quality Training Framework. A peak industry group has been established to guide training investment by government in areas of skill needs, occupational shortages and employment opportunities. A total of $84.4bn has been contributed to the delivery and support of the VET sector in 2009-10. $52.2m has been committed to VET recurrent funding for CDU, BIITE and other service providers to deliver a broad range of vocational education and training programs in urban and remote centres. $24.1m has been committed to support and train apprentices and trainees.
Funding is allocated across the following areas: $17.2m in training delivery; $1.8m towards apprentice and trainee travel; $1.4m to apprenticeship centre funding; $1.3m to Workwear/Workgear funding; $1.1m in employee incentives funding; $400 000 in pre-employment training; $900 000 for work ready programs; $6m has been committed to the productivity places program; $2.6m committed to Indigenous response programs; and $1m to support six training advisory councils. The NCVER outcome survey recorded 89.1% of trainees were satisfied with the overall quality of training received, and 92.6% achieved their training outcome through VET participation - the highest in Australia. The Northern Territory has the highest VET participation rate for people aged 15 to 64 in Australia.
Indigenous Territorians also access mainstream recurrent training and apprenticeship traineeship programs. $2.6m is invested by government in training programs in regional and remote communities aligned to local job opportunities. In 2009, 10 823 Indigenous students undertook units of training in programs ranging from pre-employment to apprenticeships. As at May 2010, 717 Indigenous Territorians were in training, apprenticeships and traineeships, reflecting 22% of the total in training. In 2009, Indigenous responsive programs delivered 139 programs to 1021 students in 51 regional and remote locations to meet emerging employment and economic development opportunities and provide personal or community capacity building.
In the 2010 calendar year, there are currently 3577 apprentices and trainees in training against the target of 3400. With 2216 commencements to date for the third quarter, the government is on track to meet the 10 000 apprentice and trainee commencements over four years. The priority area for apprenticeship funding includes skill shortage occupations in traditional trades. The uptake of traditional trades apprenticeships has increased 69%, from 497 in 2001 to 842 in 2009. There has been a 29% increase in the non-traditional trades.
The Workwear/Workgear bonus is provided to eligible apprentices and trainees to assist in meeting costs of buying work wear and safety gear. A bonus of $1000 is paid to trade apprentices and $300 to all apprentices and trainees. Since July 2005, 2745 Workwear/Workgear bonuses have been allocated to skill shortage trade apprentices, whilst another 4890 apprentice trainees have received the $300 bonus. $1.3m is allocated as a contribution towards apprentice and trainee travel where training is not available locally. The completion rate for the period 2001 to 2009 is 48% and is comparable to many other jurisdictions.
When talking about the good work happening with apprenticeships and traineeships, I must pay tribute to one of my predecessors, Syd Stirling, who really drove the agenda around having a jobs plan, with the Chief Minister, implementing many of the measures I have mentioned tonight, and setting the original target of 10 000 trainees in the first four-year period. Our target is now 10 000 in the second four-year period. Syd Stirling really drove this and was passionate about it.
The Chief Minister, when minister for Education, as well as Business and Employment minister previously, was very keen to have an employment and job strategy. Prior to Labor coming to government there was no strategy, and it is something this government can point to as a positive achievement in vocational education and training and encouraging people down that path, particularly in skills shortage areas, and also providing support.
We also realise we are facing further shortages. There is ongoing massive economic development in the Northern Territory with INPEX and other projects. There will be continuing demand and skill shortages so we cannot rest on our laurels. We have to continue the good work and keep producing more apprentices who will become tradesmen, particularly locally-grown ones who will stay in the Northern Territory.
The National Centre for Vocational Education Research, NCVER, destination survey has revealed 92.6% of Northern Territory apprentices and trainees who completed training are in employment, 76% of non-completing NT apprentices and trainees were employed following the cancellation of their training contract, and 82% of Northern Territory apprentices and trainees were satisfied with their off-the-job training. Strategies to improve apprenticeship and traineeship completion rates in the Northern Territory include: Try’a Trade program; pre-employment courses Workready Program; Workwear/Workgear bonus; and more vigilant monitoring of training contract cancellations by the Northern Territory apprenticeship centre.
We have allocated $1.8m and the Commonwealth has contributed $4.2m for job seekers. This will assist them to access employment. An additional 955 training places are available for existing workers to re-skill or upskill in Certificate III in higher qualifications. This training provides a range of qualifications with strong engagement from industry, identifying skill shortages and emerging skills on access requirements for employment.
I now turn to housing infrastructure. In Budget 2010-11 a record $1.8m was foreshadowed to be spent on infrastructure. Unlike members opposite, the Henderson government supported the $550m allocated to the Territory under the Commonwealth’s Nation Building and Jobs Plan. The CLP did not, and does not support this package, even though it delivered vital infrastructure, economic growth, and jobs to the Territory in the midst of the greatest economic downturn in the world economy in 75 years. Honourable members will recall this year’s budget delivered a record $695m for affordable housing, and new and upgraded public and remote housing across the Territory.
The building and construction sector is vital to creating and maintaining a strong economy. The Australian Bureau of Statistics has estimated every $1 committed to building and construction projects generates $2.73 in economic activity. On this basis, government’s $695m will result in $1.897bn in economic activity in the Northern Territory. Importantly, this will result in jobs for Territorians involved in direct building, construction, and supply sectors, as well as ancillary support and administration services.
Our strong economic growth has generated increasing demand for public and private services across a range of sectors, particularly in the vital area of housing. In 2010, $49m was committed to build 150 new homes over three years, including 76 homes across three seniors villages, an 18-unit village at Larapinta, and two new villages at Malak of 28 units, and in Johnston, 45 units, and 59 one- and two-bedroom units. Works are also continuing on the $10m 40-unit Bellamack seniors village. A further $5.5m parcel of land has been purchased to construct 18 two-bedroom units for seniors accommodation at Larapinta. It is anticipated the project will be completed in September 2011. A parcel was set aside by government to construct 12 one-bedroom and 28 two-bedroom seniors public housing in Bellamack at a cost of $10m.
Around $30m has been allocated for repairs and maintenance of public housing in 2010, with $15.1m being allocated to repair and refurbish existing public housing dwellings vacated in 2010-11. I will talk a little about that. I have mentioned the money figures, but to visit sites where contractors are working on public housing, and the business places of those companies and see the people employed and the work being done by local contractors, you can see the spend by the Housing department on repairs and maintenance provides employment to a considerable number of people on an ongoing basis, and supports the development of trades within the Northern Territory.
The social housing initiative under the Nation Building Economic Stimulus Plan is another example of cooperative arrangements between the Territory and Commonwealth governments delivering for Territorians. In the Northern Territory, the social housing initiative delivers $59.7m from the 2008-09 to the 2011-12 budgets to construct 208 new dwellings and refurbish another 136 existing public housing properties across the Territory. Stage 1 of the initiative delivered $7.12m to construct 22 new dwellings for public housing. These dwellings are now complete across the Territory. Stage 2 will deliver $48.45m to construct 186 new dwellings in 2010-11, and building has commenced on 141 of these dwellings. It is anticipated all dwellings will be completed by December 2012.
In relation to stimulus money coming to the Territory and its impact on Alice Springs, it has been my pleasure to visit the new Bath Street and Percy Court accommodation centres. A whole range of projects is occurring in Alice Springs; I have only mentioned a few. Refurbishments and upgrades are being carried out on many existing buildings, particularly those owned by non-government organisations. It is pleasing to see so many young apprentices starting their working life working on these sites. Alice Springs is running red hot economically with all the construction work happening; it is a real boon for the Alice Springs economy. In my conversations with Alice Springs businesses, they recognise the economic activity occurring in Alice Springs. It is great to see and hear.
Turning to Darwin, a further 45 dwellings will be part of the village at Parap, which is of particular interest to the member for Fannie Bay. This development is due for completion by June 2012. A total of 298 dwellings were refurbished or repaired through stimulus funding. The target of 136 dwellings was exceeded by more than 200%. It is great to see we are using the stimulus money effectively. We are doing more with the stimulus money and providing more benefit to citizens of the Northern Territory, to those in need, and also supporting business.
The budget delivers $2.7m to operate five new short-term accommodation facilities in Alice Springs and Darwin to house visitors from remote communities and outlying areas as part of the Alice Springs Transformation Plan and the Australian government stimulus package stage 2. I mentioned the Percy Court transitional village to house up to 70 people; construction is nearly complete. Construction has commenced on the Bath Street Lodge in Alice Springs to house up to 40 visiting renal dialysis patients - I have visited that site. Construction is also under way at Goyder Street, Alice Springs with eight single units. I mentioned the Alice Springs Accommodation Park which will house up to 150 visitors. There will also be a new domestic violence and crisis transitional accommodation facility in Malak to house up to 26 people, including children.
I now turn to SIHIP. There will be debate during the two weeks of parliament on SIHIP and I am ready for that debate. I have been out and about inspecting many SIHIP projects. I have heard what the member for Braitling has to say. I say bring on the debate; I am ready, I am equipped, and it will be an interesting debate. It is an important program with a minimum target of 20% Indigenous employment and is averaging around 30% and more in some regions; 323 Indigenous people working on the biggest housing investment in Northern Territory history, the remote Indigenous housing construction project. Each Indigenous employer will have a career management plan …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! I move an extension of time for the minister, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will not be long, and I thank members for extending my time.
Each Indigenous employer will have a career management plan in place to assess the employee’s skills at the beginning of employment, identify a training pathway, discuss aspirations, and identify a long-term career plan. The remote rental framework now provides a basis for ongoing training and employment of Indigenous people who have been working within the SIHIP program. To date, the vast majority of Indigenous people employed within SIHIP have been unskilled or semi-skilled; the specific type of work Indigenous employees undertake varies depending on the unique circumstances of the works package.
It was pleasing to go on site in Alice Springs and see firsthand a very good carpenter. From what little I know of carpentry he seemed a fantastic carpenter, but what really made this man special was he had four or five young Indigenous blokes he was showing the ropes to and he recounted his time as an apprentice and all the people who helped him. His major motivating factor was to help these young blokes find a career to help them on their way in life the way he had been helped. That was fantastic. More than a job, more than a tradesman, he is someone special and we are lucky to have people like that in the Territory who give so much of themselves.
That has been a real plus to see as I inspect the SIHIP sites and talk to Indigenous employees and contractors. It has become evident SIHIP is more than building houses; it is about employment, community development, self esteem and a lifetime journey.
In the package of work at Wadeye, approximately 16% of the Indigenous employees were plant operators. This reflects the use of concrete from the local tilt-slab factory, which I also inspected. I saw the young blokes involved in making tilt-slabs, cutting the steel, welding and fabricating. The young Indigenous blokes were busy. They were right into the work and were supporting the effort to meet the incredible deadlines set for the SIHIP project. The alliance partners develop training and employment opportunities for each Indigenous employee based on their aspirations, levels of literacy and numeracy and formal training and education. There is remedial work to be done as well. As the alliances work with the shires who undertake ongoing repairs and maintenance, local people will develop the skills directly transferable to ongoing housing maintenance roles in the communities post SIHIP.
This government’s investment in the infrastructure and training areas is vital to the future of the Territory and is ongoing. We see jobs as providing a way for people to provide for their families, to enjoy life to the full, to enjoy their potential, to bring up families and build the Territory in the major urban areas, the rural areas and our remote regions. It is very important work; it represents an enormous challenge and this government is committed to it.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend this statement to the House.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Deputy Speaker, I was a little frustrated during Question Time today knowing this statement was on this afternoon yet all questions from government related to jobs. We are now debating a ministerial statement about jobs. The one thing this government is good at is advertising. McDonald’s could take a leaf out of your book, the advertising is fantastic.
There is an old saying: ‘build it and they will come’, and one of the biggest issues in the Northern Territory today, whether it is Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Alice Springs or the more remote areas, is housing. If we can believe ABS statistics - and being a former employee I believe in their statistics - the nett migration is high at the moment with more leaving than coming to the Territory. There are plenty of jobs, which is great for the economy, but people need somewhere to live.
The government must always wear rose-coloured glasses; people bring real issues to my office on a daily basis. Jobs at the moment are a little like window shopping. In Sydney last week I stood outside shops I could only dream of purchasing items from. It was not very welcoming having a security guard glare at me; he must have known what I had in my wallet was not going to get me through the door. Maybe I had that look about me. The Northern Territory is like that at the moment. Yes, there are jobs, but where do people live? The unfortunate thing is, bad planning has placed the Territory in this position.
At lunchtime yesterday I drove down The Esplanade to Mindil Beach, past the Ski Club, past Vesteys Beach out to East Point. The number of Indigenous and non-Indigenous people congregating in those areas was remarkable. I met someone I used to work with during my time at Darwin City Council on the Public Places Program. It has been 14 years since I worked on the Public Places Program; however, during that time I never saw as many Indigenous people sitting around the Ski Club, Vesteys Beach or East Point as I saw yesterday. These people have no homes and there are probably many reasons they have come into Darwin. People have said it is a result of the intervention, alcohol restrictions, many reasons, but the fact remains they do not have houses.
It is not just these people. People come into my office upset and crying because they do not have a home for their family. It is no use going to Territory Housing; the waiting list is remarkable. I have tried to help many people and, in some cases, have had success; however, writing to the average minister - and I use the term ‘average’ lightly – I find the response is sometimes no better than the answers during Question Time. There is no answer in the letter; it is just rhetoric. What is the point of writing to a minister? It is like some of the briefings we receive. We are only told things you want us to hear. You always say: ‘Why don’t you get a briefing on the matter?’ Sometimes the briefings - no offence to the public servants who are under strict guidelines and if they step out of line will be castigated, probably have their phone records searched and their job will be on the line. Many public servants come into the office of opposition members and openly talk about issues within government. Some things are not friendly. I grew up thinking the Labor government of the day was supposed to support the workers. I find some of the issues raised with me disgusting.
The bad planning of this government has left us with some of the highest housing and rental costs in the nation. Good people, according to the ABS, are leaving every day. Why? Not about jobs - plenty of jobs. There will be more jobs because as people leave they will have to be replaced. It is not about jobs.
I have told this story before. I had a nephew who uplifted his family from Adelaide to Darwin. He is a refrigeration mechanic and we need plenty of those. He moved to Palmerston with three children and lasted six months before he had to move back to Adelaide. It was not even about the money because he was earning hundreds of dollars more per week than he could in Adelaide. It came down to the cost of housing. He could not afford to live here because of rental costs.
I am sick of hearing people are leaving this fabulous place we call the Northern Territory. Every single day people say: ‘Had enough, cannot do it’. You read letters to the editor, talk to friends, talk to family and it is the same story: ‘Love Darwin, love the Northern Territory, but guess what? We cannot afford to live here’.
I have lived here since 1985 and appreciate it has always been a relatively expensive place to live because it is a remote location compared to the eastern seaboard. There will always be additional costs and we have to appreciate that. People who live in Darwin and the more remote places in Australia, whether in Queensland or Western Australia, have to appreciate there will be additional costs. However, it is so out of hand the average income does not keep up with it.
We talk about problems with families and children. Some of that may be because parents do not spend enough time with their children. Why? They need two incomes to pay the high rents, the high electricity prices, and the high mortgages. Bad planning from government in failing to release land for so many years has forced prices up. Ministers pull out graphs every day in this House. The opposition can pull out graphs and show you the cost of housing, particularly in the last few years - all because of bad planning. Recently we had a planning session and someone asked: ‘What if we do not want Darwin to grow any more? What if we are happy with the way it is at the moment?’ Unfortunately, no one is going to build that gate. If anything, I would like to be remembered as someone willing to plan for our future. We need to plan where future freeways will be. One day there will be a bridge to the Cox Peninsula; major roads and a second airport will be required. Whether it is 30, 50, or 100 years, it will happen.
Look at Sydney today, look at Melbourne. Take Sydney as a case in point. I was quite scared one morning driving through a tunnel I did not think would end knowing there were suburbs above me. Darwin has a relatively small population. Wouldn’t it be great for politicians sitting in this Chamber in 30, 40, or 50 years from now to say: ‘Gee, politicians back then were wise enough to plan for the future’? It would be fantastic if we were remembered for being good planners and the corridor for this bridge was put in place now so we do not have to build tunnels under suburbs which come with a huge cost like in Sydney.
I recall my dad asking me: ‘Pete, as a politician, if you could be remembered for one thing what would it be?’ It is a hard question because I try to use the starfish approach; help one person at a time. Sometimes in opposition that is all you can do. If I could be remembered for one thing it would be people thought: ‘Those people in 2010 had the wisdom to plan for a city with one million people or, in 100 or 200 years’ time, two million and beyond. Unless we plan today, we are not going to get ourselves out of the problem we are in.
Conversely, I am hearing horrible stories where people have bought at the top of the market and are seeing their investments falling because the bubble has burst. Perhaps we have seen the peak and people’s investments are going backwards, interest rates are going up, and the pain is going to be far more extreme. It is disappointing that people are struggling with high mortgages, high rents and high electricity costs because the government has failed to plan. Is this the worst government the Northern Territory has ever had? I believe it is, and it comes down to one thing: how wrong can you get it?
So many things have gone wrong recently, whether it is electricity or planning - you only have to look at Tiger Brennan Drive at the moment to see the issues facing that massive piece of infrastructure - $110m. I went to a public meeting recently and, to his credit, the member for Daly turned up. He did not have much to say; he sat in the crowd, but at least he was there. I could not understand the answer to a question I asked: how can infrastructure the size of the Tiger Brennan extension with the amount of planning that went into it be so wrong in so many areas? Surely, when it was designed, road use would have been considered.
The answer given shocked me. Apparently some regulations regarding safety had changed since the initial design and therefore changes had to be made to meet the new safety regulations. Well, hello! Road trains have not become shorter; they are still the length they were two years ago, three years ago, or five years ago. The original designers of that infrastructure must have known how long a road train was. What were the risks of going around a corner and rolling? Perhaps the cambers of the road needed to cater for those trucks. Who would design something where a road train needed to cross three lanes of traffic to get to another road? Fair dinkum, this is basic stuff. I am not an engineer, but I could see that was going to be an issue when I saw the road being designed.
How can you get it so wrong? What is it with planning? Why can’t we plan for our needs? I appreciate things change here and there, but this needs massive changes. The minister said today it is going to require government money to invest in the changes. You have to ask, were they tasked with designing something to meet the needs of the community and those needs were not met? Someone has made a mistake, and the costs should at least be shared to correct this. I am amazed.
I mentioned writing to ministers on different issues. Sometimes the responses I receive astound me. In fact, for a while I took them on board thinking I had received an answer. I then write to the original complainant saying: ‘All is well, I have written to the minister and this is the answer. Thought I would follow up with their response’, to be told later the issue had not been dealt with. In fact, I have one relating to a crossing in Palmerston where the minister responded saying the department would review the crossing and enter into some kind of arrangement or review with Palmerston City Council.
In 2006 the matter was being reviewed, and we are still reviewing it in 2010. What interested me with the letter was - because I had asked that the lights at this crossing, after witnessing two people in wheelchairs nearly hit because drivers were not paying attention - be upgraded. The letter said the lights had been upgraded and new LED lights had been installed. Well, hello! No, they were not. The lights are still the same. Again, I take the minister at his word; send this letter on to the original complainant saying: ‘Look at that. The good minister has taken action and the issue has been solved’. No, it has not. The lights have not changed. Yes, they are working, but they have not been changed to LED lights. Who is giving you advice before the letters are drafted to send back to shadow ministers?
It is amazing, and this is the small stuff. How can we have confidence in this government delivering on the big stuff? You cannot; Territorians cannot have confidence.
We talk about jobs. There are plenty of jobs but no houses. Who would want to live here with some of the issues I hear about in my office?
How many people have had issues with patient travel services? We pay $30 a day for patient accommodation interstate. What public servant or politician would go interstate for $30 a day. It would not happen; no one would hop on a plane. How is someone supposed to live on $30 a day? Fair dinkum. Most people get more than that in a meal allowance. Look at the rates for politicians and public servants. Look at how much private industry pays for accommodation, incidentals or meal allowances when they send people interstate. Appreciating the fact most people would have a house in Darwin, Palmerston, anywhere in the Northern Territory, they are still paying rent or meeting their mortgage repayments but are interstate and receive a measly $30 a day.
There is a real disconnect with this government and business, this government and people, this government and the average person. There is a real disconnect because people who come into my office do not come into your office, or is it only your friends come into your office and therefore are not going to tell you the bad things which are happening. Housing is just one of them.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I watched Four Corners the other night and I had tears in my eyes. We heard the Treasurer say today how much government was advertising the Northern Territory as the place to go if you want a job. When people see shows like Four Corners, which was horrible, what kind of advertising is that to attract people to the Northern Territory? People would and should be scared because this is the worst government the Northern Territory has ever had.
Ms McCARTHY (Indigenous Development): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, it is a relief that on this side of the House we see the problems across the Northern Territory and are prepared to do something about them. We see a future in the Northern Territory for all people; we do not talk the Territory down or trash the Territory. Part of standing here is about leadership. It is about saying this is the vision we have for the people of the Northern Territory where we can walk together - a vision which members opposite cannot begin to understand.
I am pleased to speak in support of the Chief Minister’s statement on jobs in the Northern Territory. The ministerial statement goes to the heart of what the Henderson Labor government is all about: developing an inclusive, progressive Territory where all Territorians, no matter where they live, have the opportunity and capacity to participate in a workforce and benefit from a thriving Northern Territory economy; and ensuring the opportunity to engage in the mainstream economy for all Territorians to have this opportunity to explore all the world has to offer, to build strong, healthy and happy families, and to contribute to the economy. I am proud many of my portfolio responsibilities lie at the heart of this work: Indigenous Development, Regional Development, Tourism and Women’s Policy.
Our A Working Future policy to develop local business and maximise opportunities in our 20 Territory growth towns is central to our plan to build local economies around our remote growth centres and ensure Indigenous Territorians, more than 70% of whom live outside of our major towns and cities, can join and benefit from our growth economy. While I am proud to be part of a government which has helped increase Indigenous employment by 6% in just two years, there is an incredible amount of work still to be done.
As a government we have committed, through the national commitment to close the gap on Indigenous disadvantage, to halve the gap in employment outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians within a decade.
Indigenous jobs required to meet the COAG Closing the Gap targets in the Northern Territory are estimated at between 11 400 and 16 000 by 2020. We are not daunted by the scale of that work, a legacy passed to us as a consequence of years of neglect by previous governments. A key pillar of A Working Future is building economic profiles, a town prospectus; job profiles for each of our towns. Building on this work will be our Futures Forums, opportunities for residents of our bush towns to explore the possible real opportunities for individuals, families and committees. A key challenge in this work is linking labour with capital. While government services and jobs will be key features as we build access to services in our towns, real results and real growth in jobs will only come from business activity. Our Futures Forums planned for each growth town will be a key opportunity for the business and finance community to explore with local people, local business and investment opportunities.
I have stood in this House on several occasions talking about the first Futures Forum held in Ngukurr in August. Over the next 12 months we will be looking at the 19 Futures Forums we have yet to do across our growth towns. These Futures Forums are based around local empowerment. It is about Indigenous people across the Northern Territory standing strong saying: ‘This is who we are; this is who we are as a people of Ngukurr; this is our vision for our town; this is the way we want it to grow based on cultural identity, on language and on fundamental respect with those who live around us’.
I also stress these forums are not just about our growth towns. They are about regional development, remembering 80% of the people living remote are within 50 km of our growth towns. Developing our regional economies and jobs will also require significant new investments and necessary roads and communications infrastructure to connect our towns to the mainstream economy. The necessary investments are well beyond the capacity of our own government and I am working with my ministerial colleagues, both locally and nationally, to bring attention to our need in that area and new investments in that new infrastructure.
Coordination and integration of effort with supporting federal government investment is a key feature of A Working Future. We cannot meet our objectives from within our own Territory budget and it is in the national interest to address Indigenous disadvantage and support regional developments in the Northern Territory. I highlight the fact within our own Northern Territory budget this year we made historic steps in almost $1bn towards our growth towns. That is $1bn in all areas we need, and we know that is only the first step. That is why the relationship with the federal government is pivotal in ensuring we not only secure added funding, but that it is ongoing for years to come.
Last week, I had the opportunity to meet with my ministerial colleagues in the portfolios of Local Government and Regional Development, as well as Indigenous Development. I had the opportunity to discuss with minister Simon Crean, minister Jenny Macklin and Senator Mark Arbib the importance of supporting us and working with us on the growth towns, and the importance of ensuring there will be jobs; jobs for now and into the future.
Locally, we are coordinating government work through the Regional Operation Centre, ROC, and our own service delivery coordination unit. We are connecting with local people and their priorities, demonstrating our commitment to their towns, and building and delivering a shared vision for thriving places with job opportunities for townspeople.
As part of our plan to progress this urgent work, we are also establishing across-agency economic development teams for our growth towns to cut through red tape, coordinate government activity, develop local economic activity, and help build a business-ready and job-friendly investment environment. Key precursors for successful participation in the workforce include reasonable health, capacity in education, and skills and alignment between a person’s interest and the work they are engaged in.
A Working Future also includes investment - nearly $1bn this year - in education, health, housing and supporting strong families, all important in supporting participation in employment. They are also important in engendering strong families and strong self-confidence, including the confidence to leave families, friends and clan groups to learn about different places and work with other people outside the comfort zone of one’s own mob. It is a big thing to do, as many members representing bush constituencies would know.
Returning to the theme of a business-friendly investment environment, we are working with the land councils to provide certainty and security of tenure for business activities. This includes the Territory Labor government continually working to resolve outstanding Aboriginal land and native title claims by negotiation and agreement rather than combative litigation. This is the path to certainty and new business opportunities.
My aim, as Minister for Indigenous Development and Minister for Regional Development, is to work with land councils, landowners and the business community to maximise opportunities and job creation. A key part of working with the land councils is developing lease arrangements to underpin business investment on Aboriginal land.
As Minister for Regional Development, I also have carriage of the Indigenous Economic Development Strategy 2009-2012, which targets the following achievements by 2012: 3000 more Indigenous Territorians will commence employment across the private and public sector; 10% Indigenous employment in the Northern Territory Public Service; and 200 new Indigenous businesses. These are ambitious targets we are committed to reaching with the support of industry.
My Regional Development portfolio also supports job creation through our Indigenous Business Development grant scheme. Since the program’s inception by Territory Labor in July 2005, individual IBDP grants of up to $30 000 to support small business developments have assisted around 140 Indigenous businesses and organisations, resulting in an estimated 290 Indigenous Territorians employed by these businesses. It is pleasing this government initiative has resulted in such real results. In October this year, the value of the program was recognised with the Aboriginal Benefit Account contributing a further $500 000, growing our 2010-11 grant pool to $1.1m.
As Minister for Local Government, I am aware of the important role local government plays in our communities, both as a service provider and employer. Collectively, local government councils are the largest employer in the Territory’s rural and remote areas, with our eight regional shire councils employing more than 2500 people. Indigenous workers comprise approximately 75% of this workforce. The female/male split is approximately 45% female and 55% male. Independent research comparing shire council payroll reports with those of former community government councils show fully-paid employment has grown by approximately 600 positions or 35% since the formation of the shire councils two years ago. The research also indicates the major component of shire council employment is engaged in the delivery of core municipal services.
Part of this employment growth is linked to Northern Territory and Commonwealth programs to transition CDEP positions in services such as aged care to fully paid jobs. A large part of this employment growth is also due to the commitment of the elected councillors to leverage the professional capacity of the reformed local government councils to ensure their council provides employment and skill development programs for local residents.
Unfortunately, in the 2010-11 year the Commonwealth has not participated in the matching funding program which assists councils to transition former CDEP participants to jobs in core council services. The Northern Territory government has had to fill the void; however, I am stressing to my colleagues in Canberra the importance of these positions in local government and the ongoing necessity for Australian government support to meet our shared objectives to strong local government and better remote service delivery in the Northern Territory.
On a more positive note, a key result of our local government reform is councils are now providing individual career and skill development plans for their workforce. This is the first time this has happened for some Indigenous members who have worked for decades in local government. The Northern Territory and Commonwealth governments have jointly funded $200 000 for a workforce development position in LGANT to assist the regional shire councils coordinate and develop their Indigenous workforce planning, recruitment, retention and training from a whole-of-industry perspective.
As Minister for Local Government, I have responsibility for the Northern Territory Aboriginal Interpreter Service. The AIS is one of Australia’s largest single employers of Indigenous people. Close to 400 Indigenous people are actively engaged by the AIS to provide interpreter services. The service covers over 100 languages and dialects, and its employment benefit is widespread, as is its language benefit. The majority of this employment is part-time, but there is a growing number of qualified interpreters who are earning the equivalent of a full-time wage through this employment, which is fantastic news for the Northern Territory. The service commenced mainly as an essential element of Justice and Health services. However, more recently, the real value of effective communication has been increasingly recognised by government agencies. The number of bookings made by the service has almost doubled in recent years. In 2010-11, it is projected the Aboriginal Interpreter Service will make 7000 bookings, which is equal to more than 130 interpreter bookings per week.
Until recent years, the service has been coordinated by government agencies operating out of Alice Springs, Katherine, Tennant Creek, Nhulunbuy and Darwin. The service has now established offices in Yuendumu, Maningrida and Wadeye, with a total of 10 interpreters and operations staff now locally employed in these offices. AIS offices are planned to open in another four Territory growth towns by the middle of next year, providing more local jobs in those communities.
As Minister for Tourism, I well understand, as does the government, the importance of the tourism sector as a vital economic driver of the Northern Territory economy. The vitality of the tourism industry has a broad impact upon many other industry sectors and tourism generates a significant number of jobs in the Territory. Around one in six employed Territorians has a job as a result of the tourism sector. Tourism’s contribution to the Northern Territory’s gross state product totalled $1.73bn, or 11% of total Northern Territory GSP. The tourism industry is one of the Territory’s largest employers and was estimated to support, directly and indirectly, 18 000 full-time equivalent jobs, or 16.3% of the Northern Territory workforce in 2007-08. This is more than double other states and underlines the importance of the sector to the Northern Territory economy.
Two of the key sectors making up the tourism industry, retail trade and accommodation and food services, supported over 13 000 full-time and 8000 part-time positions in August 2010. That is 14% more jobs than August 2009. Over the past 12 months the Chief Executive of Tourism NT, Maree Tetlow, has chaired two of the key working groups of the Tourism Ministers’ Council focusing on employment in this sector. The first one was the Indigenous Tourism Development Working Group and the second was the Labour and Skills Working Group. The invitation for the Northern Territory to chair these national committees reflects the value given to our work, and the work by the committees will be a positive outcome on job creation for Territorians into the future.
The Labour and Skills Working Group is developing an outlook for the industry’s labour and skills requirements over the next five years. A key will be improving the ability to attract and retain labour in an increasingly competitive environment. This will be done through better planning, improved training procedures and providing greater career opportunities. Work is also under way to promote careers in tourism in high schools, encouraging students to consider tourism as a real career choice. The tourism market can be varied and seasonal, and while we work hard to flatten the edges of the busiest periods and extend the season, it is challenging for employers to find and retain staff at the levels they need. This is particularly so in the regional areas and something I am keen to help resolve.
The Indigenous Tourism Development Working Group is a key focus area for the development of future employment opportunities, particularly those which can be created in our regional and remote areas of the Northern Territory. There is no doubt the Northern Territory is well placed to capitalise on the emerging Indigenous cultural experiences our visitors are seeking. The Territory government continues to support Indigenous operators to offer …
Mr McCARTHY: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be given an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms McCARTHY: I thank my colleague for the extension and the House - it is a terrific news story. The Territory government continues to support Indigenous operators to offer quality tourism experiences and maintain a strong market presence. Tourism NT is working on emerging grassroots Indigenous tourism opportunities with the aim of exporting market-ready tourism products. All sectors of the market are being targeted to ensure an even spread of development to enhance profitability, sustainability and employment outcomes for Indigenous operators.
I recently attended the celebrations of the 25th anniversary of the hand back of Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, including the launch of the park’s Tourism Directions: Stage 1 report. Tourism NT has been working closely with Parks Australia and the tourism industry to deliver new tourism developments into the future. This approach will create sustainable jobs for local residents and reflects the importance we attach to tourism at Uluru as the pillar of the Central Australian economy and a spiritual icon, the heart of this country - it really is a special place.
At the same time we heard the exciting news of the Indigenous Land Corporation’s purchase of the Yulara Resort and partnership with the Australian government and local Anangu tourism businesses to establish a National Indigenous Training Academy at Yulara. I met with the ILC and Shirley McPherson and discussed their plans to employ 670 Indigenous staff at the resort by the end of 2018. These are ambitious plans, but plans this government believes in knowing this is about the future; these plans are generational and we have to make a difference for the children today so they, and their children, can have these jobs well into the future.
Turning to my role as Minister for Women’s Policy, I am keenly interested in the issue of increasing women’s participation in the workforce. In the Northern Territory, the workforce participation rate for women increased from 63.1% in January 2000 to 68.8% in January 2010; 54 900 women participate in the Northern Territory workforce with 39 000, or 71.4%, of those female workers engaged in full-time employment.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, the Northern Territory government is committed to building on this progress. A key area for further work is that of workforce participation by young women. We have established a Young Women and Unemployment reference group to work with us developing effective strategies to improve the equitable participation of young women in the workforce. This will be a focus for future policy development to ensure women, as well as men, have the opportunity to engage in the ongoing economic development of the Northern Territory. Given next year will be a significant year as women across the world celebrate 100 years of International Women’s Day, it is an important time to focus on the agenda.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, it is a pity this statement came at 11.30 pm because I had left. Previous speakers have proclaimed how wonderful the job rate is; it is in Darwin, there is no doubt about that - plenty of jobs if people want them. Overall, the economy is fairly steady and if you want a job in the major centres of the Territory you should be able to get one. The Chief Minister says the unemployment rate in the Northern Territory is 3.1%, which is good.
However, we should be concentrating on people who live in remote communities, which we continue to gloss over. I will give you some figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics for March 2010: the unemployment rate for various places in the Northern Territory - Madam Deputy Speaker might be interested to know the unemployment rate for Bathurst and Melville is 12.1%. That is four times higher than Darwin. The Daly is not far behind at around 12%; Alligator is about 9%; Finniss is about 8%; lower Top End is about 7.5%; and the Barkly is 5% - one of the lower areas - Darwin City, Palmerston and Litchfield Shire are all around 2.5%.
A figure of 3.1% can be quite deceptive. An article written by Professor Jon Altman and Dr Nicholas Biddle from the Australian University published on Friday, 4 June 2010 said:
It uses some ABS statistics and says:
It warns about interpretation; however, Professor Altman says:
the estimated number of indigenous people employed decreased from 163 200 in 2008 to 161 200 in 2009, a decline of 2000;
the gap in employment percentages between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians of 23 percentage points in 2007 increased to 24.4 percentage points in 2009; and
the increase in the gap in unemployment rates was even greater, growing from 9.6% in 2007 to 12.6% in 2009.
Much has been said today about employment; however, those national figures are reflected in the Northern Territory. If CDEP does not continue, those figures will become worse. I quote from a speech by John Paterson, CEO of the Aboriginal Medical Service Alliance of 11 and 12 November 2010:
I will go on. Some of this is part of a speech he was giving on food security:
They are fine words but they do not relate to the world as it is. Two years ago a mining magnate launched a program to find 50 000 jobs for Aboriginal people. It has only produced 3000 jobs. In many of our remote areas the reality is that there are no real jobs. We have to either create jobs or put in infrastructure to allow these places to have real jobs.
The member for Arnhem was talking about the number of jobs at Yulara. That is fine. Yulara has infrastructure allowing it to create jobs - interstate and overseas airlines connections, a good road network and an all-weather bitumen road. What does that infrastructure do? It allows tourism to operate and real jobs to occur. However, Palumpa, Peppimenarti or the Laynhupuy Homelands do not have any connection to interstate and overseas airlines, they do not have an all-weather road, and real jobs cannot be found in those communities - very limited.
When talking about jobs in the Northern Territory it is fine to look at the good picture but the real issue is that we are not capable of providing Aboriginal people in remote communities with full employment, and we have a Commonwealth government which says the concept of removing CDEP by the middle of next year is so people will become work ready or get involved in community projects. Most people will be involved in the community project side because there are no real jobs in many of these places. You have to face the facts: unless there is a big mine somewhere there are not many jobs. If you live at Lajamanu you might get a job at Rabbit Flat or the Granites; however, there will not be many and they will not employ the whole community.
What other real jobs are there? There will be artificial government jobs like the Aboriginal Interpreter Service. They are, to some extent, real jobs, but are dependent on government. Tanami is not dependent on the government; it creates wealth from what is under the ground. Tourism comes from people visiting and spending money. Governments can put money into communities and say it is a real job - in reality it is an artificial job.
The member for Arnhem spoke about the number of people employed by councils. Many of those jobs are agency jobs not council jobs; they are taken on by council because government will not do it. You can have a figure saying council employ X number of people. If I asked, how many people would council employ in council-type work, the figure is not very big. Our CTC report has asked for those figures. How many jobs were created by the amalgamation of the councils? Take out the agencies - how many jobs? We are waiting on that.
We need to oppose the destruction of CDEP. I would rather it was not CDEP; people should receive a full wage. Government jobs, regardless of which department, should not be CDEP jobs; they should be paid fully by the government. There is an opportunity for councils to become the main employer in communities. We owe it to those people not to give them welfare, but to create jobs within their own community. They may not be the greatest jobs in the world, and some people might say - this was published by Treaty Republic, with headings of Sovereignty, Genocide, Land Rights and Pay the Rent issues. An article headed ‘Slavery returns to Top End’ is about the walk off at Kalkaringi and Dagaragu. I am not asking people to be slaves, but I am not asking people to live on welfare. Where there are a limited numbers of jobs some people will be doing fairly mundane work.
The SIHIP program is about building houses, but building houses on its own is not going to help these communities. What will help is getting pride back, working in the community to clean up the streets, plant trees, fix the oval and paint the dilapidated houses. You use your workforce to create a community people can be proud of. I have been to quite a number of communities lately and would not be proud of some, yet people have no work. I see long grass, I see rubbish and I see an oval with goal posts that need a coat of paint. There is work but I do not see people working. The longer we allow the welfare mentality to go on the harder it will be to get people into real jobs because they will not be job ready. Much work needs to be done in that area.
I want to raise SIHIP. The member for Johnston praised the number of Aboriginal people employed in the SIHIP program. The theory is fantastic. To employ 20% of Aboriginal people in the SIHIP program is a good concept, finding out whether it is doing something is much harder. You might be employing 30% Indigenous, but how do we know the same people are employed all the time. Does 30% mean 100 people turned up at different times? We employed 50 then we employed another 50, and some of those people came to work and some did not. Who was trained and what were the outcomes? The CTC has asked - and these figures have not come our way - that every six months training and employment data for SIHIP is made publicly available. This data is to include a breakdown of employee and subcontractor numbers, labour hours, training hours on site and in the classroom and the trade people are trained in. The government agreed to that. Someone told me it may be on the website; however, I would have expected the CTC be given that information. That is the sort of information you need before you comment on whether the program is helping individual Aboriginal people receive the training they want. Twenty per cent sounds good but does it mean actual people? How many of that 20% are being trained? How many are turning up to work? How many of them end up with a certificate?
In theory, people employed by SIHIP will be able to get jobs when they have finished building and refurbishing houses. That is what you hope - we have not seen that yet. Some of these places have not finished their building program. A number of Indigenous people were employed to refurbish houses at Milikapiti and they do not have jobs. We train people to maintain houses but they have no job. Jobs were promised. Are we lifting people up with grand statements which sound good in the media? The federal government also likes to boast about this. How many people will have jobs when this is completed? Will we let people down? That is the worst thing you can do. You train them and all of a sudden they do not have jobs because there are very few real jobs at Milikapiti. How many people do you need to look after houses? Maybe one or two on a continual basis is probably all they can employ. We need to ensure people have some work when they finish and do not go back onto the dole. It may not be in the trade they learnt, but they at least turn up for work regularly. We have taught them to come to work, at least ensure they have a job.
There has been talk about …
Mr Knight: Do you want some more time?
Mr WOOD: Yes, please.
Mr KNIGHT: Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I seek an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: Figures have been quoted on how many people work in the Northern Territory Public Service. I ask the question: ‘How many remote Indigenous people will be employed in the public service?’ That is where the high unemployment rates are.
According to Dr Jon Altman, employment rates nationally are rising. We can say there will be more Indigenous people working in Darwin. I know many Indigenous people who are - my daughter is one, but does that make any great difference to the people in remote communities? If you are serious about getting people trained into the public service you will have to get them from remote communities, otherwise we are not addressing the real problem.
I may sound alarmist but if we do not give people jobs - if they continue to have nothing to do even if we build nice houses - we will not change things. The gap will not close. Chapter 6 of the child protection report gives reasons why children are abused: unemployment, alcohol and overcrowding. Where you have people without a job and nothing to do, people living in overcrowded houses with alcohol problems, you can guarantee there will be child abuse. Children will not be protected. We need people with pride in themselves, pride in their community as a good place to live, and we need kids in that community to know they are wanted and have a future.
It is more than the structures we build; it is about changing the way people feel. It is about giving them a chance, and we do not give people a chance if we keep them on welfare. We need to turn the CDEP policy around. As much as Peter Murphy thinks I am the world beater, government is in power, and your friends are in power in Canberra. You have to make a bigger effort because I believe, Dr Jon Altman believes, John Paterson believes, and other people believe if we do not have employment for Aboriginal people other than working for the dole we will take some gigantic steps backwards.
If you are serious about the protection of children ensure parents have a job. If this government has to march on parliament, I will come with you; even if parliament has to go to Canberra to say Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory need work - they need a wage and a decent job. Do not drop them, because we will have problems in the future.
Jobs in the Northern Territory is an important issue. I wish I had more time to prepare for it today. I wanted to go into it in more detail. It is no good beating one’s chest and saying how wonderful the unemployment figures are at 3.1% when it is around 12% to 14% unemployment in many communities. Do not forget, if you took CDEP away, which is not counted as unemployment, you would have a figure similar to that suggested by John Paterson, around 50% unemployment. CDEP masks that and we have to be very careful we do not hide it.
Councils have a prime role as an employment centre for many Aboriginal people in remote areas. They have managers, they have infrastructure, administration, and if the federal government will give them enough funds for capital equipment and materials, and give people a real wage, not only will the councils and the communities benefit, Aboriginal people will benefit much more. They will then have the opportunity for real jobs. If they cannot find jobs on their community they can go elsewhere. The member for Arnhem mentioned this in relation to Bathurst Island - there are not enough jobs for people in some of the small communities. Eventually, people have to decide whether to move or not, as in all other parts of the world.
We cannot rely entirely on Commonwealth or government funds for these jobs. People will have to move. That does not mean it is not their home; they will have to find jobs. First, let us find people a job. It may not be the greatest job in the world but, if it can be used to develop community pride, pride in oneself, and give kids a better chance of living a good future, the government should make an effort. It should not be words and platitudes in parliament. Although we are the Northern Territory with 200 000 people, put continual pressure on Ms Macklin who, I believe, does not have her feet on the ground. People like her need to understand this will be disastrous. When people say CDEP will be replaced by real jobs, they dot not know what they are talking about. They do not have their feet on the ground; they do not understand reality. They talk to southern people to make it sound good and, in the end, it will come back to bite them. It will be the shame of the Commonwealth government.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I hope this government makes the effort. It is of the same political ilk. Make the effort to save jobs for Aboriginal people.
Mr KNIGHT (Business and Employment): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement today. I will make a few comments about the member for Nelson’s contribution, some of which I agree with, some not.
With respect to CDEP, I totally agree. I am not sure I will go to Canberra with him - Canberra is still getting over the Gerry and Dave show of last week ...
Mr Tollner: We did much good work last week. We might have a win.
Mr KNIGHT: Yes, it might be a win; however, it was an odd couple, Dad and Dave heading down to the big city ...
Mr Wood: Dave was the Independent candidate for Nelson, and I am the one who won it as the Independent.
Mr KNIGHT: That is right. I remember that.
I have quite a good understanding of CDEP. I ran a 300-person CDEP at Timber Creek. Coming from another resource centre …
Mr Giles: You got the sack from it.
Mr KNIGHT: I am one of a few members in this parliament who has worked in a remote community. Everyone is an expert; no one has bothered to work on one. Oh, no, it is too hard out there ...
Members interjecting.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Order! Minister, direct your comments through the Chair.
Mr KNIGHT: I have had five years on a remote community and everyone else is an expert.
I have a genuine understanding of CDEP and the benefit it brings to people. I grew CDEP with the council from 170 up to 300. Anyone who did not have a job and was of adult age was on CDEP, so the amount of contribution made in each community was tremendous. It was no work, no pay – strict rules; always tough rules to apply. It really had benefit. Coming from Julalikari Buramana, another outstation resource centre I worked for which did not have CDEP, trying to work with those outstations was very difficult.
The community development part of CDEP is probably the biggest benefit brought to a community. Getting small projects - fencing projects or whatever - uplifts the community, motivates people and gives them a sense of ownership and worth. If you ask people: ‘What do you do? What job do you have?’ ‘I am a CDEP worker’, they say with pride. They are on different teams doing different things.
It is difficult to transition people. If you have been unemployed, perhaps generational unemployment, going to a full-time job is a huge step into the work culture. However, CDEP, where people are doing four hours a day on a regular basis, allows people to have some work knowledge, a work uniform, and gain skills on the job. It is a great program. From my experience, it is vital for a community, vital for lifting the community up, and lifting people up to a level to jump to a full-time job.
Mr Giles: Do you condemn Jenny Macklin for her changes?
Mr KNIGHT: Member for Braitling, I will be working with them to help understand CDEP in the Northern Territory is a very successful program. The wages component of CDEP is Centrelink, so that proportion of money will change from being delivered by a CDEP provider to being delivered by Centrelink. The capital and recurrent cost is the same as the training programs government would have to run if it abolished the program. It is a very good program; the local project developed by local communities brings a great sense of ownership.
With respect to local government grants and local government funding, the member for Nelson knows a formula is developed by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, emulated by the Northern Territory Grants Commission, and it is per person with some other factors built into it. Basically, you get a set number for a set number of people and you have to work with that.
Mr Wood: The government said it would create more jobs.
Mr KNIGHT: I accept that. You receive a set amount of dollars per person in the community and you have to work with that. That is where CDEP can come in. CDEP was not developed by some bureaucrat in Canberra; it was the Beswick community in the 1960s or 1970s. The community said: ‘We do not want to sit down, we want to work’.
Mr Wood: Yes, it was over at Bathurst Island too.
Mr KNIGHT: Yes. It was a home-grown idea where people were sick of young people sitting down doing nothing.
With respect to SIHIP, I understand you are getting more information - this is the most scrutinised program in the world. They are trying to build houses and are receiving more and more requests for more and more information …
Mr Tollner: And it is still worse than the insulation debacle.
Mr KNIGHT: They spend more time with the accountability side …
Mr Tollner: You would think you would learn.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: … than doing the project. Basically, I agree. When we talk remote Indigenous, the answer in the short term has to be mobility because it is all about the economy. Jobs are created, whether in Darwin or Katherine, around the size of your economy. The economy will support certain businesses; those businesses will employ a certain number of people. That is the logic of an economy. Where you have a small economy, you cannot do that. Where you have a small economy, you cannot start a business because you do not have enough sales, and you cannot employ enough people to support those sales. It is quite logical - a small economy, few jobs.
The answer in the short term is mobility. Where you have the skills, the inspiration and the educational level you have to move to where the work is. We have this great culture in Australia of fly in/fly out. I went to Perth a couple of weeks ago; Perth airport has 10 million movements a year, people coming and going. That is the whole of Perth airport. The fly in/fly out airport at Perth has two million movements a year, so there is a population from Tasmania to the top of Cape York moving around. This is the culture of Australia, especially with the resources boom, so why can’t it happen in remote communities. After sittings, I have a …
A member: It happens in Darwin.
Mr Wood: Education is not up to it.
Mr KNIGHT: I agree with that. After sittings, I have a four day trip to one of my outstations, Emu Point – the member for Nelson would know the Sams family. I am taking those young blokes out to some mines and saying: ‘You can work there and you can bring your money home. Do not think the money is going to come in through the front door. You go out, get it, put it in your pocket and bring it home, spend it on your family. Spend it on getting a decent car for yourself to go backwards and forwards’.
What struck me about the Port Keats, Palumpa region is, back in the 1960s and 1970s, they would pack up at the start of the Dry Season and walk down through the valley, across the Fitzmaurice through the Koolendong Valley, work at Auvergne, work at all the stations in the VRD. As soon as the first Wet started they would go all the way back and sit down for the Wet Season. It is about mobility. It is a cultural fact Aboriginal people moved around where the resources were so why can we not have a population which moves?
That is an answer which poses problems. You have to have the education levels, as the member for Nelson mentioned. You have to have somewhere for people to go as well as home life skills. There are some challenges with mobility. Hopefully, we will have a major gas project in Darwin which will bring a range of workforce demands. Why cannot remote Indigenous people work there? Not the high school level; there will be few opportunities even with the current skilled workforce in Darwin to obtain those highly skilled gas project jobs. The semi-skilled - get a foot in the door, get some experience, get to live and work in the capital city, and get your foot in the door of independence.
That is the other problem. Moving to a job is about family understanding independence and ownership of money; all those things. The member for Nelson understands the money obligations and the things which bring problems to the work life. On Monday, I launched the Department of Business and Employment Indigenous Employment Strategy, which talks about understanding getting someone, perhaps an Indigenous person, in the door is the easiest part of their life because what happens after they go home, at night, or in the morning, can be more challenging than being at work. It is about understanding, respect and providing an opportunity. We have to keep doing it.
I thank the member for Nelson for his important contributions. I agree with him regarding employing remote Indigenous people in the Northern Territory Public Service. That is who I would like to see make up the 10% by 2012; getting young boys and girls from the bush into Darwin, or transition from Darwin back into jobs in their home community, or working in our regional centres. Let us give those boys and girls a start in the public service and they can go from there into the private sector or wherever they want.
I support the Chief Minister’s statement on the achievements of the Jobs Plan and our workforce priorities moving forward under Jobs NT, which I had the pleasure of launching. The Chief Minister outlined achievements to 2009 under the previous three Jobs Plans. I am pleased to outline to the House the cumulative achievements this government has delivered since the first Jobs Plan in 2003, which includes work to date under the new strategy Jobs NT. More than 2385 employers have received incentives for taking on apprentices and trainees in identified skill shortage positions and areas of need. Over 8564 apprentices and trainees have received Workwear/Workgear bonuses to assist with the cost of commencing their apprenticeship and traineeship.
In 2003, 2216 apprenticeships and traineeships commenced work, compared to 2927 in 2009. That is a 32% increase. Importantly, the number of trade apprentices in training has more than doubled from 2001 to a total of 17 056 in October 2010. There was an increase in Indigenous apprentices and trainees from 516 in 2001 to 760; just under 20% of all apprentices and trainees in the Territory - a great result. As at October 2010, approximately 27 200 additional jobs have been created - a 28% increase in the workforce since 2003. These achievements for employment in the Territory do not come by chance; they reflect the hard work done by this government. This government has an ongoing commitment to the development of a skilled workforce through education and training.
In May 2010, I launched the new workforce planning and development strategy: the Jobs NT Employment Strategy 2010-2012. The new employment strategy has been developed on robust information built up through previous job plans and consultation with industry. It has a deliberate focus on workforce planning and development with business and industry sectors, skilling and retaining Indigenous Territorians, and skilling and transitioning our young people. Jobs NT delivers opportunity and support for these priority groups so they may meet the challenges associated with labour demands, skills shortage and delivery of appropriate skills development and training. It is an investment in our future.
As the Chief Minister highlighted, in May 2010 this government committed $312m over three years to the Jobs NT plan. This commitment aims to support a sustainable workforce providing not only jobs and training, also valuable assistance for business, employers and jobseekers. This includes new funding of $11m over three years to continue this government’s ongoing commitment to support apprentices and trainees, school-based trainees, and increase Indigenous participation in the workforce. Jobs NT comprises $280m for skilling, training, student support and infrastructure administered by the Department of Education and Training; $25.85m for business support, growth, workforce development and planning; and $6.3m for enterprise development.
Supporting Territory businesses and employers is a key to successful employment of Territorians. Jobs NT has set a target to grow the size and skills of our workforce, including supporting businesses to either adopt or change some aspects of their business practices. $11.5m over three years has been committed by the Henderson Labor government to support this target through initiatives such as upskills, business coaching and business enterprise-centred workshops, ecoBiz NT and Territory Business Growth to name a few. $59m has been committed over three years to support employers to increase their intake of apprentices and trainees. As mentioned earlier, the Henderson Labor government set a new target in 2009 of an additional 10 000 apprentice and trainee commencements over four years.
I am pleased to say, as the Chief Minister highlighted today, we are on target. Some 5100 apprentices and trainees have commenced to date. While government can offer the necessary support, employers must be congratulated for their continued commitment to apprentices and trainees over the last two years. Even during the global economic crisis, employers remained committed to growing their own skilled trades.
The Chief Minister outlined a number of initiatives that are skilling our young people in schools. As a government, we believe that young Territorians should have the opportunity and support to develop knowledge and skills they need to participate in an effective workforce. Jobs NT sets a target of a 5% increase in the number of young Territorians achieving at Year 12 or equivalent Certificate II qualifications by 2012. The Henderson government is ensuring it not only has a range of strategies and initiatives to target this, but also a focus on transition for further education, training, and also employment pathways. Through the Beyond School Guarantee, senior secondary students who fulfil base requirements will be guaranteed a pathway to work or further education or training. $560 000 has been committed annually to support 40 school leavers attain their first degree. Currently, the Northern Territory public sector apprenticeship and traineeship scheme has been expanded to include 40 school-based apprentices and trainees annually, with a focus on the youth of the Territory growth towns.
As the Chief Minister mentioned in his statement, employment for all Territorians has been a priority for this government since coming to office in 2001. It is important to acknowledge the achievements of Indigenous Territorians in the labour market, and those organisations and businesses that are truly making a difference.
One example is the Larrakia Trade Training Centre. The centre showcases what can be achieved with collaboration across public and private sectors. The trade training centre is a result of the Australian and Henderson Territory Labor governments, Larrakia Development Corporation and the Ichthys joint venture partners, INPEX and TOTAL, working to support the development of an available and sustainable Indigenous labour force. My Department of Business and Employment is currently working with INPEX and has commenced planning for the future skills associated with the expansion of our gas manufacturing industry. The Indigenous employment strategy is an integral part of this plan.
This government’s 2009 A Working Future policy includes employment and economic development commitments. The local implementation plans, which have been developed in collaboration with communities, map out actions to stimulate economic development. Local implementation plans include commitments and pathways through education and targeted training to meaningful employment. The Indigenous Training and Employment Program, ITEP, supports employment initiatives in regional and remote areas.
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move the minister be given an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Mr KNIGHT: Madam Speaker, we have committed $4m to the ITEP program to date. The program has sponsored 47 projects through the Territory, and assisted 40 organisations and businesses, including Indigenous non-profit organisations, and shires. It has achieved outcomes for 750 Indigenous people by way of employment and workforce development. It is a great program.
We have also implemented Jobs Guarantee, a guarantee of employment pathways into the Northern Territory public sector for students in growth towns who achieve a Year 12 certificate. That is a great step forward for young people in the growth towns trying to get work. We also have a range of initiatives in the bush. We are trying to attract more people into the Northern Territory.
I pick up on the comments by the member for Brennan who said everyone is leaving town. He was right, but …
Mr Giles: Have you got a graph? Here we go. Hold it up.
Mr KNIGHT: I have a graph. It is a lovely graph. You are right, people are leaving town; however, you have the wrong time period. You are talking about a period when the CLP was in office ...
Members interjecting.
Mr KNIGHT: You had a nett interstate migration. This is the important one - this yellow bit shows more people leaving than arriving. In the period 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 and rolling into 2002, the CLP wrecked the economy; people were packing up their utes and driving out of town. Then we have the period of the Labor government, and the population is growing and nett migration is in the positive.
I understand the member for Brennan worked for ABS? Is that correct?
Mr Chandler: That is correct.
Mr KNIGHT: You worked for ABS. He would be aware of nett interstate migration. I have some information from the ABS. During 2008-09, there were 359 900 movements of people interstate; a similar number of movements to those recorded in the previous year. In 2008-09, nett gains were also recorded, a positive – the Northern Territory had 750 people nett, which was more than Victoria and Tasmania - a nett gain in the Northern Territory. You would know, member for Brennan, you were in the ABS. You are misleading the House. A nett increase …
Mr Bohlin: Oh come on, withdraw!
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, I ask you to withdraw those comments, please.
Mr KNIGHT: Madam Speaker, I withdraw those comments. You were not telling the truth, member for Brennan. You would know this is made public. A media release was put out yesterday by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, member for Brennan – and he lives in Palmerston, a great city. The headline is, ‘Palmerston’s Fastest Growing Region:
Mr Chandler: What do you consider low cost, you moron?
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Brennan!
Mr Chandler: I withdraw that.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you very much, member for Brennan.
Mr KNIGHT: Member for Brennan, we have massive land release because people are moving here for jobs. First you say everyone is leaving town, then you say we need to release more land because there are not enough houses for people who live here. We on this side know, and the ABS - the organisation you worked for - knows people are moving here. They are coming here because this government has run a tight and well-balanced budget. We have businesses and major projects coming here and we have people coming for the high paid jobs.
The major projects require higher skill levels, which is why we have programs in place allowing people to transition their skills, uplift their skills so they can share in these major projects. We are working with the business community around the labour force demands that will be created by the major projects. We will have more to say about that as things move on.
Madam Speaker, this is a great statement brought by the Chief Minister. It shows we are doing things right in the jobs area. We have the lowest rate of unemployment and the highest participation rates in the country. I acknowledge that we have to do much more in the bush. However, we have strategies in place; we have to implement them and get people to take them up.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Speaker, the member for Daly mentioned remote communities and people being able to fly in and fly out. I have mentioned this before in this House, and it is appropriate to reiterate some of the comments in relation to the prospect of Darwin becoming the only fly in/fly out capital city in the country.
I was talking to some local people recently who fly their staff in for a period of time and put them up in dormitory-style accommodation because they cannot find accommodation at a reasonable cost, and then fly them out. This is the hospitality industry, not mining companies in remote areas; businesses in Darwin and in the CBD flying staff in and then flying them out because they cannot find reasonable accommodation. We also have people flying in and out from mining operations in the Territory. They fly into Darwin, sit in the Qantas Club, and then fly to Bali, where they live.
The member for Daly suggested people in remote communities can come and go, earn their money and take it home. Because many people do not live here - and I am aware we have a global workforce in some of the skill sets we need, these are ordinary people who do not have the high skill sets required for some sites who reside in Bali because it is cheaper. They fly to Darwin, spend a couple of hours in the Qantas Club enjoying the hospitality, jump on the plane and two hours later are home in Bali. Where are they taking their money? Not to Darwin or the Territory. They are taking it out of the Territory because it is cheaper.
We in the Territory, and the government on our behalf, spend a great deal of money advertising interstate to attract people to the Territory. The title of this ministerial statement is: ‘Jobs in the Territory’ and that is great. We attract people; they come but cannot afford to live here.
I was doorknocking recently and spoke to people who had moved to Darwin several years ago. They are mid-level public servants. They came to Darwin, bought a boat, got a great house going, and they said: ‘We love the Territory but cannot afford the rent. Both of us are working, we have a couple of kids, but we cannot afford to live here’. Unfortunately, having spent enormous amounts of money moving people from interstate, these people will leave the Territory, take their experience and local knowledge with them, and we have the expense of replacing them. These people work in an industry where there will be a large number of resignations at Christmas for the same reason. It is the topic of discussion at their workplace. None of them can afford to pay the rent in Darwin. Life has become too hard, too difficult and they are moving.
I have been approached by a number of parents of apprentices. These young people cannot afford to leave home; they cannot afford to buy anything. They are stuck in a cycle because rents are horrendous, again brought on by the lack of land release. The member for Daly mentioned releasing suburb after suburb as if there are thousands of blocks of land for all and sundry to purchase an affordable block of land. I would like to know the address please; I will buy some for my kids! I do not know where they are. Could the member for Daly give us an address so we can buy affordable blocks of land? This puts pressure on young families and is tearing families apart. Young people, unfortunately, cannot stay and need to move interstate where they can afford to rent a house and, if they work hard, can afford to buy a home. Unfortunately, that is not the case in the Territory.
The family I mentioned previously had a nice boat in their yard and I said: ‘Obviously you like fishing’. They said: ‘Yes, we love fishing. The problem is most of our money goes in rent and the cost of living and we cannot afford to run the boat’. They could not afford to buy petrol to have a great weekend of fishing and enjoy what we had in the past, the great Territory lifestyle.
I understand many small businesses are struggling. Things are supposed to be good - the government tells us everything is great. We have an increase in population. Small business says they do not know where these extra people are; some are 30% down on this time last year, and in some months even more. The price of renting a property in the northern suburbs - I am more familiar with that area than Palmerston and Alice Springs - is so high families have to pay an ever increasing proportion of their income in rent which prevents them spending money on entertainment, on their kids going out to the movies, or having a good time.
In fact, the disposable income of families in the northern suburbs is on the way down. That is borne out by talking to business. Ask how things are going and they say: ‘We are struggling a little; power has gone up; the cost of running the business is going up; and our daily turnover is going down’. This is happening to the point where people are starting to lower stock levels; shut down anything which consumes power; turn the air-conditioner off when they can to save money because they are not making the dollars to pay the expensive bills.
The other aspect is numbers are shifting in relation to skills and services in the northern suburbs. It is interesting talking to schools and looking at the projected figures. Young families are not staying in the northern suburbs. There are vacant houses and school numbers are down - young families cannot afford to pay the rent.
You find mid-level public servants cannot afford to buy a house. People are saying: ‘I rent the place and there are three of us living here’. One person earning about $75 000 a year told me recently they could not afford to buy a house. Houses are so expensive they are out of reach for many people. People are struggling. Three people, all on good incomes, in a house struggling to pay rent. Their ability to enjoy the great Territory lifestyle has been stymied by the cost of rent and the cost of buying a home.
That was not the case a few years ago. The government says things are great; there are many jobs. However, how will we keep people here to fill those jobs? The number of job vacancies I am hearing will occur this Christmas is alarming. In the New Year there will be more vacancies; we will struggle. Government will need to spend enormous amounts of money advertising to attract people. When people ring estate agents and discover rental costs they lose interest. Why has this happened? The lack of land has forced prices up; there are not enough houses; we have people living in caravans; people living in small rooms underneath elevated homes paying exorbitant prices.
A member: How will 1000 soldiers affect the nett migration?
Madam SPEAKER: Order! The member for Sanderson has the call. Order!
Mr STYLES: It affects a range of things. This is a bad time of the year. Try to get a refrigeration mechanic fix an air-conditioner or a fridge. You cannot find one. A group of refrigeration mechanics were renting a house in a suburb in my electorate and all have left the Territory because it is too expensive to live here. Five refrigeration mechanics have left the Territory.
Where will we find the people for the great projects the government says are coming on line? All sorts of things are in the pipeline. The government says all is wonderful and there is going to be great growth and expansion. Where will all these people live? What will that do to house prices? People who built this Territory have children struggling to get a deposit to buy a home. Every week, because of the lack of land release and lack of planning by the government, they are forced further out of the market to the point where they leave.
When these big projects come on line what is going to happen? Darwin will become a fly-in/fly-out city. Civil engineers and people who understand the land release process will tell you it cannot be done overnight. They say planning is not there. We hear the rhetoric; the planning is not there. The government says it is; it has been telling Territorians that for years but we do not see the results. We see it across so many different areas. We are talking about child protection today, and we see the failures there. A private member’s bill will be introduced tomorrow regarding smoke alarms. This is as a result of a coronial inquiry. There is a lack of action by the government on that issue. What is the government doing for young people desperately trying to buy a house? What is it doing for people who want to enjoy the Territory lifestyle, yet are hampered by the lack of planning by this government?
I have three adult children living in the Territory. They struggle and it is up to parents - most parents I talk to want their children to remain in the Territory. Even though their kids have good jobs, they still struggle to get into the housing market and parents are assisting them. If you want to keep your family here, increasingly parents have to help children with deposits and payments, and help keep them going for a few years until they are on their feet. That is fine if parents are in a position to do that.
Many Territorians struggle to survive with the high cost of living and the high cost of rent brought on by a lack of planning by the government. They struggle to survive, let alone help their children. It saddens me when I have people sitting in my office crying. They are struggling to survive, their kids are struggling, and they ask: ‘Why can we not get assistance? Why can we not get into a Housing Commission home? Why will the government not help us?’ I have to make suggestions and write letters to the minister. People writing letters for the minister are trying to do the right thing and give people hope but the waiting list is enormous.
Madam Speaker, when we say jobs in the Territory, we need real action across the board from the government, not pieces of paper which say how good it is. People are struggling - good Territorians; children of people who built the Territory. Government needs to have a close look at itself and say: ‘We desperately need more land released; we need to do more for young Territorians’. When we offer people jobs in the Territory we need to offer support services such as health, education, law and order, and all the things to ensure people enjoy the wonderful Territory lifestyle.
Mr HAMPTON (Central Australia): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on jobs in the Northern Territory. My contribution will be in two parts: one from a personal work background - I had 12 years experience in the employment and training area before coming into parliament; and the other part is in my portfolio responsibilities through Natural Resources and Environment, Parks and Wildlife, as well as Sport and Recreation, and ICT, and the many opportunities coming from those portfolios, particularly jobs in the Northern Territory and creating more jobs for future generations.
Turning to my work experience, back in 1989 I began working with the Commonwealth Employment Service as a trainee AO1. I joined through public service entry exams, and it was probably my first real job. That is the important part the public service has played in the Northern Territory, particularly for Indigenous people. It is where many of us had our first real job. The member for Nelson said the public service has a very critical role in Indigenous employment and creating further opportunities for Indigenous Territorians. For me, starting at the bottom of the public service as a trainee AO1 in CES 1989 was a big step. The public employment area in the Commonwealth Public Service changed names several times over my 10 years in the CES.
That is one of the serious problems we have when talking about creating more jobs for Indigenous people. We have governments - more at the Commonwealth level - continually changing policy and programs when it comes to the public employment and labour market. People in the bush often become lost and overwhelmed with the changes; not only the names of departments and names of different labour market programs. When we talk about CDEP we are talking about work for the dole. In 1989, there was a Training for Aboriginals Program, with two smaller programs under that policy. One, known as A31, was a work experience type-program, where employers could receive a wage subsidy of 100% to employ an Indigenous person for six weeks, and another program called A30, which was more for longer-term projects over three months or so. The government would provide a subsidy to employers for a particular project.
My first real job was through the Commonwealth Public Service and over the 10 years I worked there I saw various changes to Commonwealth employment and training policy and programs which, in the Northern Territory, have had a significant impact on Indigenous employment.
Listening to the Chief Minister’s contribution, and to my colleagues on this side of the House, we have much to celebrate in employment in the Northern Territory. For me, there are still many challenges in the bush we need to tackle to achieve true equity in jobs in the Northern Territory.
Going back to my personal experiences in the CES, there were many changes over the 10 years I worked there, particularly during the era of Paul Keating being Prime Minister. We had labour market programs and …
Mr Tollner: The golden years, Karl.
Mr HAMPTON: Well, they were golden years because …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr HAMPTON: I was probably fortunate, member for Fong Lim; I had worked in the public service during two completely different styles of government. We had the Keating era, then the John Howard era, where we saw privatisation. We saw privatisation of employment during the Howard years, particularly public employment. That had a detrimental effect on Indigenous employment, particularly in the bush. As I said, through my 10 years in the CES I was fortunate enough to go through two different eras of government. Not being too critical, but the biggest changes to public employment we saw in Australia’s history were during the Howard years when he took on the public service. He went in with an iron fist and cut back on public service numbers. That was his objective. What occurred was the privatisation of public employment, which had a significant impact on delivering employment programs in remote communities. There were problems with training for Aboriginals program and subsidies - 100% for work experience prior to Howard - and the beginning of the national employment program.
We saw privatisation of many remote employment and training programs which serviced many remote communities in the Northern Territory. Privatisation of public employment services under Howard saw a withdrawal of public employment services to the bush. That had a significant impact on the situation we have today. I was at the coalface; I was delivering some of these programs to remote communities in Alice Springs and around Central Australia for 10 years and saw firsthand the significant impacts of privatising public employment. Not only did it have a big impact on the office in Alice Springs - the CES had something like 60 staff working in Alice Springs to deliver these programs, when it was privatised, staff dwindled to 10 or 15. That has a significant impact when talking about delivering employment and training programs to people in such a vast and remote area as Central Australia. That is my personal experience. We are still seeing the ramifications of Howard privatising the CES to employment national and the Job Network today, particularly in remote communities.
I also had the opportunity to work for a mining company and for the Central Land Council, particularly focusing on Indigenous employment. My year of experience at the Granites with Normandy Mines when it was run by Robert de Crespigny was during an era where mining companies became focused on being good corporate citizens, focusing on Indigenous employment and supporting Indigenous businesses. It was a great time to be employed by the mining industry and my short time at the Granites saw me setting up the Indigenous Affairs department, working with the land councils and focusing on getting Indigenous employment up to 15% at the Granites and Tanami gold mines; that was a challenge. The member for Daly talked about his experiences in managing a CDEP program and the enormous challenges in getting Indigenous people into real jobs and keeping them there. I had that experience during my time at the Granites Gold Mine.
We talk about the challenges – numeracy and literacy are right up there in getting Indigenous people to a standard where the mining industry is able to employ them. During my time there were challenges with young Indigenous men holding a job, having to deal with jealousy issues with their partners and being away from their home community. We made a conscious effort to bring those Indigenous people into the mining culture by putting them on the same roster, two weeks on one week off, which provided challenges. Sometimes we were not flexible enough.
We focused on getting people into jobs on the same rosters and routines as the other miners. That presented even more challenges because jealousy is a significant issue for young Indigenous men; having to work at a mine site and live in a mining camp away from home. Two weeks on, one week off is hard enough for non-Indigenous workers but for young Indigenous men it presented real problems and had a significant impact on retaining young men after their first two weeks and their first pay. That is the other big issue; many of these young Indigenous men came from not only illiterate backgrounds, but from backgrounds where they did not know how to spend money. They have cultural obligations to support a larger extended family group. They have issues because of their cultural obligations, whether it is through business, ceremonies, sorry business, that sort of thing.
There is a range of things the members for Nelson and Daly mentioned which are real issues. We can talk about success - and many of my colleagues have talked about success – however, in my experience of 10 years in the public service through the CES, 12 months at the Granites Gold Mine and the 12 months I worked for the Central Land Council focusing on the mining industry, there are still huge challenges for us as a government, and for the private sector, in getting Indigenous people out of the too hard basket. That was the title given to these people in the CES. Most were long-term unemployed Indigenous people. We would put them in the too hard basket and often they would be left there for many years. I suppose many of those people are still there. The challenges are there. As a government I have confidence in some of the policies we are bringing out in A Working Future, the growth towns …
A member: Which ones?
Mr HAMPTON: A Working Future, the growth towns. There are huge challenges.
Mr Giles: Which ones do you not have confidence in?
Mr HAMPTON: There are obligations, member for Braitling, both on government and the private sector. Government cannot do this alone. We need to bring the community with us. We need to talk to those young fellows about some of the challenges they face with real jobs.
When I worked with Normandy, and with the Central Land Council, I learnt we do not talk much about encouraging Indigenous people to set up their own businesses - encourage Indigenous entrepreneurs. I was involved in a joint venture with the Granites and Roche Brothers, who were operating the open cut mine contract, and with Yuendumu Mining Company and Sid Rusca, and it was for a joint venture on the backfill project with Callie Underground goldmine.
The whole experience showed me there is a great deal of work to do with the private sector. The mining, supply and service contracts are sometimes so huge it is overwhelming for Indigenous contractors to break into that environment. As a government, we have to encourage Indigenous contractors to access the supply contracts, particularly in the mining industry. We also have to encourage Indigenous entrepreneurs. That is one area I would like to see our government focus more on. Much of that has to do with government procurement and tender processes; however, much is in the private sector. Much is about negotiating these things in mining leases; it is one area we need to work on. My short time working in the mining industry saw the setting up of one joint venture which resulted in some jobs, although it is not there now. It probably lasted five or six years then the joint venture ceased to continue.
There are many more challenges in the bush. I would like to see government focus more on the too hard basket; getting Indigenous workers out of that basket into real jobs and it is the responsibility of everyone. It is the responsibility of government and the private sector. That is why, when minister for Regional Development, I worked on the Indigenous Economic Development Strategy. We had some ambitious targets and outcomes I wanted to see achieved in relation to the strategy.
I will mention those targets. As a government, we have set that 3000 Indigenous Territorians will commence employment across the private and public sectors by 2012. The second outcome is 10% Indigenous employment in the Northern Territory Pubic Service and my colleague, the member for Daly, has recently launched our Indigenous Employment Strategy. The third ambitious target was to set up 200 new Indigenous businesses. Since the portfolio change I do not know where we are with that. I will be finding out and hopefully my colleague, the member for Arnhem, will inform us during her contribution. I also wanted to provide tax incentives for not only Indigenous businesses, but for people to create business opportunities on Indigenous lands using tax incentives to achieve that. In my time as the Regional Development minister I pushed for some things, but it is very difficult. We still have a long way to go.
From a personal point of view, I had good role models. My father worked continuously in the bush as a grader operator/plant operator, and my mother worked as a domestic in the hospital. Two or three generations of Indigenous kids do not have those models, particularly when it comes to work ethic. They are the principles and foundations we need to get back to and provide these young Indigenous kids with good role models and leadership, and the profiling my colleague, the member for Arnhem, is doing in the growth towns and the opportunities that exist.
I also join my colleague, the member for Johnston, in his comments on SIHIP, in Alice Springs particularly. As Minister for Central Australia, I have taken the opportunity to visit many of the town camps and look at the success. We should not be ashamed to say some things are working. Some are having success ...
Mr Tollner: Some things.
Mr HAMPTON: If you get out to Morris Soak and the Trucking Yards in the electorate of Braitling, you will see young Indigenous men doing apprenticeships on SIHIP’s projects. That is success and we should be proud of it. Talking to those young men, as my colleague, the minister for Housing has, they are very proud of their achievements. We should not be knocking them down every time they achieve. There is a long way to go. Going to Morris Soak and the Trucking Yards and talking to those young Indigenous men, they are as proud of their getting apprenticeship as I was when I got my traineeship as an AO1 in the CES so many years ago.
I agree with the member for Johnston on the success of the transformation plan. We can talk about how many houses we have built and renovated, but the Indigenous employment target has been well and truly achieved in this project. It is around 30% at the moment. There is a role to play. There are flow-on effects of programs such as SIHIP in the town camps. The minister also talked about Mt Gillen House in Alice Springs, where I had the pleasure of handing over keys with minister Macklin not long ago. That is providing accommodation; Aboriginal Hostels is managing that. It has created many jobs for Indigenous apprentices. We have Percy Court, the accommodation park, the lodge. Many things are happening in Alice Springs and it has been a great boost for the local economy.
The Chamber of Commerce recently held a forum with 30 to 40 businesses attending. The business community was right behind that. It has been a successful program, and I am sure there are going to be great outcomes. The Indigenous employment outcome has been fantastic.
Turning to my portfolio of Parks and Wildlife, it is very important this government has invested strongly in the infrastructure of our parks. We know how important they are to tourism and the regions, particularly in joint management with traditional owners. It will create more jobs for people on country. The Henderson Labor government has invested heavily in our parks, and I will mention a few: $7.5m over the last few years for upgrades at Litchfield National Park; $5.2m for upgrades of Leanyer; $2.1m for …
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I move that the member be given an extension pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr HAMPTON: Madam Speaker, I thank colleagues for their support.
Going back to parks: $2.1m …
Mr Conlan: This has been going for five hours.
Mr HAMPTON: Sorry?
Mr Conlan: Five hours.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Minister, you have the call.
Mr HAMPTON: What did you say?
Mr Conlan: The statement has been going for five hours.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, you have the call.
Mr HAMPTON: It is an important statement.
Mr Conlan: It is not an important statement; it is a joke.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Greatorex! Order!
Mr HAMPTON: I am entitled to speak, as is everyone else, without getting …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask the minister direct his comments through the Chair.
Madam SPEAKER: Indeed, member for Braitling. I am sure if there was not the cross-chatter it would not be an issue. Minister, you have the call.
Mr HAMPTON: This government has invested strongly in our parks: $2.1m to upgrade essential services at Nitmiluk in my electorate of Stuart; $3m on upgrades to Howard Springs; and $3m to the West MacDonnell Visitors Centre. Many dollars have also been put in via capital works, minor new works, and repairs and maintenance across the Territory every year.
Turning to my sporting portfolio, we have invested strongly in sporting infrastructure projects including: $4.2m in the athletics track redevelopment at Arafura Stadium; $4.6m into the drag strip upgrade at Hidden Valley; $3m to other major sporting infrastructure works at Hidden Valley; $1.62m for upgrades at TIO Stadium; $495 000 for upgrades at Traeger Park; $8.1m into the aquatic centre in Alice Springs; as well as significant upgrades and works towards the Katherine sporting precinct and the Purkis Reserve in Tennant Creek. We continue to roll-out these job-creating projects with new construction due to commence in the coming months, including: $29m Palmerston sporting facility; $13.6m at Palmerston Water Park, and many other opportunities and commitments to our growth towns.
Turning to my Environment portfolio, we have the EnvironmeNT Grants program; the Environment and Heritage division provides operational support to a range of environmental non-government organisations such as the Environment Centre of the Northern Territory, Arid Lands Environment Centre, and Keep Australia Beautiful Council of the Northern Territory. Operational grants support these organisations in a number of ways, including providing the funding to employ personnel, while the Environment and Heritage division provides operational support to the Top End COOLmob and Desert COOLmob in Alice Springs, which is utilised to employ program managers for these organisations.
The Environment and Heritage division is also leading the establishment of the Northern Territory Cash for Containers scheme. The scheme will operate throughout the Northern Territory, and I will be introducing legislation this week. It is expected to create new jobs in urban, regional and remote areas in the recovery and recycling of beverage containers. Preliminary estimates are approximately 50 jobs will be created at collection depots across the Northern Territory. On my trip to Adelaide earlier this year I was able to visit several depots and the super collectors - a very labour intensive-type environment - and I am sure those jobs will be suitable for many people in the growth towns.
Through the Active Remote Communities funding program of the Indigenous Sports Unit, we provide funding for 57 community sport and rec officers across the Northern Territory. The agency is working with the Department of Education and Training to develop a pilot program to use art, sport, and Parks and Wildlife concepts in the school curriculum. I look forward to working with my colleague, the member for Barkly, on that as a means to attract and retain remote Indigenous students in school. Numeracy and literacy levels are so important in getting those kids into real jobs.
Mr Conlan: What is your action plan, Karl?
Mr HAMPTON: You are so cheeky and so rude.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr HAMPTON: The Alice Springs Desert Park has developed an apprentice work ready program for new apprentices commencing in the Northern Territory Public Service. This is an eight-day program which builds upon the successes of the Desert Park. This offer was extended to all Northern Territory Public Service agencies in Alice Springs last week.
Madam Speaker, I could go on talking from my personal experience of 10 years in the Commonwealth Public Service at the CES, in the private sector with Normandy at the Granites, the CLC, particularly in the mining industry, and through my portfolios. I support the Chief Minister’s statement. I believe there are many challenges ahead, particularly to get people in the bush out of the too hard basket.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, the Northern Territory government is overseeing a banana economy underpinned by welfare and social programs, with a complete lack of focus on economic direction, industry growth and job creation. Today’s statement is reflective of exactly that. We talk about jobs created in a welfare sector, how much money in programs the government has put in, but nothing about what it has done for industry development and job creation, nothing at all.
When we look at jobs we have to look at the government. When this statement came out at 11.45 pm yesterday, or whatever irresponsible time it was, I thought what a perfect opportunity to talk about the government and its performance. We have 12 members of the Labor government of the Northern Territory, and a number of ministers who are doing a poor job. When you put that in the context of a banana economy underpinned by social programs, the welfare class, and a lack of attention on the economy and job creation, it is important to reflect on what has been said tonight, and what ministers in this government continue to say.
The Chief Minister often talks about his portfolio of Police, and law and order, in the Chamber and publicly. The Minister for Alcohol Policy is also the Treasurer and Minister for Racing, Gaming and Licensing. She talks about alcohol policy. We know the Enough is Enough campaign is happening, and some proposed alcohol reforms in Alice Springs to limit alcohol supply up to 2 pm - another socialist regime coming into place in the Northern Territory. The Minister for Education and Training cannot get kids to school, cannot educate people and has NAPLAN results going backwards. He is also the Minister for Public Employment with the public service unhappy, and the Minister for Public and Affordable Housing - we know the situation with housing in the Territory and are all aware of SIHIP, which happens to be another welfare program in the Northern Territory.
Ms Walker: Houses for people.
Mr GILES: It is not building houses, member for Nhulunbuy. The Minister for Health has problems in the hospital system and child protection. Fortunately, he attempts to do something in his mining portfolio, but he cannot get the other parts right.
We have the member for Daly, the Minister for Essential Services, with the lights going out, donkeys hitting power lines, snakes on the lines, and so forth. We do not hear him talking about business, employment and job creation. He did not speak about that tonight - he spoke about how good CDEP is. That was his speech: how good CDEP is; nothing about job creation. He does not talk about Asian Relations, he has no idea of Defence Support and how we develop that industry, and he seems to have completely forgotten senior and young Territorians. When the member for Barkly was minister for senior and young Territorians we heard about it.
We have the member for Arnhem, the Minister for Local Government, which is a complete shambles. The shire system in the Territory is an absolute disgrace. She does not talk about Regional Development. The member for Stuart spoke about when he was Minister for Regional Development; he did much more in that area. Indigenous Development – she will speak on a statement but there is not much happening. The thing we hear most from the member for Arnhem is her statements on statehood. As if we are going to achieve statehood when they run such a shambles here!
The minister for turds in the harbour, the member for Stuart, we do not hear …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, I ask you to withdraw that, thank you. This is the parliament, member for Braitling.
Mr GILES: I withdraw. The minister for the poo shooter, as it is commonly known in voter land. We do not hear anything on climate change. All we hear about is E. coli and bacteria levels in the water. The member for Barkly, minister for corrections, seems to talk so much about prisons.
There is not much in this House about jobs and job creation. When the ministers have to look after their portfolios they are missing in action. The minister for SIHIP missing in action and the CEO had to represent him. The Minister for Child Protection was in China. The minister for bringing people back to Yuendumu from Adelaide was sunbaking in New Caledonia - all missing in action. When we talk about jobs, it is important to talk about ministers who are not doing their job.
I will reflect quickly on something the member for Stuart said. He spoke about the importance of the housing developments in town camps, and particularly spoke about Morris Soak and the Trucking Yards. He made assertions being negative about the SIHIP program is being negative to those employed. That is not the case at all. Those people should be in training; they should be in long-term jobs. The issue is the amount of waste which has occurred getting those houses built. The fact you spent $500m building 88 houses is what you should be looking at.
You talk about tax incentives on Indigenous lands. Tax incentives and economic zones are fantastic ideas; however, you have just had $672m, now $1.2bn, to build 750 houses despite the fact you are getting rid of 750 houses, when that money could have gone into infrastructure with public/private partnerships or some industry and business sector development to create jobs.
You talk about Indigenous people getting jobs. The member for Daly thinks CDEP is his employment program and is how to do things as Minister for Business and Employment. You had money sitting there you could have used.
A debate will happen tomorrow in relation to the NBN. Stacks of money will be spent in the Territory on the NBN. We should be considering how best to utilise that money for job creation, economic growth and productivity gains in the Northern Territory. It is not just about laying the fibre-optic cable. There are other ways to do business. I know you will vote it down because you have Senator Conroy in Canberra and have to follow political lines.
You cannot think outside the welfare program prism; you cannot think in an economic context. That is what you should be thinking about. You had the opportunity to do this with SIHIP, you will have it again with NBN in the Territory - will it deliver anything here?
For all future SIHIP spending you should stop the alliance model, work our public/private partnerships with the shires and get long-term investment into communities, not just a slap and tickle house job.
It is interesting reading the CTC report the member for Nelson presented earlier today. The CTC is saying they want to move away from the alliance model and look to the shires. That is what is coming out of the report. The minister for SIHIP has made jokes about how I believe we should remove the alliance model. Now we are seeing the CTC - two members of government sit on the CTC - say the same thing. You have to look at how industries are developed in the Northern Territory. We are in a position to …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr GILES: I cannot hear. I have noise in the back of my ear.
The Territory is a banana economy. We are in a prime position with direct links to Asia. We have the opportunity for expansion, to become part of Asia - not to forget Australia – we need to think about things. The minerals and gas developments in Western Australia - the four major projects - and the two in Queensland are going to starve the Northern Territory of labour. The member for Sanderson was right when he said the Territory is becoming a fly-in/fly-out town. Some of our most senior bureaucrats fly-in/fly-out on a weekly basis. I will not get into the housing side of it - how the member for Johnston has failed in housing, along with Chief Minister and all his merry men and women.
We have a perfect opportunity to redirect ourselves. We should not forget how, in 2008, the Chief Minister went to an election 19 months early on the back of an impending INPEX announcement. If we are not careful we will have no workers in the Territory because they have all gone to Western Australia and Queensland. There is a need for urgent release of land across the Territory so we can get housing supply in affordable markets, where the market will still determine the price and the supply will not have a negative impact on current housing stocks but will ensure we have a plethora of housing to bring people to town. We can then work on our construction industries and other areas rather than the industries we specialise in at the moment. We can have a complete paradigm shift in how the Territory operates from being a mendicant state to one where we are contributors to the Australian economy, not just receivers - people with their hands out all the time.
It is interesting to look at some of the 2006 census data. Whether it is Alligator, Barkly, Bathurst, Melville, Central NT, Daly, Darwin City or East Arnhem, look at employed persons by industry by those statistical divisions. The leader in employment across the board is public administration and safety, then healthcare and social assistance, then education and training. You have to go a long way down the list to find private sector employment. Warranted, jobs in education and training are important, and public administration and safety are necessary; however, we have to have jobs in the private sector to contribute to the rest of the economy.
All the debate around the world on climate change and the need for action on carbon is very important. Whilst I do not always agree with the different strategies, climate change is real and we need to do things. We have a significant opportunity in the centre of the Territory to develop research and development industries around solar, and how we can improve solar, not just for Alice Springs, but Australia as a continent, its population and the world. There is an opportunity to move into research and development in many fields, whether it is uranium mining, nuclear enrichment, solar technology, or a number of other things to assist in the climate change debate which is very topical around the world. We should be looking at these things, not putting our head in the sand like the Chief Minister did at the Araluen by-election, discounting uranium because he thought it was politically exciting.
This is an industry opportunity, subject to environmental safety nets, we have thrown out. We see at Roper River, with Sherwin Iron and Western Desert Resources, opportunities for iron ore and the potential export. I have not heard anyone talk of those positive opportunities. Of course, everything goes through environmental protection; however, these are massive opportunities. We talk about opportunities for Indigenous employment. I am firm believer in economic zones, and I have spoken about these many times.
Where you have economies and jobs, we should be turning off the welfare tap. The welfare tap should be working where we cannot develop jobs or cannot get industry working. Where there is an industry with jobs - and Roper is a prime example of where we can develop an industry; whether we need to build a train line, new port services in the Roper, or we come through the port - wherever that may be - there is an opportunity to build jobs and get people off the dole.
We need to refine the housing system to a private market housing system so we do not have to keep putting SIHIP against the wall all the time. This is how we reform our economy, reform the Territory and look forward. We have to do these things. We do not have any champions on the other side leading the approach. All I have heard tonight, apart from a few things from the member for Stuart, maybe one or two things if the member for Barkly speaks, has been about welfare, programs, Indigenous employment and CDEP. Get over it! CDEP should be a tool in a suite of services, not the be-all-and-end-all. Let us get everyone on CDEP and put our hands in our pocket and play tiddlywinks. What are we doing? Pocket billiards? This is ridiculous.
I cannot go past tax incentives the member for Stuart spoke about; the opportunity to develop our economic zones, work through tax incentives. You, as a minister, have to do things. It is a difficult area - I worked in this area in Canberra years before I came to the Territory. It is tough to get this through. Many are against it, especially interstate jurisdictions. You can work on this. Combine economic zones, taxation zones and welfare zones and say: no more welfare; there are jobs here. There are jobs in Alice Springs, and there are jobs in the Territory. The reason things were bad in the mid- to late-1990s was because we came out of the Paul Keating recession we had to have. It became better, not because of the economic brainwave of the Labor government of the Territory, but because John Howard was in Canberra enacting economic reform with Peter Costello. We were getting jobs; we were getting change. That is what it was all about.
I would not be waving the Chief Minister flag saying: ‘Look at what we saved’. There is another reason, and the member for Sanderson touched on it. If you do not have a job in the Territory you cannot afford to live, unless you are lucky enough to get a SIHIP house, a tin shed, a sleeping bag or a tent, depending on where you are. Unemployment is low because people who do not have a job or cannot afford rent are leaving.
We talk about job creation; let us talk about childcare. I touched on it in the last sittings several times. Childcare across the Territory is in a bad position. A working family needs childcare. This is an issue across the Territory not just in my electorate of Braitling. My colleagues, the members for Greatorex and Araluen, experience this. It is a problem in the member for Barkly’s area, the member for Katherine, and through Palmerston and Darwin. There are better solutions in remote communities now than previously. As part of the intervention, there were some changes with childcare and preschool. In the major communities and townships it is a problem because there are not enough places. There are not enough workers to fill the centres, and if new centres were built, there would not be enough workers. Training for childcare is also difficult in the Northern Territory.
I recently received an e-mail, as have my colleagues in Alice Springs, from constituents in Larapinta who have raised the idea of getting the wives of workers at Pine Gap involved in the childcare industry. That is a fantastic idea, and I would like the Minister for Central Australia to consider how that might be done. It will be difficult because you cannot receive training for childcare in Alice Springs.
This is as about jobs, which relates to Kevin Rudd and his working families. I have a flyer - FaHCSIA 1422.0309, the Australian government Department of Family and Community Services, Making a Difference titled, ‘What happens when a childcare service does not have enough places for families wanting care?’ It goes through the priority list, which is very important in the context of jobs and how we support our economic growth. It says:
It is important to put that in context. In the context of jobs and working families, this is how child care organisations have to allocate placements:
priority 1 - a child at risk of serious abuse or neglect;
priority 2 - a child of a single parent who satisfies, or of both parents who satisfy, the work/training/study test under section 14 of the Family Assistance Act;
No mention of jobs or working families.
Ms PURICK: Madam Speaker, I move that the member be granted an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, I advise you the House adjourns at 9 pm; you can see how you are going at that time.
Mr GILES: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
priority 3 - any other child.
children in families on lower incomes;
children in families with a non-English speaking background;
children in socially isolated families; and
children of single parents.
Not once does it mention working families. I am not denigrating people in those categories but surely we have a responsibility to look after children from working families.
This statement is about jobs and I have not heard anyone talk about childcare and how we look after working families. I have not heard anyone talking about the people who have to leave the Territory because they cannot find childcare. We hear about housing when raised by the Country Liberals, who are socially conscious and have an economic focus on the Territory; however, we do not hear about childcare. I encourage the Minister for Central Australia to look into the American non-employed workforce in Alice Springs being trained to work in childcare to help address the need for childcare in the Territory, particularly in Alice Springs.
We heard much about jobs for Indigenous Territorians and the minister for Employment, the member for Daly, spoke about how important CDEP is for the Territory and how good it is to get Aboriginal people on CDEP. It would have been better if he spoke about how many Aboriginal employees are trapped in a denigrating employment position. Many Aboriginal employees work in positions of ACPOs or teacher assistants and are never given the opportunity to move into full-time jobs. People have been Indigenous education assistants for 20 years and cannot break through to become a teacher - have never been able to set a class lesson because they have not been given the opportunity. It would be good if the minister for Education could talk about the training received at Batchelor in a school-related environment with opportunities for teacher assistants to move between communities rather than being stuck in one community because that is where they were trained. It would be good to transition people from Aboriginal Community Police Officers to police officers.
I would have liked to have seen much more about job development in this statement. If the great, big, white hope of INPEX does not happen, what is our future? Many people across the Territory and I, as a representative, wonder if INPEX is coming. What if it does not? We have hung on this hope for two years. What if INPEX does not come? What is our future? What will we do? We have not seen a growth in our minerals mining sector in the Territory like Western Australia, Queensland, and other parts of the world. We have seen a socialist, green-grabbing preference notion put forward by government which sends out signals it is anti-mining and anti-uranium.
This is a prime opportunity to be saviours of the climate change debate. I encourage government to get on board and have a say about the future of the climate in the world, how we address greenhouse gases, how we solve power problems, how we ensure the developing nations are not emitting so much gas it will be to the detriment of all societies, including Australia, including the Northern Territory and all electorates within it.
I encourage the government to change its paradigm and move towards a job creation and industry development paradigm rather than this socialist, welfare-based, mendicant status where it seeks to take money from the federal government and manage programs so poorly nothing seems to change. We end up with a negative debate about the failures of government. I would love to be celebrating how …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, it is now 9 pm. You may finish if you wish to.
Mr GILES: Madam Speaker, I will finish at a later date.
Debate suspended.
Madam SPEAKER: The Assembly is now adjourned, pursuant to Standing Order 41A.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, the government is investing more into the Territory Arts and Museums sector than ever before. The NT Arts budget has grown steadily since 2001 and support for arts organisations has also increased.
Statistics compiled by the National Centre for Culture and Recreation reveal that the per capita spend on arts in the Northern Territory in 2008-09 was $45.31, a full $12.17 above the national average of $33.14 per person. The Northern Territory per capita investment for total cultural funding, which also includes libraries, arts, museums and environmental heritage, is $324.34 per person, more than twice that of any other jurisdiction and approximately three times the national average. A quick comparison of budget papers shows that in 2000-01 the estimated funding for Arts NT was $3.5m and by 2009-10 the funding for arts and screen arts is $11m.
The addition of screen arts reflects the establishment of the Northern Territory Film Office, a new initiative of this government recognising the value of this sector. We have boosted funding available through the Northern Territory Arts Grants Program from $2.2m in 2000-01 to $5.9m in 2009-10.
These figures relate to Northern Territory funds only and do not include the additional resources that come from the valuable relationships the government has developed with external agencies, such as the Australia Council for the Arts, bringing in extra funding also managed through the program for the benefit of Territory artists and arts organisations.
In 2000-01, the total paid for annual funding to 13 arts organisations, including the Darwin Festival, was $1.6m. By comparison, in 2009-10, the total paid to support 25 arts organisations, not including festivals, was $2.9m with an additional $1.1m paid to the Darwin and Alice Springs Festivals in that period, representing an increase of $2.4m.
I take this opportunity to commend the Darwin Festival on its impressive growth and success. The popularity of the festival with the community is a credit to the organisers, and the linkages with the national Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Art Awards and the Annual Indigenous Music Awards, makes this a very special time of year in Darwin for art and music lovers.
The most recent increases to the Arts Grants Program include an increase of $250 000 per annum to the Indigenous program, including $150 000 allocated to an Indigenous music touring circuit; an additional $200 000 per annum for remote regional and community festivals; additional funding of $100 000 per annum for arts projects; and a further $325 000 was granted for the lease of Chambers Crescent over the period 2008-11 through Darwin Community Arts.
In addition to these increases in funding to the sector, I am pleased to announce that I will soon release two very important policy documents developed after extensive community consultation right across the Territory. My personal thanks and acknowledgement go to all the committed Territorians who gave their time, knowledge and experience to influence and guide these consultations in a manner that has resulted in policies and strategies unique and appropriate for the Northern Territory.
The first, Living Arts, starts from the proposition that arts and culture should be central to the life of Territorians. Through Living Arts we seek to place arts within the central circle of the Territory 2030 strategy wheel as a critical tool for education, life-long learning, health and wellbeing.
Community consultation in 2009 informed the initial development of the proposed new direction for the arts. A further series of consultations in 2010, through public focus group workshops, were held in Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and Darwin. Priorities identified included strategies to encourage arts development through the funding program; support quality audience and participant experiences through festivals, programming and touring; increased regional and remote access to programs and arts services; grow employment in the arts, including technical and support roles; and strengthen community-based arts service infrastructure.
The opposition has continued with its complete lack of interest and vision for the arts. Its spokesman for the arts, Mr Bohlin, has not attended even one of these public meetings. In addition, I have not seen Mr Bohlin at any of the arts gigs I have attended across the Northern Territory this year. In stark comparison to just knocking like the CLP, or making uninformed statements to the media, I advise the member for Drysdale to take an active part in the wonderful opportunities on offer in the arts throughout the Northern Territory, and especially encourage him to take an active part, as an MLA, in the growing and developing Palmerston Festival.
All the Northern Territory government policy directions, particularly A Working Future and Territory 2030, are now being incorporated into a draft, overarching Northern Territory government arts policy. The other important initiative is the development of a strategic 10-year plan for the Northern Territory’s museums and galleries sector - Building Our Museums and Galleries Sector (BOMAGS) - the Northern Territory government initiative announced in April 2008. The initiative aims to better position the Territory to respond to the needs of a growing and more regionalised population, and increase tourism.
The BOMAGS Working Group has been established to develop the 10-year plan in line with major Northern Territory government policies and plans including Territory 2030 and A Working Future. The working group, comprised of 18 members representing the Museum and Art Galleries of the Northern Territory Board, major stakeholders, and sectoral interests, has been established and has met twice, with the next meeting scheduled for early December this year. Community consultation was held throughout the Territory in October and November to engage local stakeholders in identifying priorities and initiatives for the 10-year plan. A draft copy of the plan will be available for public comment in early 2011.
This year, there has been change in the department, and I take this opportunity to welcome Mr Hugo Leschen, the new Executive Director for Arts and Culture, and also thank all the staff in the department for their hard work and dedication in 2010. I look forward to working with them in 2011 and continuing this important and exciting work.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I wish to talk on a couple of issues. One is to offer my compliments to St Francis of Assisi Primary School in my electorate where I went on Remembrance Day. All the schools have functions of different types, but St Francis had a flag raising and they paid homage to soldiers and people in the Defence Forces who had fallen on the 11th of the 11th, and after that. I provided them with a new Australian flag because I believe it is important all schools have a good Australian flag they can feel proud of. They tell me each day the students fight to raise and lower the flag, which is good news. They also sang the National Anthem, with both choruses, which was excellent.
I thank the Principal, Neal Maxwell, for the invitation; also Eileen Breen, the Administration Officer; Robert Burns who coordinated the day; and Mel Bolwell, the Deputy Principal. Father Milton, the Catholic Priest at St Francis of Assisi Church also attended and read Psalm 23 and also The Divine Shepherd. It was a very good day, albeit a little hot, but the students definitely enjoyed themselves, and so did I. Congratulations to the St Francis of Assisi Primary School.
The other issue I raise - and I have written to the minister in regards to this – is the problem experienced on the Wells Creek Road in the Coolalinga area. Wells Creek Road comes into the Henning Road intersection, and Henning Road leads to the Coolalinga lights section. I have written to the minister for Lands some weeks ago with some quite graphic photos of problems with drainage and flooding resulting from what I believe is some of the construction work done on that intersection.
I have spoken with many of the residents on that road now our Wet Season has started and they are experiencing some severe flooding through no fault of their own. It is a combination of Northern Territory government and Litchfield Council roads; Litchfield Council manages the Wells Creek Road. I did a doorknock and letter-drop all along that road, and I have had very good response from people. They are concerned with the high level of flooding and the water flow. There are no bike paths or walkways on that road, and the school buses come along the road in the Wet Season, during downpours, to drop off schoolchildren. I have been down that road in a storm; we took photographs which I have sent to the minister’s office. I am sure he has seen them because I have a letter of acknowledgement in regard to my letter.
I have been told by the department they are looking into the intersection and water flows, but I would like to hear more than just ‘looking into it’. There are serious safety issues in regard to the water flows down one side of the Wells Creek Road. For some reason the water is diverted on to the western side, which is causing extreme problems and safety issues for the families there. I have had two families come to me saying in the heavy storms and heavy downpours they do not allow their young children, under six years of age or thereabouts, out because they are very concerned about them falling into the water and possibly getting washed away. There is another property with a very elderly lady on it, and they are having real problems getting in and out of their property when the rain starts, not because it is boggy, but because of the water flow.
I have undertaken to try to work with the residents, the council, and the NT government to (1) investigate, engineering-wise, how we can fix the problem; and (2) how the residents can help themselves in regard to drainage, or receive some advice from government or council engineers how they can best help themselves.
The other disturbing thing about it is not so much the water flows, but the level of litter washed down the drains and onto these properties. I have been on a couple of the properties and talked to the residents and they have told me an enormous amount of litter, not only bottles, bags, nappies, Coke cans and that type of thing, but also syringes have been washed down in these huge water flows, which is of great concern, particularly to the people and families with young children. Mind you, they also told me they found money floating down the river, so there has to be a little of an upside to it; paper money, $50 notes and the like.
I urge the minister for Lands to give some serious and dedicated attention to this issue; and if the government and the department is looking into the issue, if there can be some advice to my office, or to the Litchfield Council, so we can address this issue because, as I said, it is presenting serious safety issues to the families, and is causing distress to some of the more senior people because they get rather frightened with the water flow.
I have seen it, minister, and you know from the photographs I sent you that it is a problem and we need to try to fix it.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to talk about two particular issues.
I would like the Defence Force in the Northern Territory to look at the number of AJs riding around Darwin on black motorbikes and in camouflage gear. I believe it is quite dangerous because it is very difficult for people to see them on the road, and I have had a number of people complain to me about how dangerous it is. It is always dangerous for people to ride black motorbikes, but it is particularly dangerous when they are wearing camouflage on black motorbikes - I think it is quite silly - for people to see in their rear view mirrors. It is like the statistics on people driving green cars.
The second thing I want to talk about is irregular maritime arrivals, in particular irregular maritime arrivals in South Australia. In the Department of Immigration Citizenship 2009-10 Annual Report there were 323 irregular maritime arrivals in South Australia. That is 15% of the illegal maritime arrivals granted visas and settled on the Australian mainland. Also, on a daily basis, there are Greyhound buses taking people to South Australia from many different states; there are planes arriving in South Australia from different states bringing in tourists, residents, business people, and so forth; there are trains going in there, and people drive to South Australia.
I have to say I was quite concerned two months ago when the South Australian Premier, Mike Rann, decided to dog whistle the fact that some 100 residents from Yuendumu had decided, off their own bat, to move to South Australia seeking asylum to protect themselves, their families, and their children. I thought the racial undertones in Mike Rann’s comments as he dog whistled throughout South Australia that a swathe of Indigenous Territorians were moving across the border was one of the saddest things I have heard in Australia for some time.
These people are Australian. I have not heard Mike Rann complain about the irregular maritime arrivals granted visas in South Australia, and I have not heard him screaming from the rooftops about the proposed centre in the hills outside Adelaide, but his concerns about people who moved from Yuendumu to Alice Springs and then to Adelaide were quite delirious.
Then the Chief Minister, the Deputy Chief Minister, and the Minister for Central Australia jumped on the bandwagon saying how irresponsible it was, and other language was used which is unparliamentary, in regards to assistance I may or may not have offered people in their personal endeavours, which they chose to do before I had even spoken to them. It was unwelcome and further inflamed the situation to the point it is at today, which we are all aware of.
Let the facts be known that I was called by people who were camped in an accommodation facility near Alice Springs airport. I was asked to go there and I sat down and had a chat with some people. They told me of their situation and their desire to move to South Australia, temporarily, until they could work with the senior leaders of Yuendumu to come up with a resolution to balance law and customary law. That was their decision; that was their position. I asked them what they needed me for, and they said they needed help with transport. I said: ‘I am not a government person; I do not have a stack of money; I do not have program dollars. I cannot help’.
I asked why they did not call Karl Hampton, who is the member for Stuart and the Minister for Central Australia. They said he would not help. I said: ‘Why do you not call Warren Snowdon, he is happy to get your votes at election time?’ They said: ‘He won’t return our calls’. I am relaying what I was told. I said: ‘It is a dire situation’; and they said: ‘We have to protect these children’. And there were children everywhere, about 150 people. I told them I would see what I could do.
I went away and met with some police officers who were not in the station at the time, and I told them of the dilemma. I asked them what they thought, and they told me they thought it best for those people to move to South Australia to calm the situation down, take the violence out of Alice Springs, and protect the children. So, I rang some people to see what I could do.
I returned to the accommodation facility at the airport four or five hours later, in the afternoon, to find Tracey Brand, from the Chief Minister’s office in Alice Springs, there with folder and paperclip in hand. Tracey is a good person and a good worker, and I am not speaking derogatively about Tracey. I saw Samara Hanley there, who is the GBM for the town camps in Alice Springs, a federal government employee; and I am not speaking derogatively about Samara. I know these two people, so I said hello and asked them what they were doing; and they were assisting in the transition of these people to South Australia. They were buying them blankets; getting them accommodation; and they informed me they were calling Centrelink to help them transition their payments to South Australia so they could still use their Basics Cards, and so forth. This is what was happening.
This is at the same time as the days and weeks went on when the Chief Minister, the Deputy Chief Minister, and the member for Stuart were all coming out and condemning the stupidity of the member for Braitling in sending these people to Yuendumu. They chose to go. Six of them drove cars full of people, let alone the buses.
But there were some people there who were trying their best to help these people, to keep it out of the media and the public, and protect those women, children and men - trying to give oxygen to the elders and the senior men and women from the Adelaide group and the Yuendumu group to try to deal with this. There were things going on behind the scenes.
I tried my darndest to keep it out of the media; I thought the ABC at the time was completely irresponsible in their reporting, and further inflamed the situation. Then I found out the Chief Minister and the Minister for Central Australia had brought these people back. I knew they were coming back on the 11th. I had phone calls from the media; I had a phone call from The Australian newspaper saying the Chief Minister’s office in Darwin had told them the people would be back on the 11th - they confirmed it.
Then I got a personal phone call from the Minister for Central Australia, which I appreciated, telling me exactly what was happening. That was courteous and good politics, and he said he was not going to talk about it. No worries. He has a responsibility as the Minister for Central Australia, and the local member, and a Warlpiri law man, to try to bring calmness to this situation, because time and cool heads are required in this situation.
But what happened when these people came back, when it required political leadership, when it required no media, when it required cool heads? He took off to New Caledonia - flew the country! Politics 101: when it is too hot in the kitchen, get out. That is completely gutless! He should be ashamed. He has family out there. There are people injured with broken bones; people who have been hit in the head. Anyone who saw the media tonight saw the weapons that were used, and saw it was a riot - that is not cultural payback. I know it is a sensitive issue. I know there are two laws; there is law as we know it, and there is cultural law. We have to abide by our one law, but finding the way to that point is difficult. It takes time; it takes negotiation. It is tough; it is sensitive.
We did not need all this other stuff, all this gaff the Chief Minister put us in. He said on ABC radio that the police guaranteed protection of the people at Yuendumu. What sort of a guarantee does he give? Now that the Minister for Central Australia, the local member for Stuart, is back in Australia, what is he doing? He should not be in parliament this week; he should be in Yuendumu trying to solve these problems, working with the people and calming it down.
A 16-year-old has been arrested for the riot. Riots are not cultural payback; drunken fights are not cultural payback. We need to be sensible in this debate. We have to allow these people to have cool heads; that is what they had when they went to Adelaide. The hospital was quieter; the police were quieter, everything quietened down in town. Now you have exploded it again. Police officers are putting their lives at risk. Children, men and women at Yuendumu have their lives at risk. The Chief Minister and the Minister for Central Australia should hang their heads in shame because they caused it and they have blood on their hands.
One last thing, I am quite surprised that parliament is only going to sit for 11 weeks next year, not 12 weeks. I believe it is a shame on Gerry Wood’s agreement.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Deputy Speaker, I have several issues to raise tonight, so I will go through them fairly quickly.
I have just come back from the presentation awards ceremony for the St John’s College graduation. It is 50 years this year since St John’s College starting operating in the Northern Territory and now I notice some of the ex-students’ kids are now going to St John’s College.
I do not intend to mention everyone by name, simply because I do not have time this evening; however, I seek leave from this House to have all the names listed in the program I am now about to table to be incorporated in the Parliamentary Record.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I seek leave to table the awards ceremony document to assist Hansard with their purposes.
Leave granted.
I also rise tonight to deal with an issue that has come to my attention in relation to the Victims of Crime NT. I am going to quote from a note I was handed by Mike Campbell from the Victims of Crime. I believe this situation is shocking and needs to be addressed. The document I have from the Victims of Crime NT reads as follows:
On this document are three graphs. One deals with the numbers of assault victims, and families of homicide victims assisted by Crime NT in the Northern Territory: 2000-01 a little over 100, by 2008-09 over 300. The second graph reported assaults in the Northern Territory: in 2004 the number is 3500, by 2009 is it 6500. The last graph shows no change between 2005 and 2009, shows 150 000 - and that is dollars dedicated to Victims of Crime NT.
This is an organisation whose workload, because of the mismanagement of this government in relation to issues of violent crime in our community, has doubled and tripled, depending on the case involved. The fact that this government has not increased any funding to this very important organisation that has worked for many years to support victims of crime only goes to demonstrate, in my mind’s eye, exactly where this government’s priorities are in relation to victims of crimes. We know, with the world view of this government, the offenders are the victims and society is the real criminal.
I do not subscribe to that world view. I am not going to suggest that Victims of Crime subscribe to that world view, but they do have to suffer the consequences of having to deal with vastly increased demands on pretty much a shoestring budget. I argue that their request for a further $60 000 per year is entirely reasonable.
I do not often find myself doing this, but I will anyhow. I congratulate the minister for Housing, Hon Dr Chris Burns, who took the time to come out last Friday night at 8.30 pm to Tomaris Court, a set of public housing units in my electorate which I have oft had cause to lament and complain about. To the minister’s credit, he agreed to come out. I suppose it is not a sad thing but, clearly, the department became aware of the minister’s visit because, at 4 pm on Friday afternoon I did a doorknock around Tomaris Court and discovered the lawns had been mowed; the graffiti on the walls had all been sprayed over; the faeces had been hosed out of the laundry blocks; where people wipe their backsides on the corner of the walls had all been cleaned up, or largely cleaned up; the piles of rubbish that were in those laundry blocks had been cleaned up; all the empty liquor containers had been cleaned up from around the back, and all sorts of things had been done. I spoke to a few residents at 4 pm that afternoon and they informed me that they had seen a substantial amount of activity in the Tomaris Court area in the days immediately prior to the ministerial visit.
It is a shame the department would seek to deceive their minister in that fashion, assuming, of course, the minister had not told them and they had managed to get that information from his diary. Or it is a shame the minister decided to have these blocks cleaned up. However, I do not believe the minister did; I believe it was something the department took upon themselves.
What I find surprising is, after standing in this place for over a year complaining about the condition of Tomaris Court again and again and having not much happens, only to discover when the minister turns up everything I had been complaining about happens. I congratulate the minister for taking that time out on a Friday evening. I thank him for doing so because it shows he is dedicated to his cause. I have discussed his proposed policies with him in a very preliminary fashion, and I said to him I would indicate some support if he started going down the path he is intending to go down. So, on this occasion, I thank the minister.
It is a shame we need a ministerial visit to get anything done, but the presentation of those apartments last Friday night passed muster. Curiously, we still found several things which need to be addressed. I know the minister has taken those matters in hand, and I look forward to seeing some results in those areas. All in all, I remain grateful to the minister for his efforts, and acknowledge so publicly.
I will close tonight with my usual complaint about drunks in my electorate. They continue to be a problem. The government talks about a new alcohol policy. They have been talking about a new alcohol policy for six months.
The problem I have is I still get complaints in my office from various people around my electorate complaining about drunks. Drunks at Mindil Beach, drunks at Bicentennial Park, drunks in the Mall, not in the Raintree Park at the moment because that is a construction site, but there are still drunks all over our streets. I will continue to harp on about these drunks because the government has promised to fix this problem. It promised to deal with this issue and, whilst I do not agree with its process of making society answerable for the actions of a few, I still expect the government to keep its promise.
I urge the government of the Northern Territory to direct police to patrol Bicentennial Park and get rid of the drunks, particularly on the walkway to Doctors Gully. I also urge the government to patrol the railway corridor behind Gardens Hill Crescent, as well as some of the older buildings in Gardens Hill Crescent which have become camping grounds for drunks. These people are often offensive; they often behave in a disgusting manner and frankly I, like so many of my colleagues on this side of the House, am utterly and fully sick of them.
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will not speak for too long. I wish to provide a report to this Chamber on my visit last week to Canberra and Sydney. I departed Darwin on Monday, 15 November, on the direct flight to Canberra. I stayed in Canberra until Thursday morning, the 18th, when I departed for Sydney. I spent Thursday and Friday in Sydney, and departed Sydney on the Saturday morning.
Whilst I was in Canberra I spoke to various ministers, shadow ministers, members of the House of Representatives, Senators, and Independents in both those Chambers. The topics discussed were oil, gas and mining of various natures, and possible developments within my electorate, in the harbour.
The other topic which got some media attention was that of the RAAF Base houses, also in my electorate, the suburb of Eaton. It received media attention, I believe, because I went with our good friend, the member for Nelson, and that spurred some interest from the media. Those meetings were, I would not say fruitful, but they were enlightening and it seems there may be some light at the end of the tunnel - cross the fingers - if what we saw and heard is to be believed.
On the Thursday I went to Sydney and had a range of meetings there, particularly in relation to gas developments and opportunities which may exist in my electorate. I also spoke to people in the private equities management industries.
All in all, the trip was fruitful and worthwhile.
Motion agreed to, the Assembly adjourned.
TABLED PAPER
Council of Territory Cooperation – Discharge of Members for Port Darwin and Katherine
Council of Territory Cooperation – Discharge of Members for Port Darwin and Katherine
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table a letter from the Opposition Whip dated 2 November 2010 notifying the discharge of the members for Port Darwin and Katherine from the Council of Territory Cooperation.
PETITIONS
Tiger Brennan Drive Extension – Access for Cyclists
Tiger Brennan Drive Extension – Access for Cyclists
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 167 petitioners praying that cyclists be permitted to ride on the Tiger Brennan Drive extension. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Madam Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- To the honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory
We the undersigned respectfully call upon the Territory government to permit cyclists to ride on the Tiger Brennan Drive extension, specifically the fly-over leading to Roystonia Avenue. We are bewildered that cycling to and from work and recreational cycling has been prevented especially since this does not support NT government policy on green transportation. Cycling access between Palmerston and Darwin has been cut off by the NT government failing to plan for appropriate cycle paths in the construction of the Tiger Brennan Drive extension or via Wishart Road.
Marjorie Street - Stop Closure of Left Turn
Mr BOHLIN (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 514 petitioners praying that the left turn road closure into Marjorie Street be stopped. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Madam Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- To the honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory
We the undersigned respectfully call upon the Territory government to stop its intended left turn road closure into Marjorie St, Pinelands and to erect multiple additional street signage directing traffic into the business precinct of Pinelands and Marjorie Street. The NT government’s proposed left turn road closure into Marjorie Street will prevent trading and cause business closure. The government must also include revised road works for heavy vehicle access into Pinelands business precinct.
Nganmarriyanga/Palumpa Store – Return to Community Control
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from122 petitioners praying that the Nganmarriyanga/Palumpa store be returned to the community. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Madam Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- To the honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory
We the undersigned respectively showeth that all members consider that the store at Nganmarriyanga/Palumpa be returned to the community from the Victoria Daly Shire immediately.
- And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray that the store at Nganmarriyanga/Palumpa be returned to the community from the Victoria Daly Shire immediately.
RESPONSE TO PETITION
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members a response to petition No 42 has been received and circulated to honourable members.
Petition No 42
- Telstra Telecommunications Facility, Larapinta, Alice Springs
Presented by: Mr Giles
- Referred to: Minister for Lands and Planning
Date response received: 9 November 2010
- Date response presented: 23 November 2010
Response:
- On 22 June 2010, a development application was lodged on behalf of Telstra to develop Lot 8090, 32 Grant Road, suburb of Larapinta, Alice Springs for the purpose of a telecommunications facility (including a 30 metre high guyed mast, equipment shelter, antennas, fencing, electrical and optical fibre connections).
The application was placed on public exhibition in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Act to allow the community to comment and make submissions on the proposal.
- I am advised that the Development Consent Authority held a public hearing on 13 October 2010 to consider the proposal and the submissions received from the community and decided to approve the development but with a reduced mast height of 24 metres.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Year 8 Dripstone Middle School students accompanied by Ms Liz Easton. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
WATER AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 137)
(Serial 137)
Mr HAMPTON (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I present a bill without notice, entitled the Water Amendment Bill 2010 (Serial 137).
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr HAMPTON: Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
Madam Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to amend the Water Act to confer powers to grant waste discharge licences, and to validate existing and expired waste discharge licences following legal advice on the proper operation of section 74 of that act.
Since becoming minister, I have indicated a number of times my intention to ensure compliance with our environmental laws, and to drive reform to modernise our regulatory frameworks. The bill I present today is one small component of that body of work. The bill reflects my commitment to ensure our environmental legislation works and, if it does not, to fix it.
I have previously indicated, in the context of recent issues surrounding the water quality of Darwin Harbour, I have not been happy with the content of waste discharge licences which regulate discharge into water bodies from activities such as sewage treatment plants. I have given a commitment to review and improve the conditions for existing waste discharge licences for sewage treatment plants, and to develop a new licensing regime for high-risk activities. Work on the new licensing regime is well under way, as is the review of discharge licences.
It is during the course of these reviews, prompted by my commitment to improve regulatory practice, that legal advice from the Solicitor-General has been received indicating serious problems with the operation of section 74 of the Water Act, under which waste discharge licences are issued. The advice indicates, except in very narrow circumstances, section 74 must be read with the effect that the provision, as currently drafted, precludes the issuing of waste discharge licences for actions which cause waste to enter a natural body of water such as the sea or a river. This is clearly at odds with the way section 74 has been thought to operate and has been implemented since the passage of the Water Act over 17 years ago. As a consequence, current waste discharge licences, or those issued in the past, are invalid to the extent they purport to licence discharge of waste to a natural water body. Furthermore, no waste discharge licence to discharge to a natural water body can be issued in the future.
There are circumstances where waste unavoidably needs to be discharged to a water body. In such circumstances, appropriate water standards need to be developed and the conditions of a licence should ensure any potential environmental risks are regulated and litigated. Until recently, that is how section 74 of the act was thought to operate, and that approach has been taken by successive administrations since the passage of the Water Act. Currently, 20 waste discharge licences are in place and eight are in negotiation for activities such as sewage treatment plants I have already mentioned, aquaculture, dredging, and release of waste water from mines.
The recent legal advice is unequivocal: section 74 of the Water Act does not sustain the practice that has been followed since the act was passed. Section 74(1) of the Water Act states:
- Subject to this Act, the Controller may, of his or her own motion or on application in the prescribed manner and form, grant to a person a licence to carry out an action which would otherwise be an offence against this Act by virtue of section 73.
Section 73(2) of the act under the title of Water Quality Standards goes on to say:
- Subject to subsection (3), where a notice under subsection (1) is in force, every licence, permit or consent granted under this Act before or after the publication of the notice is, except to the extent that the licence, permit or consent otherwise provides, subject to the condition that nothing shall be done or suffered or permitted to be done under the licence, permit or consent which prejudices the beneficial use, quality, standard, criteria or objectives specified in the notice in the area to which it applies.
There is a nexus between sections 73 and 74, and the legal advice received indicates the nexus limits the operation of section 74 such that section 74 does not, despite its heading, generally authorise the granting of a waste discharge licence. In particular, the advice indicates, whilst section 74 provides for a licence to be issued for an action which would otherwise be an offence under section 73, that is the only circumstance in which a section 74 licence can be issued.
The practical effect of section 73 is to impose a standard condition on all other licences to be issued under the act, with the effect that nothing in those licences should prejudice a declared beneficial use or water quality standard. Those other licences in the act are many and varied but include, for example, licences to extract water.
I have spent some time clarifying the background to the recent legal advice, because I am bringing this bill before the House for passage on urgency. I am doing this because the failure of section 74 to authorise the grant of licences, except in the narrow circumstances I have explained, creates significant risks for industry currently holding such licences and for the ongoing protection of the environment.
I now turn to the provisions of this bill that will rectify the problems with the current drafting of section 74 and avoid the risks identified.
This bill seeks to do two things. First, it seeks to create within section 74 of the Water Act sufficient power for the Controller of Water Resources to issue a valid licence to discharge waste that may enter a natural body of water subject to conditions that can be enforced. That is, the bill seeks to restore the workings of section 74 to the manner in which it has been implemented since passage of the act. The reasons for this are obvious. While every effort is taken to avoid discharge to the environment, there are circumstances where this cannot be avoided. As I have already indicated, such an activity needs to be regulated properly to protect the environment. Without a legally valid mechanism, our environment will be at risk.
Second, this bill seeks to validate existing and expired licences issued in good faith under section 74 in order to minimise disruption to licence holders. Thus restored, those licences can then continue to be reviewed as part of my absolute commitment to bring them up to scratch where they are found wanting. The restored licences would also be capable of being transitioned to the new licensing regime I intend to establish in a considered fashion over the coming six months.
I wish to emphasise validating existing and expired licences is proposed to ensure licensees do not face detriment from the need to fix section 74; however, it does not in any way infer that the process of driving change and improving environmental outcomes will halt. As I have indicated already, some of those licences are separately under review and, once validated, can be updated and improved.
I also wish to emphasise nothing in the amendments brought forward today alters the existing operation of section 73(2) of the Water Act which, in effect, provides that all licences issued under the act are subject to the condition that, except to the extent the licence provides otherwise, nothing can be done by the licensee which prejudices a declared beneficial use or water quality standard or objective.
Issues of interpretation of legislation crop up from time to time when an act is placed under greater scrutiny, and sometimes that scrutiny reveals the operation of a provision is not as first thought.
It gives me no great pleasure to bring this bill to the House, particularly on urgency, but as a responsible minister concerned about achieving better environmental outcomes and good governance, I have a responsibility to ensure when issues arise and they are serious, I fix them quickly and decisively. That is the action I am taking.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and table the explanatory statement to accompany the bill.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Twice the minister has mentioned he is seeking urgency. The only leave given by this House was for him to introduce the bill without notice, which he has done. There is no motion before this House which seeks urgency for the passage of this bill. In discussions prior to coming into this House - and we on this side of the House appreciate the reason the minister would be seeking urgency - we were give certain undertakings, not one of which has been met. I ask, if the member wants to seek urgency he moves so accordingly, or does so through the appropriate systems allowed for by standing orders.
Dr BURNS: Madam Speaker, speaking to the point of order, a motion will be moved tomorrow in relation to urgency.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you.
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Why not move that motion today? There were certain statements and suggestions made during a briefing we received prior to this that the process would undergo a series of chronological events. Why are we suddenly seeking urgency tomorrow on this matter and not today?
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I am not party to any of these discussions. I suggest the Leader of Government Business and the member for Port Darwin have a conversation outside the Chamber and come back with a resolution.
Mr ELFERINK: That is a very good idea, Madam Speaker.
Debate adjourned.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the Speaker’s Gallery of Jawoyn Board members and Nitmiluk Park Board members in Darwin for the renaming of the Nitmiluk Lounge. In particular, I acknowledge Mr Long John Dewar, the artist who has donated a very beautiful painting for the newly-named Nitmiluk Lounge, which I must say is now a particularly beautiful room.
Thank you very much to Long John, and thank you very much for allowing us to use the Nitmiluk name for this room.
I congratulate Nitmiluk Tours and park for winning the major tourist attractions at the Brolga Awards on Saturday and confirming our choice of the work Nitmiluk for the lounge in Parliament House.
On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
CHILD PROTECTION (OFFENDER REPORTING AND REGISTRATION) LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 133)
(Serial 133)
Continued from 27 October 2010.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, it is the intention of the opposition to support this bill. I appreciate the briefing received outlining the need for the bill. It is quite specific in its application of monitoring the movements of certain individuals who cause widespread community concern. These changes are necessary due to changes in technology and to ensure the reporting requirements for offenders interstate align with the Territory capacity. This amendment would provide that alignment and hence provide greater security for our community in monitoring the movements of offenders. Madam Speaker, with that, this bill will be supported.
Mr VATSKALIS (Child Protection): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister and his bill. As the Child Protection minister it is my role to ensure legislation is in place to protect our young, and these legislative amendments seem to do so.
This legislation, which commenced operation in 2005, assists police in ensuring those previously convicted of a sex offence continue to be closely monitored to protect the community from further potential harm. This is so very important in keeping our community safe.
The proposed changes to the legislation seek to strengthen the efficiency of the act and allow more monitoring by police. One of the recommendations of the Board of Inquiry in the recent Growing them strong, together report was for greater interagency communication. These amendments seek to ensure this by allowing important information to be passed between government departments. At the same time as allowing this information to be shared, measures have been put in place to ensure the personal information they share is limited as much as possible to protect the privacy of individuals. By allowing the disclosure of the reportable offender’s personal details to another agency, albeit in limited circumstances, these amendments seek to further protect our community and our children.
As the Chief Minister has already stated, the bill has been widely circulated and these amendments have been carefully discussed with the legal fraternity to ensure they meet the aim of keeping our community safe, and can be upheld in a court of law. As Minister for Child Protection, it is important my agencies have access to any information which would protect our children. Another important part of these legislative amendments is the updating of the act to require reportable offenders to provide their telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, or Internet provider information to police.
As it currently stands, the legislation does not require this information to be provided and these amendments are a timely update. In recent times we have seen a rapid increase in the use of telecommunications in our society, especially our young people using telephones, Internet and e-mail to communicate constantly, not to mention texting. Our youth participate in information sharing on a daily basis over the Internet through websites such as Facebook. Although this information sharing is done innocently and in a fun, social context, some in our community prey on the information provided. These amendment updates require reportable offenders to provide their e-mail, phone, or Internet providers to police. Police can use these laws to appropriately monitor reportable offenders; however, as the Chief Minister has already outlined, for them to monitor an individual they require a warrant under the law. This legislation strengthens the power of police to protect our community, especially our youth. These amendments also seek to provide police with improved powers to ensure offenders can be easily tracked when travelling. The changes to report travel intentions are trying to strike a balance between protecting our community and being an overburden on our system.
Previously, intra-Territory travel did not have to be reported. This meant a reportable offender could travel to a community and be mixing with children without police being aware. The change requiring reportable offenders to report intra-Territory travel to police is designed to further protect our community. A neighbourhood may be unaware a breach of the act has taken place in allowing a reportable offender to have unsupervised contact with children. By informing the police of intending travel, they can attempt to ensure a breach does not take place.
There is, in the act, strict provision for certain elements of travel, such as repeated travel to a location not to be reported every time to the commissioner. This change to travel is designed to protect Territory communities and our children. The reporting and registration amendments are designed to update our legislation to ensure it is properly protecting our communities in the Territory into the future.
Madam Speaker, I strongly urge the House to support these changes and vote in favour of these amendments.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I would like to say a few words on this amendment bill, which I support. Reading through this bill, it is the government’s intention to reduce what is sometimes called ‘jurisdictional shopping’ by offenders - a major problem throughout Australia. The government has amended various sections of this bill by making it a requirement offenders report and give their telephone details, their e-mail addresses, etcetera. It has also made changes requiring people who make a significant change to their personal appearance to report that; changes to a birth certificate or other documents; and also important changes to travel, especially intra-Territory travel; and in relation to what seems a loophole - some offenders said they were travelling to their new place of residence and used that as a reason for not reporting. I believe these amendments have covered that loophole so it cannot be used as a means of getting around the law.
The idea of these changes is to have uniform legislation throughout Australia so reportable offenders are not looking for a place where the conditions placed on them are less onerous than elsewhere. It is good to see the government has brought in these changes.
There are two areas the government needs to carefully look at. I have raised them with the government and I am hoping, at a later date, these changes will occur. The two examples of inconsistency which need to be looked at are in relation to section 37 - the length of reporting period. The inconsistencies in this section mean people who have committed a Class 2 offence, and commit a subsequent Class 2 offence, and were found guilty before this bill was introduced, have to report for life. The anomaly is people who committed a Class 1 offence before this act came into effect, and are reporting due to a Class 2 offence, do not necessarily have to report for life.
You have a case where an offender committing a more serious offence, then a Class 2 offence, due to the way the act is written, does not have the same reporting obligation as a Class 2 offender. It is an important area which needs to be looked at, especially in light of what I said before: these offenders shop around for a better place to live in relation to their reporting obligations. I hope the minister will give some consideration to fixing this - not necessarily a loophole, certainly an anomaly - which would mean the Territory’s reporting obligations may not be as onerous as in other states, which means we could be getting offenders coming to the Northern Territory, which I do not think people would appreciate.
The other area which needs looking at is the issue of mandatory DNA testing for reportable offences. My understanding is in New South Wales they have the capacity to do this. Part 7B of the Crimes (Forensics Procedures) Act 2000 in New South Wales provides for carrying out of certain other forensic procedures, including carrying out buccal swabs and taking samples of hair other than pubic hair on persons required to comply with the reporting obligations under the act. They must be an untested, registrable person.
Queensland has amendments to this legislation under way; Western Australia is progressing amendments; and South Australia has the capacity to do it. However, the Northern Territory does not do that. If we are to be uniform with the rest of Australia, government has to look at mandatory DNA testing for reportable offenders. This is a gap in our data. I note if reportable offenders come to the Northern Territory from New South Wales and re-offend, the Northern Territory cannot force DNA testing, and there is potential they cannot match the New South Wales database.
There is a range of issues I ask the government to follow up. Obviously, the government intention is to ensure we are not only in line with other states, we are ensuring offenders are restricted as much as possible evenly across Australia, as I said, to reduce jurisdictional shopping.
I support these important changes to the bill. Even though it is called Child Protection (Offender Reporting and Registration) Legislation Amendment Bill, people may think it is to do with some of the other matters we are discussing. This is to deal with the very serious matter of adult offenders against children. We all have grave concerns about this type of behaviour. We need to ensure those people who have orders carry out those orders throughout Australia, because children need to be protected from this type of behaviour. We need to ensure there are no loopholes or anomalies. No matter where a child lives in Australia they should be protected equally. This bill before us is attempting to do that. However, some important considerations need to occur: the inconsistency in section 37, which is the length of reporting period; and the requirement for mandatory DNA testing for reportable offenders.
Madam Speaker, I support the bill.
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I thank the opposition and the member for Nelson for supporting this important amendment bill. We all agree that, of all crimes, sexual abuse of children is up there amongst the worst offence people can commit. For adults to take away the innocence and trust of children through sexual abuse is an awful abuse of an adult’s power over children.
When this legislation was introduced in 2004 it sought to provide a regime for offenders who had been convicted of these types of offences, either at conviction or on release from prison, with a requirement to report where they live, and a whole heap of other details, to police on a regular basis for a period of eight to 15 years, or for life. The reason why all the states decided to introduce this legislation is because, tragically, people who are convicted of these types of offences tend to be predatory and tend to re-offend. All the states came together and decided to introduce a national register. The whole idea of that register, and picking up on the comments from the member for Nelson, was to have uniform reporting requirements across the nation to ensure people who commit these offences are not allowed to jurisdiction shop for the weakest reporting regime.
For police, this means that in the event of a report of a predatory offence against children or specific monitoring of children, or of adults hanging around schools or other places, police can immediately go to the register within that area, knock on a person’s door and seek to determine their whereabouts when incidents occurred - to either rule people in or out of suspicion in further investigations.
This bill seeks to pick up on a number of issues. The existing legislation does not require reportable offenders to report their telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, or Internet service providers. Of course, with the advancement of social networking sites such as Facebook and others, we all understand that predators roam the Internet seeking to groom children for liaisons and encounters. This is a significant new strength in the legislation requiring reportable offenders to register those details.
Another anomaly in the act is that it does not compel reportable offenders to report to police any significant change in their personal appearance. On registration, marks like tattoos and other distinguishing features need to be on the register. Over time, though, people might decide to grow a full beard or to shave their head entirely, change the colour of their hair, and look like a different person. A new requirement is any significant change needs to be reported to police, and police would add those details and a photograph of the change onto the register.
There are other requirements regarding travel intrastate, interstate and overseas which I outlined in the second reading. There is also an additional capacity to provide for the Police Commissioner, when there is duty of care considerations for other agencies, to be able to advise other CEs of the presence of someone on the register, and those issues have been worked through.
I pick up the specific anomalies in the reporting requirements identified by the member for Nelson, and congratulate him on his eagle eye in picking up those anomalies. They were also brought to my attention. Without going into the technical issues of Class 2 offences and not being able to take into account, prior to the act commencing, a Class 1 offence, I acknowledge, member for Nelson, there is an anomaly. The proposal I have to restore uniformity to the register across all states is I will ask our Police Commissioner to take the issue up formally as an agenda item for the next meeting of police commissioners. Those meetings feed into the agenda items for police ministers, and the intent was to have a uniform regime across the nation. I understand some of the states have moved already on this anomaly. I believe all states need to resolve this with the same amendments to legislation so we have a uniform register.
We will pick up that issue, member for Nelson, and bring further amendments to the House to clarify it. It is not significant; it would not affect many people, having required them only to register for eight years as opposed to 15 years or life. We will look at this and seek national consideration to return uniformity to the register.
The other issue regarding a requirement to collect DNA from reportable offenders, both current and future, could be considered by the Police Ministerial Council. The issue of legislation across Australia for the collection of DNA and the sharing of those samples across the jurisdictions has been quite contentious over the years. I understand there is now the ability, and I stand corrected if I am wrong, for all states to share access to DNA collected in other jurisdictions for criminal investigations. The collection of DNA from reportable offenders on this register is something I will take advice on and get back to the member for Nelson.
Madam Speaker, this further strengthens the register in the Northern Territory. Since the act commenced operation, around 209 reportable offenders have registered with and reported to police. This strengthens those requirements and serves to further protect children in the Territory.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS (INTERCEPTION) NORTHERN TERRITORY AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 131)
(Serial 131)
Continued from 27 October 2010.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, looking at the very brief second reading speech and accepting the argument this amendment is needed, on the face of it, one could be persuaded by the sense of the amendment. However, I cannot help being distracted by another issue starting to take shape over this government.
We have in this amendment what they call ‘streamlining’, and ‘we do not want duplication’ and so on, when it comes to the Police minister being advised whether interception has occurred, or when the requirement for it has ceased. It is explained away by saying: ‘The federal minister will get to know about that’, and ‘I can find out about that from time to time’.
It may make sense in how these things are managed - we do not want duplication, for heaven’s sake. What we want is accountability and a government which takes responsibility for the things which happen under its watch. That is something we do not have with this current administration. Press conference after press conference, issue after issue, you are left wondering what is the role of this Labor government? What is its position? What does it do? All it does is exempt itself from responsibility. We have a minor issue, as evidenced by the substance contained within the argument in the second reading speech. Effectively, there is no requirement for the Police minister to be advised by the Police Commissioner of the surveillance of a Territory citizen because it will go to the federal minister.
You can argue it away with your legislation and you may say the minister would get to hear about this. However, we have the reinforcement of that ongoing theme of exemption from responsibility - taking itself out of the frame which leads further to what the community is starting to form a very clear view of: there is no point in having this government because it does not take responsibility for anything. We see this theme reinforced here.
More disturbing is we had the leak of a Cabinet document which went public. It was to do with boat registration and the identification schemes of boat registration and revealed things which were obviously embarrassing to the government. You have the community looking at the government and thinking: you did not tell us this; you have not explained this to us. Instead of occupying the public space and explaining yourself, a police investigation is commenced to discover who leaked this embarrassing information. That is very disturbing, and sends a message to the community that this government, once again, whether it is child protection or the release of a document for the consideration of the Labor Cabinet which is embarrassing to government, will turn its forces onto discovering who leaked that information.
I will not go to the protection of children. Even in that area this administration would turn its attention to investigating those who have caused embarrassment rather than minding the affairs of good governance and protecting the sensibilities of our community, and protecting standards and values. No, do not worry about that, we have to find out who it was. We then have a journalist reveal a conversation. We have a detailed investigation into who leaked, what material was made available to this journalist, and an investigation of journalists. To me, that makes it difficult to say this is tidying up; it is an amendment. We are going to find out anyway. The Police Commissioner does not have to tell the Police minister because it is going to go somewhere else, and I will find out from time to time perhaps.
Madam Speaker, I am concerned, and I believe many Territorians are concerned. This government is quick to exempt itself from responsibility, take itself out of the frame, and rushes happily to have an amendment like this brought before the parliament because it reinforces the modus operandi - I am not responsible, I do not need to know; I can investigate whatever I wish but it is not my business; the Police Commissioner did that, or someone else did that. We are not really responsible.
You are a government which does not seem to be very effective at all, and I am starting to form the view, as many Territorians are, this has to be the worst government we have ever had in the Northern Territory.
Members interjecting.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, they have started interjecting although they have not heard a word from me. They are already saying: ‘We do not want to hear it, we do not want to hear it. We are beyond criticism’. That is typical of the attitude of this government.
I listened carefully to what the Leader of the Opposition said, and I can add to that. This government tries to give an impression in the public domain that it is beyond criticism and in no way should be held accountable for the actions of its public service.
Mr Lawrie: Not true.
Mr ELFERINK: ‘Not true’, says the Attorney-General. Isn’t it interesting, the Chief Minister said a prosecution launched by the head of the Department of the Chief Minister has nothing to do with him; nothing to do with him at all. The Attorney-General who says: ‘Not true’, was quite happy, as Attorney-General, to enter a courthouse in Tennant Creek and have a prosecution pulled because she did not like the effect of that prosecution. What a double standard! For these people to sit there and say: ‘Nothing to do with us,’ is reprehensible.
Moreover, we have heard from the Leader of the Opposition about their witch-hunts through the public service. There was a dreadful leak about boat registrations and all of a sudden we are checking a journalist’s phone records. To the strains of Deutschland ber alles do we hear this government governing for the people of the Northern Territory! The government will go through a journalist’s telephone records - and whoever else’s phone records they so choose - if they do not like what they are hearing ...
Ms Lawrie: Not true.
Mr ELFERINK: Wrong! Absolutely correct! It is well established …
Members interjecting.
Mr ELFERINK: Picking up on the interjection, I invite another interjection. Have the telephone records of journalists in the Northern Territory been looked at or not?
Members interjecting.
Mr ELFERINK: Well, there you go! Nothing to do with them! It is funny that two days before Bob Collins attempted suicide, this Chief Minister - then Police minister - and the then Attorney-General, Peter Toyne, were briefed on the investigation into Mr Collins ...
Mr Henderson: You were briefed as well.
Mr ELFERINK: Guess what? Two days later Mr Collins attempted suicide ...
Mr Henderson: No. Wrong! Wrong! You are absolutely wrong on those time lines.
Mr ELFERINK: Where were the telephone interceptions of the conversations dealing with that matter …
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The issue of Bob Collins has nothing to do with this legislation. We are debating very specific legislation. I point out to the member for Port Darwin he had exactly the same briefing regarding those issues as I did ...
Mr Elferink: Not true! Not true!
Mr HENDERSON: Exactly! I urge him to return to the bill instead of the leadership speech he is now proposing to his colleagues to roll the hapless Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Elferink: Information was withheld …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, please! There has been a point or order. I remind you of Standing Order 67 in relation to no digression. I always allow a level of digression, member for Port Darwin, but you are getting to the end of my patience. Could you get to the point of the bill, please?
Mr ELFERINK: Where was the checking, using interception powers this government has, of the phone records of the fifth floor after that leak?
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! For the sake of accuracy and not misleading this House, I ask the member for Port Darwin to withdraw his comment. It goes to misleading the House. The government does not tap phones. The government does not access phone records, as he well knows. These are powers applied to the Police Commissioner, not the government. I urge the member for Port Darwin to withdraw his allegations. He is misleading the House.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Elferink: If you do not want to hear the truth why not suspend parliament?
Mr Henderson: The government does not have access, as you well know.
Mr Elferink: The government is beyond investigation though, is it not?
Mr Henderson: You well know, as a former copper.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, if you could keep to the bill, please?
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, this bill deals with the responsibility of government and reporting to government by police in relation to the telephone intercept warrants it obtains. Until now, this government has been receiving copies of those telephone intercept warrants, and now it will not because it can wash its hands of it. It can say: ‘We are clean, nothing to do with us’. Is it not funny how government switches this on and off whenever it suits?
Frankly, it is a despicable action it takes every time it washes its hands and says: ‘Not responsible’, because it is responsible. The doctrine of responsible government says it is responsible to this House. Government wants to shut down debate and not talk about things which embarrass it. I can tell you, if something embarrasses government, there is a witch-hunt. If something embarrasses government, who fronts the cameras? Is it one of the ministers? Hell, no! I raise an issue in relation to particular matters and, all of a sudden, the media is quoting someone by the name of Ivanovski. Who is minister Ivanovski? Will she or he be the person briefing this House at some point as to what government is doing?
Why is it every time some issue that does not suit the spin machine of this government gets pumped out by the media, this government heads for the hills? You do not see a minister explaining anything. Eight hundred cows died on Mataranka Station and where is the minister? Cannot be seen! Childcare is in disarray - where is the minister? No, we hear someone by the name of Clare Gardiner-Barnes, a public servant, explaining the political issues. Is Clare Gardiner-Barnes a minister of the Crown? Yet, she is on the radio explaining what this government is doing.
The government avoids being responsible at every occasion, and continues to do so by the pursuit of this type of legislation through the House: ‘We have nothing to do with it, they did not report to us. We changed the law, so nobody spoke to us’. Why are you a government? Why do you bother? Why do you get out of bed in the morning? You do not do anything when you get to work.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr ELFERINK: You find out what the bad news is and you trot out a public servant - what, human shield.
Ms Scrymgour: You need four more than Tollner.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr ELFERINK: Human shield. They can jive as much as they like and laugh as much as they like, but these are serious issues. This turns into a culture of bullying in the public service, and that is what is starting to transpire.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Honourable members!
Mr ELFERINK: You will find public servants investigating other public servants because ministers do not have the courage of their oath of office to be responsible to the people in this House and for the people of the Northern Territory.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr ELFERINK: They laugh and they joke, and they think it is the funniest thing in the world. Quite frankly, as far as I am concerned, they are bereft of responsibility. They will persecute any public servant who has the audacity to speak out against them …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr ELFERINK: Well, Sue Mansfield. Let us talk about Sue Mansfield on the Four Corners program, who immediately was being read the riot act …
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Relevance.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin, this seems to be a significant digression. Could you could come to the point of the bill, please?
Mr ELFERINK: Will Sue Mansfield’s phone be tapped or her phone records checked as a result of the conversations she had with journalists prior to the interview on the Four Corners program?
Ms Lawrie: Just scaremongering, like you always do; pure scaremongering.
Mr ELFERINK: I am not scaremongering. These records are being checked by police. Police are going through people’s telephone records and they are asking questions as to who rang who, and the purpose of that is to persecute public servants who leak. That is the only thing you are interested in, driving an environment of fear throughout the public service, because you do not have the courage to stand up and do your job. If they genuinely believed they were being protected by their ministers, they would not be coming to talk to me about the increasingly dangerous environment they believe they occupy in the public service. They are scared, they are frightened, and they feel like they are being bullied.
Madam Speaker, I am spoken to by public servants who genuinely believe they are being bullied. Now we see that bullying going one step further and the phone records of journalists being checked so the government can prosecute people who are talking to the media. What a wonderful brave new world in which we live! This government stands condemned for its political cowardice.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I rise to support this bill and make several points. First, these amendments are being made in every jurisdiction around Australia and are not peculiar to the Northern Territory. What is peculiar to the Northern Territory is the ranting, raving and hyperbole of the member for Port Darwin …
Ms Lawrie: And the member for Blain.
Dr BURNS: ... and the member for Blain. These amendments are sensible. They go to streamlining the processes. They go to repealing the obsolete provisions of the act and updating various elements of the act.
A number of former police officers are sitting opposite; none of them have been Police minister. I will talk about my own experience as Police minister in relation to this matter. I was never comfortable receiving reports from police about surveillance activities. I did not think it was the purview of a minister to be privy to that information. It exposes ministers in a way they should not be exposed. As Police minister, you do not direct investigations and are not privy to various undercover operations by police. Why should you be privy to elements of that which include phone taps?
This is a sensible amendment for that very reason. Ministers should not be in possession of that information, or survey that information, because if something went wrong with a phone tap in an investigation there would be question marks about everyone involved, including the minister. Ministers should not be involved. Members opposite should apprise themselves of the Police Administration Act which clearly points to the separation between executive power and the powers of the police, and the roles and function of the Commissioner of Police.
To a large degree we need to be at arm’s length of investigations and other procedures occurring within the police force. I am quite comfortable with these amendments, and if any member opposite became Police minister they would appreciate these amendments giving them some cover.
Details of telephone intercepts should not be on a minister’s desk. What should be there are reports about the efficacy and results of the intercepts - what court proceedings and convictions have occurred as a result of the intercepts. That is what is important. A minister should not be involved at that level. To that extent I support these amendments and emphasise they are not being introduced solely by the Northern Territory government, but by every jurisdiction in Australia.
The members for Port Darwin and Blain raised several issues, notably that being canvassed by the print media in Darwin about phone records of a journalist being accessed by police. The police were not directed by this government to undertake those investigations – police initiated the investigations. I have carefully read what has been said in the NT News regarding freedom of the press and alleging a witch-hunt on their journalist, but I also heard the other side of the story from the Northern Territory Police Commissioner. In essence, his concern is - I am paraphrasing what he said on ABC: this is not about freedom of the press; this is about police proceedings being made available to the media before the matter goes to court. He felt that was quite inappropriate and potentially illegal. I listened very carefully to what the Police Commissioner said and it struck a chord within me. I understand the argument about freedom of the press. I suppose the challenge is where does freedom of the press finish and illegal activity begin?
As I understand it, the target is not so much the journalist but those who have leaked to the journalist. The member for Blain was very careful not to mention the matter involved Lord Mayor Graeme Sawyer, who happens to be a neighbour of mine. I felt for Graeme Sawyer when I read what had been leaked to the media. He finds himself in a family situation - we are all subject to it in this House, which is why you feel for someone - and it is splattered all over the press. Members opposite should try to put themselves in the Lord Mayor’s position and understand the anger he felt. He is not the only one; Mr Jon Tippet also expressed his anger in very eloquent terms on a matter involving his family which had been leaked to the media and splattered all over the front pages of the paper.
There are two sides to freedom of the press. Yes, I believe in freedom of the press, it is essential to our democracy; however, where does freedom of the press end and illegal activity start? That is the hard balancing act. I have a great deal of confidence in our commissioner.
The other issue related to Cabinet documents being leaked to the media. We are not talking about someone saying: ‘Did you know next Tuesday coming into Cabinet is a particular matter?’ A whole Cabinet submission was leaked to the press! No matter what members opposite say, that is not right; that is not on. In the whole gamut of documents coming to Cabinet there are issues which could give financial advantage to people. That is why, around Budget Cabinet, there is even more scrutiny and security around our documents, particularly in relation to revenue matters. There has to be security around Cabinet documents. I ask the opposition, in its brave new world - if and when it gains power – will you put Cabinet documents on the website? You are suggesting, through your argument, there should be no legal restriction around Cabinet documents. You need to explain yourself. You need to think about what you are saying because none in the CLP opposition have been a Cabinet minister, and there are a few things you need to understand about being a Cabinet minister.
I support this legislation; it has sensible changes. I have spoken from the perspective of a former Police minister who had to sign off on these warrants, and I can tell this House quite honestly I was never comfortable with it. In fact, I was quite uncomfortable about it for the reasons I have outlined today.
You can talk about taking responsibility, and I will stand up and take whatever responsibility I need to take as a minister, member for Port Darwin; however, I was never comfortable about that. If anyone thought about it, as a potential minister on the other side, they would understand what I am saying. It is a protection for the system and gives the right separation between politicians, ministers, and the operations of police, and that is quite appropriate.
Madam Speaker, I have also addressed a number of other issues raised by the opposition; however, in essence, I support the bill.
Mr HENDERSON (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, the member for Johnston, for his support. I am not sure if the opposition will support this or not. There was much rhetoric from the other side to say the government is removing accountability in regard to oversighting these warrants. Given they spoke in that fashion, I assume they will be voting against this legislation, maybe even dividing on it; we will wait and see.
I also point out, given the allegations that the government, and me as Police minister, was walking away from responsibility for oversighting these warrants, I am curious why the opposition did not seek a briefing on this bill - very curious given the allegations made. If it had sought a briefing it would understand the Territory government is reflecting changes which have been made to the Commonwealth act, the principal act that refers powers to the Territory in regard to the Commonwealth Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act.
This legislation declares the Northern Territory as an interception agency. There had been a review of the operations of the act by the Commonwealth. That review was oversighted by a Commonwealth parliamentary committee which would have had Liberal members on it, and passed through the federal parliament on the voices. The Commonwealth parliamentary committee system which oversights this legislation - with Liberal party members on the committee - was in support of the changes to the Commonwealth act.
The Commonwealth act is the principal act. All other states have to amend their legislation to reflect the principal act. That is what we are doing here, and maybe the opposition did not understand that. Had the opposition received a briefing, that position may have been clarified. The Commonwealth act, with the agreement of the states and territories, removes the requirement for Police ministers in the states to sign off on warrants and revocations of warrants.
In regard to the issuing of warrants under the act, police have to apply to the court. It is not only police making the decision to intercept and tap people’s phones. Police have to attend court, and the court authorises a warrant be issued under the powers of this act.
It has nothing to do with the government, in spite of the rhetoric from the member for Port Darwin. We know, every time he rises to speak it is a bit of a leadership speech. We know the Leader of the Opposition is swinging in the breeze, waiting to be cut down by his colleagues. There is an opportunity for the member for Port Darwin to jump to his feet and promote to his colleagues - who, sooner or later, will put the Leader of the Opposition out of his misery - his abilities versus the abilities of the member for Fong Lim. Unfortunately, we do not tend to hear much from the member for Fong Lim these days. My understanding is the member for Port Darwin has the numbers but is reluctant to use them. He is gutless ...
Members interjecting.
Mr HENDERSON: He is gutless; he is a wimp. He has the numbers and will not use them. We wonder why he does get up here and perform, because he is gutless …
Mr Knight: He has no ticker.
Mr HENDERSON: He has no ticker - thank you, member for Daly. He does not have the ticker to put the Leader of the Opposition out of his misery.
Anyway, getting back. That is where all the theatrics come from.
The Police minister will still be issued written reports about information obtained under the warrants. This is sensible in regard to the Police minister oversighting and understanding police are using these powers to effect; that these powers lead to charges being laid and prosecutions before our courts. That ensures the territory or state minister understands police are using these powers appropriately, and they are leading to prosecutions and legal access under our court system.
I also point out in regard to police power; the Ombudsman still retains the power to inspect all records. The Ombudsman is also required under legislation to report to this House on an annual basis, the appropriate use of these powers by police - not by government, as the member for Port Darwin and his theatrics would assert. There are checks and balances all through this. The Ombudsman still provides the independent oversight. The Ombudsman reports to parliament on an annual basis regarding police use of these powers. If the opposition had not been so lazy and had bothered to get a briefing on this bill, they would have …
Mr Elferink: We asked for one; you refused it.
Mr HENDERSON: Sorry?
Mr Elferink: We asked for one and you refused it. She asked.
Mr HENDERSON: I will take that on board because my advice is there was no request. With all due respect to the member for Araluen, briefings regarding legislation are provided to shadow ministers who have carriage of the legislation. My understanding is the Leader of the Opposition is the shadow Police minister, not the member for Araluen. There might have been a change there. This is a police bill. The very long-standing protocol in the Westminster system is the shadow minister is provided an opportunity for briefings on legislation. Maybe that is something for the member for Araluen to understand. In legislation she has carriage of she is entitled to those briefings, with briefings on any other matters on request. This is a police bill for the shadow Police minister to be briefed on.
Madam Speaker, with these comments, I thank colleagues for their support. I am interested to see if the opposition is going to vote against this bill.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time, and note it was nothing but theatrics from the opposition.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
WITHDRAWAL OF BUSINESS
Matter of Public Importance
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I advise I wish to withdraw the Matter of Public Importance presented to you earlier today.
Motion agreed to.
MOTION
Note Paper – Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report 2009-10
Note Paper – Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report 2009-10
Continued from 26 October 2010.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I have concluded my remarks.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I rise today to comment on the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report 2009-10, and thank the Treasurer and Treasury staff for the briefing provided to me last week.
If you take what the Treasurer has said over the past weeks on face value, the Territory is in pretty good shape, and certainly, on the surface, the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report reflects reasonable economic times for the Territory. According to the Treasurer, we have a surplus for the financial year of $66m which is an improvement from the estimate of a deficit of $137m in May.
The estimate figure from the 2010-11 budget papers is an improvement from the 2009-10 budget, which indicated a deficit of $196m. So, from the 2009-10 budget delivered in May 2009 - in the estimate provided as to the budget bottom line to the end of June 2010 – only 13 months have elapsed and the overall bottom line of the Territory has, according to the Treasurer, improved by a whopping $262m. Given such a short time frame, I am not sure how there is such a disparity between those figures - $262m-worth of disparity.
This improvement to the bottom line has not been brought about by the sound economic management of this government. It has been due to some very significant windfalls brought to the Territory courtesy of the federal government. I will go into this in more detail shortly.
The other side to this pretty picture painted by the Treasurer is some rather poor …
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! This is not a pretty picture painted by the Treasurer. These are the audited accounts signed off by the Auditor-General. I caution the shadow Treasurer in his attempt to paint this as records which have not been audited by the Auditor-General or, indeed, that do not meet the Fiscal Integrity and Transparency Act. They do. This is not a general debate. This is a debate on audited accounts.
Madam SPEAKER: Treasurer, resume your seat. You will have an opportunity later.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Where was I? The other side to this pretty picture painted by the Treasurer is some rather poor economic management which feeds into the rhetoric of the supposed record infrastructure spend, as the Treasurer has been quoted many times; the $1.8bn announced during Budget 2010-11.
We have a surplus as outlined in the TAFR tabled; however, it comes heavily conditioned and is certainly not the result of good economic management, but through additional federal money and the lack of spending of committed funds by this government. My concerns were raised upon reading the Overview on page 7 of the TAFR which says in part:
- The result comprises an underlying budget improvement of $53m with the remainder due predominately to additional and brought forward Commonwealth revenue and delayed timing of Commonwealth funded expenditure, which will be spent in 2010-11 and future years and will result in a corresponding worsening position in those years.
Looking at that in more detail, page 10 of the TAFR details the variations of operating and cash flow statements. This is where we get a snapshot of the increases or decreases in both the revenue and operating payments of the general government sector. The first thing which leaps out on this page is the additional $170m in GST revenue which came the Territory’s way in 2009-10. The GST rivers of gold were running hot for the Territory in 2009-10, an additional $170m …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member for Katherine has the call.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: … which is great news for the Territory; however, how that additional GST revenue has been utilised is the question which needs to be asked. Nett debt currently stands at $719m - a drop of a $118m from the same time last year. The question is: could our nett debt position be better given the additional GST revenue received in current and past financial years? The answer is yes.
Our debt position has improved. However, it could be much better if this government exercised a little more fiscal responsibility and used more of those funds to further pay down the Territory’s debt position. The role of responsible government is to ensure the debt of the Northern Territory is kept to a minimum, and the excess – much of the GST dollars is money not anticipated by the government. This is the birthday present government was not expecting and has not used to pay down debt more significantly. Rather, it has either stashed it away or done what Labor governments do so well, which is spend.
There is an overpayment of GST to the Territory to the tune of $26m, which will not have to be paid back per se, but will amount to a decrease of inflow of GST over the course of the next 12 months. This will offset any future increases in GST should there be a continuation of additional payments flowing into the Northern Territory as a result of good economic times across the country.
I note in the variations an additional $190m in other Commonwealth revenue through SPPs and the national partnerships arrangement funding which has translated into a number of forms, and is on the books in contributing to the bottom line of the Territory, which comes back to how we managed to arrive at a surplus. This funding is translated as: housing largely through the failing SIHIP program; education through the Building the Education Revolution program; other money brought forward to the Tiger Brennan Drive extension; Alice Springs Transformation Plan; and a few other things which have been provided by way of extra revenue through those sorts of grants.
There has also been a reduction of $16m from mining royalties compared with what was expected from the May 2009 budget, and in the TAFR this is attributed to global economic conditions, lower commodity prices, and movements in exchange rates. There are other variations across the board in the TAFR regarding additional funding received from Commonwealth sources.
There is another facet to the budget surplus, and that is the apparently deliberate delayed expenditure of some of the Commonwealth funding which, if I heard the briefing correctly, is around $75m during that financial year. This goes back to a point I raised in my reply to Budget 2010-11 earlier this year of the so-called record infrastructure spend in this current financial year. The Treasurer trotted out a record $1.8bn infrastructure spend, which sounds very good. However, upon further examination of this record spend I discovered $845m, or around 52% of the entire infrastructure budget, excluding repairs and maintenance, was work revoted or brought forward from the previous year. That 52% eclipses any previous year. Revoted work during 2003-04 was 35%; 35% the next year; 30% in 2006-07; 37% in 2007-08; it climbed to 45% in 2008-09, and 52% in this budget. There appears to be a trend by this government to revote work year upon year. I posed the question why was that happening? I will quote from the Hansard of 8 June 2010:
- The only reason I can think of is so the government can effectively perpetrate a fraud upon the people of the Northern Territory by misleading them, by lying to them ...
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! If the member opposite wants to make an allegation of misleading he knows he must do so by way of substantive motion.
Mr ELFERINK: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker, he made the general assertion government was not lying - a particular member was.
Madam SPEAKER: I would like you to re-word that please, member for Katherine.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: That was a quote directly from the Hansard of my budget reply earlier this year. It was not pulled up then.
Ms Lawrie: Did you make a budget reply?
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I did a budget reply.
Madam SPEAKER: I do not know what happened in the budget; could you re-word that please, member for Katherine?
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Madam Speaker, I cannot re-word a quote from Hansard.
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Is the member for Katherine using the word ‘fraud’?
Madam SPEAKER: ‘Lying’, I believe.
Dr BURNS: He used the word ‘fraud’.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Katherine, if you could withdraw and re-word please?
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr WESTRA Van HOLHE: Madam Speaker, I will withdraw the quote, and reword what I want to say without the quote.
I postulated at the time there was a reason the government spoke about the budget in such glowing terms to give a false indication, raise some false expectations in the people of the Northern Territory by providing them with the truth but not the whole truth - and certainly not in context. I hope that gets around the use of any words members on the other side of the House find offensive, Madam Speaker.
I am discovering, by extension, the same story; by not spending much of the money from the pervious year - the revoted work - it becomes unexpended, largely Commonwealth funding, represented in the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report. That contributes to the budget bottom line, which gave us a surplus this year. Simply put, by not spending the money you roll the money forward into the next financial year and claim credit for sound economic management by bringing a Northern Territory budget to surplus, or keeping it in surplus, when all you are doing is rolling already committed money forward which should have been spent in the previous financial year.
At the time I gave my budget reply I noted some issues regarding the growth of the Northern Territory. Last year, the Northern Territory’s growth was predicted to be around 2%. Yet, using the government’s own figures, growth was 0.4%. If the government had spent a large proportion of the money from the previous financial year on infrastructure, we could have achieved a growth rate beyond the 0.4% figure provided by government. It might have taken us back to the 2% growth rate, which seems to make more sense than bundling it into 2010-11, and spread out the capacity of the Northern Territory.
Looking at how this plays out on the street, if the record infrastructure spend of $1.8bn for this year is all utilised, there will not be enough tradesmen, contractors, or people who work in industries where the money will be spent to achieve that spend. It is like putting a chokehold around the Northern Territory for a year then unleashing the floodgates some time after that. That will create quite significant variations in activity which is not good for the Northern Territory. It is much better to have a stable environment. I shall not belabour the point any further.
The member for Port Darwin will canvass issues around the Treasurer’s Advance - very interesting points raised in discussions he and I had recently. I will leave that to him, and not do him any disservice or discredit by stealing his thunder.
Madam Speaker, I conclude my remarks. It is difficult to be critical of the TAFR we have before us now, and it is not my intention to be critical for critique’s sake. The Northern Territory economy is in a reasonable position, yet we must look at how we got there and what could be done better. Reduction of the Territory’s debt is an area a Country Liberals government would take far more note of and apply greater fiscal responsibility to achieve that end.
Madam SPEAKER: Treasurer, in closing debate.
Mr Elferink: Hang on!
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Port Darwin.
Ms Lawrie: Wakey, wakey. Asleep at the wheel!
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): I am asleep at the wheel. Do you know why I am asleep at the wheel? Because there have been variations across all government departments and not one other minister is rising to explain to this House why those variations have occurred and what decision-making process was put in place. Goodness gracious me, what a fulsome endorsement of this Treasurer’s Annual Financial Statement - a deathly silence on the other side of the House with a government that could not be less interested in the results of the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Statement. Why would they not be speaking about these things? Because their departments will not let them. Have you ever seen such a jolly bunch of housetrained pets in your life as the members opposite?
Madam Speaker, yes, I was caught unawares. I was naive enough to believe a minister of the Crown, perhaps even the Chief Minister, would have something to say about a budget which, in the general government sector alone, operates at around the $4.5bn mark. This Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report before the House is the usual report on the accident which occurs every year when the Treasurer walks into the middle of Cash Street and is run over by the biggest cash truck in town, namely the Commonwealth government.
One of the tricks with a budget is to stick to it and make the results look planned. At the beginning of the financial year when the Treasurer brings down the budget, one would hope that at the end of the financial year the annual financial statement looked something like the original budget. No. We see shifts of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of income, projected deficits magically transform into surpluses as the dust fairy, Wayne Swan, sprinkles his magic dust over the Northern Territory. This government is not fiscally well run. This government falls into a swimming pool and boasts about its capacity to get wet. It is unremarkable in the least.
Over the last few years the budget of the Northern Territory has more than doubled in size. This is partly due to a GST this Labor Party chose to resist at the time it was introduced. It ran scare campaigns to resist it; however, it loves it now, and what I really like about this government’s approach to budgetary management is the cavalier fashion in which, during the last estimates process, the Treasurer of the Northern Territory announced $690m-odd was not that much money at all. Well, $690m-odd was the amount of the extra GST we did not expect to receive over several years. Wow! Her dismissive approach: ‘Oh, it is only about $690m’, could have wiped out the Territory’s debt if government had chosen not to spend it. We could have a debt situation in the Northern Territory which is a big, fat, blobby zero!
The Western Australian Labor government managed it during the good times, but not here. This government accepted the GST that came in and spent it at the very first opportunity. It is like a little kid in front of the candy store who has an extra 20 and is going to get more jubes. That is the approach of this government. It talks about its financial management plan and fiscal strategy, and you read about it in these documents - it is a genuine expression of things it is going to achieve. Here is a thought: stick within your budget.
If government had taken the unexpected component of the growth of the GST it received every year and squirreled it away, it would now have enough to eliminate the debt of the Northern Territory. There are several things operating here. One, it receives more money every year and it knows it will receive it. Two, on top of that it receives extra bonuses from the federal government for specific purpose payments and national partnership agreements - which essentially puts it into the role of project manager, and I cannot blame government for that. Three, at the end of the financial year, most years, there is a little extra GST in the kitty, the bit government did not expect.
If I was running my household budget, yes, I would have a house debt; government has debt. Some people have credit cards; I do not have a credit card debt, thank the good Lord, and some people have a car debt. There you have the basis for government spending. It is the same as a household budget in so many respects. If I, during the course of the year, know I am going to receive a raise, rather than spend it, I will squirrel some away. Not all, some of it, and then if I receive any extra money, like windfalls - like a community chest in Monopoly where I get an extra $15 from the bank teller for a bank charge in my favour - I receive those extra amounts of money and I have a choice to save it or spend it.
I can save it in two ways: I can stick it in a bank account for a rainy day; or I can pay off my credit card. That is not such a difficult thing to do. This government has chosen to spend it. Friday night comes around, the pubs are open and off we go, we are going to spend it. We spend money on all sorts of off-budget spends.
I will give you an example, the $400 000 decision by Cabinet to bring on the interlock devices because it was a good media release at the time. How many of these interlock devices have been fitted now we have spent the $400 000 off-budget spend? Many court decisions say you can get them; how many have been fitted? Two have been fitted, at $200 000 each because they could not wait until the next year to introduce the policy. That is called responsible fiscal management? No, we have to spend it now; we have to keep touching the budget and here is this hoary chestnut, the Treasurer’s Advance …
Ms Lawrie: The Treasurer’s Advance.
Mr ELFERINK: Yes, the Treasurer’s Advance. Here is a clever thing. For the folks who do not know, the Treasurer’s Advance is like pocket money we give the Treasurer. She hates me talking about it because it does not suit her. I have to accept the two paragraph explanation by Treasury of what is essentially a piggy bank, and unless I quote it parrot-fashion back, I am wrong. Well, I am not wrong. This is a contingency liability which is built into every budget and it is …
Dr Burns: You are going to do away with it, are you?
Mr ELFERINK: In the perfect world, if the budget came back properly, we would see positioning for a $40m surplus every year. That does not happen because we keep on raiding it, and the funny thing is, year in year out, government raids it; it is a $40m fund but historically you see as much as $130m extra come out of that $40m fund. One year, government raided it to the thousandth dollar so it could go to the brink of having to come back into this House and ask for more money. This year it contained itself.
When I put these questions to the Treasurer during the estimates process, the Treasurer assured me only the $40m would be spent. I asked her at that stage: ‘Are you going to spend any more?’ ‘I am not going to talk about that’. I asked how much would be spent: ‘I am not going to talk about that’. Sure as eggs, it was raided to the tune of an extra $27m more than budgeted for, which is typical of this government. It has gone to the little piggy bank and drained it, then runs off to the Administrator and gets more and drains it again, year in and year out. This is not good fiscal management. This is a government which has more money than it knows what to do with and finds ways to produce new spending initiatives.
Madam Speaker, this is an unremarkable government. It is the worst government the Northern Territory has ever had. It could have paid off its debt by now, it could have been providing services if it chose to govern rather than run the fifth floor of this building like one giant media release.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, what an appalling response from members opposite. I can see why there was some reluctance for the shadow Treasurer to step up to the role. I can equally see why the opposition sacked the member for Port Darwin as shadow Treasurer after that curious contribution to debate.
I will start where we finished because the sacked former shadow Treasurer, the member for Port Darwin, has a ground zero vision for the Territory - ground zero. Do not welcome any revenue from the Commonwealth - the GST - despite it being our entitlement, despite the fact any Treasurer worth their salt in the Territory would argue for as large a slice of the GST pie as possible. The consistent argument from the member for Port Darwin is we should not be getting the GST dollars in the Territory, it is simply a windfall, and if we are getting it we should not be spending it.
If you were to follow that line of argument to its logical conclusion, we would not have the doubling in the revenue growth we have seen over recent years. You would not be able to employ more doctors, more nurses, more teachers, more police, and more child protection workers into those key areas of service delivery. Following that logical argument down the path further, you would not be propping up the Territory’s economy, post-global financial crisis, through a deliberate decision to increase spending on infrastructure to ensure our construction and engineering sectors had the jobs it needed to make them well positioned for major projects as they come forward. We have seen in gross state product figures released recently that an increase in government spending has contributed to growth in our economy. Without that government spending we were in great risk of contracting through that post-global financial crisis period, particularly the 2009-10 financial year we are debating.
Where the government ensured, through expenditure, payments of $1.5bn - if the member for Katherine wants to understand the TAFR, they were payments of $1.5bn made in the infrastructure program. That directly correlates to recording the all-important GST growth of 1.3% announced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Yes, we expected a tight economy post-global financial crisis where we saw private sector investment stripped away from the Territory, stripped away everywhere because the financial markets had frozen for a period, and when they recovered enough to see some movement in the global financial market, the purchase of credit to invest in private infrastructure was prohibitively high.
If you listen to business it will say it is too high; it is still above the margins at which you would normally purchase that all-important credit into investment. This is why the International Monetary Fund said governments need to spend; spend significantly and spend swiftly. It made it very clear governments needed to respond to the worst financial crisis in history since World War II by spending significantly higher levels than usual, and swiftly. The 2009-10 year shows the success the government had in doing that.
The members for Katherine and Port Darwin do not understand that we are not on an island on our own, cast away at sea, not suffering the effects of the global financial crisis. They are in some bizarre fantasy, Gulliver’s Island world of their own.
The government responded swiftly and strongly to the global financial crisis in the 2009-10 budget by announcing a record infrastructure spend of $1.3bn. The TAFR we are debating today shows us we spent more than that; we stepped it up to a $1.5bn spend.
The member for Katherine wanted to kick around in the land of the revote. Clearly, he does not understand major infrastructure delivered in the Northern Territory is always over financial years. Projects like Tiger Brennan Drive and the Victoria Highway bridges are of such magnitude they are constructed over financial years. The main construction period for the Northern Territory, particularly in the Top End - no surprise to most people – is in the Dry Season. Guess where the Dry Season falls? It straddles financial years. Any government of any political persuasion in the Northern Territory will have its infrastructure revote straddling financial years. That is the reality of the construction cycle in the Northern Territory.
Our Northern Territory companies do better than anywhere else at constructing during the Wet Season. They are very good at ensuring their infrastructure program and the roll-out of their project gets as much momentum as possible in the Wet Season, but they go gangbusters in the all-important Dry Season. The revote out of the program in 2009-10 was at 53%. Now, that is sitting around average. The year before it was 58%; in 2000-01 it was 55% - not unusual; reflecting the realities of the construction cycle in the Northern Territory.
However, successive opposition members bury their heads in the sand and pretend there is something dastardly being done with this revote to try to obfuscate and pump up the construction program for the following year. Nothing could be further from the truth. They only embarrass themselves in continuing to run that spurious line that everyone in the development sector, particularly the construction industry, would find entirely laughable.
I am delighted we had a record infrastructure spend in the 2009-10 financial year of 1.59% because the ABS gross state product figure shows that 1.3% growth in the 2009-10 year backs up our government’s decision to lift our public spend by around 50%-plus. In real terms, that equates to about a 3% increase in GSP. You can do the sums yourself. If we had not stepped up our public spend as the International Monetary Fund advised all governments to do, we would have seen a contracting economy.
What does a ‘contracting’ economy mean? In real terms, it means high unemployment. It means Territorians are in the jobless queue, lining up to get a job which does not exist because under the ground zero economic direction of the member for Port Darwin, the jobs would not be there. You would not be pumping into your infrastructure spending, and you would not be providing opportunities in the public service in core service delivery areas of police, nurses, doctors and teachers. The jobs would not be there and you would see an environment, as has happened globally, of high unemployment as opposed to our low unemployment. We are tracking at about 3.1% unemployment rate. In the 2009-10 period we were tracking even lower, about 2.6% to 2.8% unemployment rates - a significant success story the Territory has delivered, quite deliberately through decisions we made as a government to support jobs and have jobs as the underpinning deliverable coming out of the budget in those key growth areas of health, education, law and order and, critically important, infrastructure. Infrastructure not only in the urban centres, but infrastructure in the bush to improve the living conditions of Territorians regardless of where they are.
In the shadow Treasurer’s first foray into economic matters, he chose to challenge Access Economics Business Outlook in his media release in response to the TAFR. This is despite his media release failing to declare he is shadow Treasurer. You have to change your shadow titles on your media releases guys - a bit of a tip. The shadow Treasurer claimed the respected economic commentator, Access Economics, was mistaken in its reference to land release contributing to economic growth. It appears the shadow Treasurer does not understand the effect of land release across civil construction, essential services and the building industry, and the fact Palmerston East is under development at Johnston, and construction is under way at Bellamack.
I refer the shadow Treasurer to the ABS data. It reports in the month of August 2010, there were 149 residential building approvals in the Territory in trend terms. This is the highest number of trend residential building approvals since December 1999, and the number of residential building approvals in the year to August 2010, at 1506, is tracking at near decade high levels. The shadow Treasurer also claimed Access Economics erred in its reference to work under way on a condensate processing plant. He failed to mention Access Economics, in its commentary and forecast, had not included the $US1.1bn Kitan project in the JDPA, of which $US550m-worth of activity will be attributed to the Territory. It is a bold, new shadow Treasurer who attacks Access Economics. It shows how truly off track and bewildered the CLP currently is.
After the March 2010 quarter publication was released we highlighted that area to Access, which informed us they would be reviewing their database of major projects in the Territory. The Kitan project is significant. Access Economics is a very credible economic forecaster. It takes far more than a couple of projects into account and, while their forecasts are just forecasts, they are worth taking into account in any policy formulation.
The Leader of the Opposition put out a media release titled: ‘Henderson Fudges the Figures’, stating:
- Annual approvals under the Country Liberals topped 2500 dwellings a year, yet the Chief Minister can only point to 1505 dwelling approvals in the 12 months to August 2010. This is actually lower than the most recent high figure in the year to October 2007.
This is an interesting statement from the Opposition Leader. If we look at the facts, those numbers do not relate to NT government policy. The period of time the Opposition Leader refers to is November 1999, where there was a spike in approvals due to - wait for it - Defence Housing Australia spending an estimated $350m, in 1998 dollar terms, for housing related to the Army Presence In the North scheme, and reconstruction activity following the 1998 Katherine floods, neither of which were driven by NT government policy.
Compare that to the current data released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics: 1505, tracking near decade high levels. This is the highest number of trend residential approvals since December 1999. You heard me talk about the high month of August return in trend terms. They are directly as a result of our government’s policy to fast-track the release of around 6000 blocks of land over a five year period, covering those four new suburbs in Palmerston East, with Bellamack and Johnston already under way. This is on top of activity by Defence Housing Australia in Lyons, which we see is fully committed, and the new development coming ahead in Muirhead.
In addition, this government has seen the approval of 2300 unit developments across Darwin CBD since 2006. Where the Leader of the Opposition would like to claim credit for Defence Housing Australia’s activity, we are simply claiming credit for our own government policy activity of fast-tracking land release in Palmerston East …
Mr Mills: That is ridiculous.
Ms LAWRIE: I note the interjection by the Leader of the Opposition. They are the facts, Leader of the Opposition …
Mr Mills: Fast-tracking! Talk to some of my constituents.
Ms LAWRIE: You may have been misled by your advisors and you may want to check before you stick your neck out and repeat …
Mr Mills: Come with me and we will talk to a few people with young families.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms LAWRIE: We heard the member for Port Darwin talk about how he would run his household budget. I find this a curious analogy. You cannot run a jurisdictional budget on the basis of a household budget when you need to create the levers which drive economic activity. You are not doing that in your household budget.
Household budgets are mainly ins and outs of revenue and expenditure. You are not creating the levers in economic activity which drive revenue growth unless you are sending your kids out to do modelling and being paid for that. You can argue that is perhaps driving some of the levers of economic activity in the household; however, on the whole, what a curious analogy the opposition continues to follow.
If the member for Port Darwin had not been sacked as the shadow Treasurer, and if he ran the budget like his household budget, where would that land us? Would Territorians be taken down the path of economic knowledge of the member for Port Darwin?
We know he has steered, curiously, away from the debate around the Conditions of Service Report, COSR. He usually debates how we are tracking in financial liabilities and superannuation; it is curious the member for Port Darwin remained silent and chose to focus on the Treasurer’s Advance, which I will get to in a moment.
If the member for Port Darwin had his way, and the CLP followed his advice on economic directions, the Territory budget would be treated as a gamble. Members might have heard of Babcock and Brown, the global investment and funds management group. The member for Port Darwin has heard of them. According to his pecuniary interests, the Elferink super fund bought nearly $20 000 in Babcock and Brown shares at $1.65. Trading in Babcock and Brown was halted on 12 January 2009 at $0.32.5. He bought $20 000 worth of shares at $1.65 and within a few months trading was halted at $0.32.5. The Elferink super fund has lost at least 80% of its money on Babcock and Brown. It is probably even worse; Babcock and Brown indicated shareholders were likely to be left with nothing. I do not think you will be receiving your $0.32-worth.
Territorians can be thankful he has been sacked as shadow Treasurer because if he handled the Territory economy the same way we would be heading down the gurgler. That is a result of the member for Port Darwin’s financial management. It was the member for Port Darwin who said we should handle the Territory economy like a household budget: I am simply responding to it.
In stark contrast, under the Henderson government’s sound financial management the government’s total investments, at the same time, lost only 4% in the first half of 2008-09, while as at 16 April 2009 the ASX, Australian Stock Exchange, had fallen 27.5% over the financial year, and 31.4% the past year. This curious argument of saying we should handle the Territory budget like the household budget, surely - after the example of how badly they handle their own - would slip away into the ether and we could get back to the real debate about revenue and expenditure.
The Treasurer’s Advance argument is led, and at the same time, and several times throughout the year, by members opposite, particularly the member for Port Darwin who is somewhat fixated on it - his way of dealing with it is ground zero …
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker. I move an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: Treasurer, I note it is lunch time.
Ms LAWRIE: I am about to wrap.
Treasurer’s Advance - ground zero approach by the member for Port Darwin, do nothing between the May to May period despite the fact the CLP used up its Treasurer’s Advance through the growth periods of the 1990s. If you look at the cycles of Treasurer’s Advance expenditure you will see you tend to rely on Treasurer’s Advance more through your growth periods.
The Treasurer’s Advance in 2009-10 was used on the roads network - $22m, community infrastructure projects and the Darwin Waterfront. It also went to fund the Alice Springs sittings; legal fees associated with East Arm Port and the Alice Springs Hospital; $20m to support the new nurse/patient ratio; the Buildstart costs as part of the stimulus project; new Police Beat offices and staffing; major events around the waterfront launch; a Street to Home initiative in the area of local government, housing and regional services; and tourism support in promoting new airline services. The member opposite would have none of this activity occur. Do not use the Treasurer’s Advance, stay frozen between May budget to May budget period; it is a nonsense argument.
We were upfront that the final cash outcome in 2009-10 of a $66m surplus was an improvement of $262m from the May budget 2009 estimate, and $203m from the revised estimate May 2010. We were upfront that that improvement included the provision of late Commonwealth funding and the timing of Commonwealth expenditure. However, and this is significant, there was an underlying budget improvement of $53m during that period. We kept growth restraint to 3% compared to the normal 12%. The levers and tools of this government with wages restraint, with a staffing cap, and other measures of efficiency dividends delivered an underlying improvement of $53m by taking away the accounting of the Commonwealth timing of payments which occurs every financial year for every government of the Territory regardless of their political construct.
Hoarding of Commonwealth dollars is a nonsense argument. We are being funded for specific projects. For example, the Alice Springs Transformation Plan and Tiger Brennan Drive were key areas where Commonwealth funding timing affected the outcome of the 2009-10 budget.
Madam Speaker, we were upfront about it; I issued media releases and talked about it at media events. This whole construct that the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report is a pretty picture painted by the Treasurer is arrant nonsense. I refer members opposite to the Auditor-General, who goes through these accounts collated by Treasury – yes, I sign off on them as Treasurer, as I ought to. I ought to be able to sign up to the accounts, and I go through them in great detail with my Treasury officials. I sincerely thank David Braines-Mead and his staff for the hard work they put in to the TAFR. The Auditor-General signs off and has a letter sitting within the TAFR - this is an unqualified audit by our Auditor-General.
I congratulate the hard work of Treasury officials in compiling the Treasurer’s Annual Financial Report for the 2009-10 financial year. Yes, it records another surplus, the eighth consecutive surplus; however, what we clearly have been flagging is the tough times continue. Our deliberate decision to step up public expenditure to support the growth of our economy during the post-global financial crisis period means we are going to be delivering budget deficits going forward. They are deliberate decisions made to support the growth in our economy to keep Territorians in jobs. In stark contrast, the CLP would go on a wholesale sacking of public servants, would withdraw the spending in infrastructure, and we would watch our construction sector collapse ahead of major projects. What a ridiculous direction from the opposition.
Motion agreed to; paper noted.
DISTINGUISHED VISITOR
Hon Barry Coulter
Hon Barry Coulter
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of former Deputy Chief Minister, the Honourable Barry Coulter. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
MOTION
Postponement of Business – 5-Star Energy Efficiency Ratings Motion
Postponement of Business – 5-Star Energy Efficiency Ratings Motion
Mr WOOD (Nelson)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that General Business Notice No 2, referring to 5-star energy efficiency ratings, standing in my name be postponed until General Business on 1 December 2010.
Motion agreed to.
MOTION
Proposed Censure of Government – Management of Child Protection System
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I move - That this House censure this government for its appalling management of child protection.
Madam Speaker, I rise to censure the Henderson government over its failure to protect the children of the Northern Territory. Labor has allowed a crisis to develop in the child protection system during the past decade. Last month, the Growing them strong, together report into the crisis in our child protection system was released. It should have marked a watershed in Labor’s approach to child protection; it should have shown a significant change of attitude. It should have been marked by a sense of urgency, some humility at least, and an acceptance something needed to be done which we had not seen before: a government take direct responsibility. It should have seen this government hang its head in shame and vow to do much, much better.
Indeed, the opposition held off censuring over the tsunami of need Labor had allowed to develop in the hope things would finally change for the better. We held back. There was a call for us to move a censure in those early stages, as we had done in the past. It is the efforts of the opposition and, principally, the former member for Araluen which have managed to get this government to the position where it has conceded action is required. However, still no responsibility has been afforded to this very important issue of governance. It is a blaming of everyone else.
To see the Chief Minister on Four Corners doing everything but create the impression the government is responsible was a shameful broadcast - that abdication of responsibility in the face of something broadcast nationally and the person who the buck stops with has not accepted responsibility. It is a systemic problem. You have to ask: what is the role of the Labor government? The opposition held off censuring because it hoped there would be change, but that hope was in vain.
Since the tabling of the child protection inquiry report we have seen a continuation of the evasion, denial and deceit which has characterised Labor’s approach to child protection. This arrogant, cynical and empty government continues to place its political protection - we just saw it during Question Time - before the protection of children.
Consider the case of Susan Mansfield. It is hard to imagine a more dedicated public servant, a servant of the best interests of the community. Whilst working at Royal Darwin Hospital, she repeatedly sought to prevent the dysfunctional child system from placing a child in grave danger - made a valiant effort. In spite of her real warnings that child was placed in danger and, sadly, came to great harm. In her efforts she was bullied and intimidated by senior bureaucrats. Recently, she appeared on Four Corners detailing her efforts to save that child, telling Four Corners she felt guilt about the fate which had befallen that child. For her honesty and integrity she was again bullied by senior bureaucrats. That is shameful! I cannot think of anything more chilling than a person who has been motivated out of the best interests of a vulnerable child who needed protection, needed a system to protect that vulnerable child, raise the warning, those warnings went unheeded and instead there was a move on the one who raised the warning - to carry that sense of guilt that perhaps she could have done more. Why doesn’t that sense of guilt pervade the actions and attitudes of this government, which is more interested in changing the deck chairs than it is in changing the direction of the ship?
The person making the public call through Four Corners for everyone in this nation to see, still received an approach from her senior which could only be described as bullying - a discouragement from speaking. Why? Because it may embarrass the system; it may embarrass the government. What about the child? The purpose of the system is to protect the child; that is what it is there for. The role of a government, as we say in the mornings, is to protect and advance the best interests, including that child.
Where do the senior bureaucrats get their written instructions from? Why do they feel they can do that? They get it from higher up the chain, from those sitting across this room - this disgraceful and deceitful government. When Susan Mansfield was bullied again for appearing on Four Corners our worst fears were confirmed. This tired, arrogant, cynical government will continue to put the protection of itself above the protection of children.
That is why we move to censure today. We held back last time, hoping against hope there would be a change. This changes all of that. There has been no change in the way this government operates. The Henderson government will continue to conceal what it can, deny what it cannot conceal, and bully anyone who dares speak the truth.
Another example post the inquiry’s report concerns the shocking revelations in the NT News that up to 500 child protection cases were closed without an investigation. How does the minister respond to this news? It is there for all to see. What do we hear? Nothing, silence, no defence, no explanation, and no reassurance to the Territory community that this government takes the matter seriously enough to provide an explanation right then and there. He is concerned. Does he initiate an investigation to ascertain if these children have come to harm? No. He describes a system in chaos, yet says the system has provided him with that assurance. The very assurance you have been provided with is illogical because it does not stack up. How can you provide us with the assurance of a system you have described as being dysfunctional?
The minister turns a blind eye and hopes the problem, which in government’s mind is a political problem, goes away. That is precisely the attitude which allowed the crisis in child protection to develop. This minister has learnt nothing from the parade of failed ministers before him. Why so many ministers? After the inquiry he continues to peddle the lie that the Henderson government spends $130m on child protection whereas the last CLP government spent $7m as though that is an explanation. As an explanation it is false. He imagines repeating a lie will make it true. He knows, I know, and interested observers know, his figures amount to simple-minded deception. How could you lower yourself to the point of running out something like that?
Those who have an interest in these matters are educated and astute enough to know if someone is telling the truth or not. Why would you go down that path? The only reason is a desperate attempt to solve a political problem by throwing a lie at it, hoping it will go away. This is about the protection of children, which is a lesser importance to this government.
The inquiry into child protection also made a series of urgent recommendations, and put a six-month time frame on their implementation. Yet, as another indication that nothing has changed in this government, it has created a Child Protection Reform Steering Committee to report on the implementation of the inquiry’s recommendations - which will only be reported on an annual basis. There is a commitment the urgent recommendations be implemented within six months, and a reform steering committee which says it will report in 12 months. That is six months after the most urgent recommendations are meant to implemented, and only once before the next Northern Territory election - just one report. I understand the next Northern Territory election is 14 August 2012. There will only be one report before that date.
Conceal what you can and deny what you cannot conceal. Nothing will change whilst government puts protection of itself against and before the protection of children. We are drawing on almost 10 years of this government’s failure to protect Northern Territory children. The astonishing thing, even in this session of Question Time, is they have a greater fixation on that which happened 17 years ago, but little interest in that which happened 10, nine, eight, seven, six, five, or four years ago. We have had five ministers, but there is a greater preoccupation of that which extends beyond the reach of their own responsibility, such is the poverty of this government to reach back 16 years. We had that as an explanation - an astonishing explanation - the current problem goes back 17 years.
Those kids who were protected by that system vote today - they are that old. Why do you not look straight at your own patch where you have responsibility? No, that is not within the capacity of this government, which is more geared by the need to defend and protect itself and a system which protects its ministers rather than children.
Since 2001, there have been numerous reports damning the management of systems and processes designed to protect the most vulnerable children. Each time a Labor government minister rises, hand on heart, and swears: ‘This time everything will be fixed. More money will be diverted to the cause. More childcare workers employed. Internal policy and processes will be improved; this time no children will fall through the cracks’. We have heard it all before; those good words spoken as though that will create an impression, a sense that things are different.
In a couple of months, or a couple of years, we are back again with a new report about systemic failures and a system in chaos, with a different Labor minister swearing government is committed to closing the gap in a system riddled with maladministration. That is where we are after 10 years - another minister saying failures of the past should be ignored: ‘Do not worry, good citizens who are concerned about children, we are going to spend money’. That is all we hear from the Labor government; the spending of money –no changing of culture, no changing of attitude, no accepting responsibility, and no changing direction. No. It is going to spend money, it is a systemic problem, and if you look back 17 years you will see it all make senses. It does not make sense.
As local members, I cannot understand how you could endure this when you have people telling you these stories. Yet, you explain it away and off you go to a function. Explain it away happily and deceive yourself. People are crying out for help; they have lost faith in the government protecting children. Off you go telling great stories, hand on heart - it is all going to be different this time.
The government tells us it is committed to shedding light and fixing the flaws of the current system. It says that because it sounds good. However, have we seen anything heroic which requires a real decision and real leadership to take it head on and change the direction of the system? No. We have talk of money being spent, but no care being given. We are told it is not the government’s fault. Well, it may as well exit stage left as far as I am concerned. What is it being spent on? Let us be specific.
What are you spending the money on and what has that spend produced which is measurable? Something real, something that can be measured, seen and explained, in real terms - we do not have that. After a decade in government, the Chief Minister still claims it was the system’s fault. The Health minister looks back 17 years and says: ‘Well, there you go’. It is 2010, Labor came into office in 2001, and we are told today it is a systemic problem. Who has been responsible for that system for a decade? It is as if the minister has no responsibility for the child protection system his government has run for a decade; as if ministerial accountability simply does not exist - it evaporates and counts for nothing. If you can explain it away it does not count. If not for the opposition, we could have allowed this to cruise, could we not?
But for those good people like Susan Mansfield who spoke up - and her voice could be echoed in this Chamber - you would have cruised on. I know the house where the young Melville girl came to grief; it is in my electorate. I know that neighbourhood. That has an effect on a community. That has an effect on people, on families, who lose their confidence in a system there to protect them, for those good people who live next door to houses such as that. One lady comes to see me again and again and again, saying she is observing these things, and she is calling out for help and is fobbed off with an explanation: ‘You need to go to this office, you need to go to that office, you need to write, you need to do this’. She is distraught. She is seeing something which is clearly wrong and the system will not respond to her. I go into bat for her; go to the school to see if I can get someone to at least provide additional information so the system will respond to that which is happening right next door. An elevated house, looking down into the backyard and seeing what is going on. The hardest part was trying to get someone in the system to pay attention. It went on for months, and yet we had assurances one after the other - it is not our responsibility, it is the system; the system is at fault, we are going to spend money on it. Do not worry, we have an inquiry.
I feel for that good citizen who has lost confidence in the system, and an appalling government which stands here and gives an explanation as though it is satisfactory. I saw the Chief Minister on Four Corners treat it as a political problem; let us see if we can bat through this one; bat it out, soon it will be over. Probably got off camera and said: ‘Did I do okay? Did I get through that one okay?’ I can see what is going on here. You are so desperate you will reach in any direction for whatever you can to distract from that core responsibility. I want to see a community with its faith and confidence restored in a system. I am not saying this is going to be fixed, but what has to be fixed is the attitude government brings to bear and the risk and responsibility carried by government rather than the excuse making, the moral vacuum we have for a government that will not accept the responsibility. That is what is so concerning.
There is a hole where the government should be. Every time another crisis is exposed - check this out, the community can see this - the minister responsible is shifted sideways to avoid having to answer for their incompetence. We have seen that. How dare you reach back 17 years and tell us lies about the amount of money spent compared with the money spent now as though that is an explanation. That is a lie, and is deceitful and evasive.
The ministerial merry-go-round has seen ministers Aagaard, Scrymgour, Lawrie, McCarthy and Vatskalis come and go like second-rate generals in a serious war. It has seen report after report into child protection commissioned, praised, and then ignored. After a decade of record government revenue, a record tax take, child protection has gone backwards in the Northern Territory. This government counts the spending of money as an achievement rather than the increased protection of children as the real, lasting achievement. Once again, we have another report demanding this government takes responsibility for the crisis it has created and tolerated for the last decade.
The latest pledge is $130m over five years will be spent to improve child protection services. This is supposed to be new money, not allocated from other health spending or other agencies. Yet, this is at best a guess because at no stage in formulating that figure did government sit down with Treasury and put a dollar figure to the response to each recommendation. Yes, we had the response, understandable in the circumstances, but in further inquiry to see whether we have a serious government - when it determined $130m as the amount which would create the impression something was happening, did government consult Treasury regarding the amount of money required? No. Let us come up with a biggish number to create that impression. Once again it is a political response to a real situation. Where is the analysis? Where is the capacity to make a full admission you came up with that figure on the basis of some sound and verifiable analysis which demonstrates you are serious?
It is a commendable increase, make no mistake, but increased spending has repeatedly failed to answer the question. The solution has been demanded in report after damning report. Spending more is not the answer because the government refuses to listen to the question; the question is about improving the processes, information collection, information sharing and hand over procedures and systems within the departments and between agencies. Will that happen itself? It will not. It will not happen if the minister is absent; it will not happen if there is a vacuum where a government should be; it will not happen if the executive arm of government is not requiring and demanding this and forcing the system to do what is required in response to the problem.
If you have the system in control and carry the political risk, because government refuses to carry the risk - it sets up expensive processes to throw money at and say it has processes, but the political risk is not being carried by the minister, it is carried within the system. The system becomes so large it looks after its own interests and is unable to care for the child. The hole where government was has to be filled, to accept that responsibility and authority which comes from the top, and make those things happen. It is a change of attitude, culture and direction and the acceptance of responsibility.
Sadly, as demonstrated by the 2007 Bath report and the 2010 Growing them strong, together report, increased spending, legislative changes and statutory bodies, although welcome, are not enough to improve the Territory’s child protection system. I doubt creating another committee with inadequate reporting time frames was what the board of inquiry had in mind when it released its recommendations. It is imperative the government - by that I mean the 12 members sitting opposite - take responsibility for the actions of their public servants and take responsibility for giving their public servants the resources and tools to carry out the recommendations of report after report after report. Get some skin in the game and have some real buy in.
Nothing has been done to address the lack of protection for workers within child protection programs exposing maladministration and gross failures of the existing internal processes. Indeed, the whistleblower process has been utterly swamped in its first year of operation. A total of 10 public interest disclosures were expected to be made in the 2009-10 financial year. Madam Speaker, 78 were received. That is an increase of 680%, yet, in the 2010-11 budget, the public interest commission was cut in half. I wonder why? Is it all about saving money? No, protect the government.
The government creates independent statutory bodies as part of its rhetoric in creating an open and accountable government. It hamstrings them by refusing to provide adequate resources so they can carry out their functions. It has done this to the Ombudsman, the Information Commissioner, the Children’s Commissioner and now the public interest commissioner.
Introducing mandatory reporting increased the reports of child abuse and neglect by 68%, but reports of abuse for 500 children were ignored. The government has dodged and weaved around giving a straight answer on why these 500 cases were closed without investigation. The answer is simple. The government created the legislation, put out the media release, patted itself on the back as having put in place measures to reduce child abuse, and then neglected to ensure the system was capable of handling the increased reporting. It is, for all intents and purposes, mere window dressing on a condemned building - a building which ought to be torn down and rebuilt from the ground up.
It introduced funding for new child protection systems, 23 new positions from memory, government was busy recruiting experienced child protection workers from the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Canada, yet has not managed to fill these positions. It will not fill them because prospective employees are turned away by the lack of support and protection for other child protection workers, like Susan Mansfield, who has been bullied and vilified by senior bureaucrats for doing her job protecting the interests of those most vulnerable, serving the public - people who endeavour to protect children rather than their political masters who call on family to take responsibility for the wellbeing of children, yet refuse to take up that same responsibility by ensuring departments are in order.
The board of inquiry was quite clear. The system is broken and needs fixing from the ground up. The government’s response, sadly, is just as clear. It is not government’s problem; it is not government’s fault. I disagree; the government is responsible. The hole needs to be filled where a government should be. Failure of the system resulting in harm to children is a fact, and there is still unwillingness for this government to accept that responsibility and promote the required change.
Madam Deputy Speaker, it is for that reason we bring this censure. We held back in the vain hope there would be some change. What we have seen since the release of that report leaves me, and the opposition, with no option but to censure this government for its failure to protect the most vulnerable in our community, our children.
Mr VATSKALIS (Child Protection): Madam Deputy Speaker, what can I say? What a performance. I refute everything the Leader of the Opposition said, and will continue to because he has no credibility at all. He said we went back 17 years to prove our case. No, we went back 17 years to show the CLP was never interested in child protection. The facts and figures speak for themselves. That was the workforce under the CLP, and under the Labor government. Starting with Hatton, finishing with Dunham, the most junior MLA, the number rotated around 100. Since coming to government there has been a significant increase in the number of people working in child protection.
How much was spent was not a lie. We say $7m was recorded in their budget books and their reports. Again, it hovers around $10m. The only serious increase we see is around 2003-04. I challenge the Leader of the Opposition: if you want to find out look at your own books. I am sure you have them in your office and you will see the real picture.
This government has addressed the issue of child protection seriously. This government has shone the light on the very uncomfortable issue of child protection over the past nine years. If you think child protection is only a government problem, some of us will be here in 10 years’ time still talking about it. It is a problem of our society; we have to work together to address it as a society. Government, and government departments, do not make good parents. It has to be addressed by society, and the government has a role to play.
The reality is the CLP turned a blind eye to children protection. How could it address child protection issues with a $7.8m budget a year? How could you address the child protection system when there was no one in the bush to address the issues with Aboriginal kids? There was no child protection after hours. In 1993, the CLP established two units, one full-time in the north, and one part-time in the south. That is their record. There was no reform of the welfare act. No children’s commission was established, and there was no Child Protection minister and, when the CLP had one, it was the most junior in their ranks. The only thing they did in 1994 was put on five additional people. In 2001, we found just over 100; today there are 500 people employed in the child protection system.
Members interjecting.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr VATSKALIS: Contrary to what the opposition says, the Department of Health and Families has endeavoured to continuously improve services in the face of notifications, rising by 400% since 2001. Investigations rose from 744 to 3683 since 2000-01. Children on care and protection orders rose from 286 in 2001 to 696.
I will start at the beginning and highlight the reports and reforms this Labor government has commissioned and implemented, in contrast to the CLP. The Caring for Our Children five-year reform package of 2003 provided $53m over five years, which emphasised greater collaboration of government services and a review of legislation and FACS services. The key outcomes include: 119 extra staff to expand services, and an increase in the foster care parent payments by 4% in 2004 and 8% in 2007; establishment of Foster Care NT; increased funding for non-government organisations; introduction and implementation of new child protection legislation, the Care and Protection of Children Act in 2007; establishment of a family support service, and preventive services around parenting and education; and establishment of the Central Intake and Child Abuse Task Force services. The Northern Territory government, the Labor government, commissioned the inquiry into child sexual abuse in Aboriginal communities, the Little Children Are Sacred report, in 2006.
In August 2007, the Northern Territory government introduced a five-year $286m Closing the Gap package as the Northern Territory government response to the Little Children Are Sacred report. The plan extends beyond the 97 recommendations of the report to tackle legislative reform, governance, economic development and employment, remote area policing, health, and housing. $61m was allocated to Families and Children over five years. Thirty-nine of the recommendations relate to Northern Territory family services. Some of these involve action by more than one agency – it has to be a whole-of-government approach. We cannot fix everything. It is not the sole responsibility of Children’s Services; Housing, Education, and Health have to work together.
Of the recommendations made in this report, 22 are complete and 17 are ongoing. Key changes include the establishment of the Remote Aboriginal and Family Community Workers Program, which currently employs 25 workers and two team leaders in Alice Springs and Darwin. The program covers 17 Aboriginal communities including Borroloola, Daly River, Ntaria, Oenpelli, Galiwinku, Yuendumu, Papunya and others. The government expanded the sexual assault referral clinic to remote areas, and provided a mobile outreach service in partnership with the Australian government. The government established, in 50 remote communities, 20 safe places. This constitutes 12 women’s safe places and eight cooling-off places.
The Child Abuse Task Force is now a permanent team in Northern Territory Family and Children Services with a CAT North and CAT South team – full-time teams, not part-time. Aboriginal Community Resource Workers now work alongside CAT to initiate community development strategies on communities, and raise the level of safety for children in these communities.
We established employment screening to include working with children checks. We established the Ochre Card for a Working with Children Clearance Notice which will be mandatory from March 2011. We established a Children’s Commissioner in 2008, and the Child Health Review and Prevention Committee. None of these had been done under the CLP government. The Safe Kids, Strong Futures community education and training has been rolled out by the department in more than 15 remote Aboriginal communities. We established therapeutic services for victims in Darwin, Alice Springs, and Katherine.
In 2007, the Northern Territory government commissioned the high risk audit report by Dr Howard Bath. His report focused on the assessment of risk management strategies for high risk clients within the community service portfolio, including alcohol and other drugs, mental health, family and community services, and aged and disability services. Thirty recommendations were made and accepted for implementation by the government; 21 recommendations have been implemented, and nine are ongoing.
Key outcomes include: the introduction of structured decision-making, screening and priority tools to improve assessment and decision making; shared case management framework and practice guidelines implemented to include collaborative practice across departments; the development of secure care initiatives in Darwin and Alice Springs; establishment of internal quarterly review processes; establishment of two new emergency care offices in Darwin; the continued implementation of the Palmerston and Alice Springs Youth Action Plan; and, development of the primary responsibility program to support young people with antisocial behaviour and their families.
The Northern Territory government also commissioned the internal review of Central Intake in 2009. This review was conducted by external consultant, Jay Tolhurst. The purpose was to identify and find solutions for inefficiencies and risks within the intake and assessment process. The key outcomes include: the introduction of the intake event to streamline the recording of client information at intake; the introduction of a new phone system to improve management of calls; and increased staffing at Central Intake.
In November last year, the Northern Territory government also sought the Children’s Commissioner to review the Central Intake and response procedures of the department. An interim report was publicly released in February of this year, and I tabled the final report. This review expanded on the internal departmental review by providing a transparent, public review of the department’s intake processes. Included within the review was a critique of the department’s capacity to undertake timely investigations. The key outcomes include: training developed in relation to the assessment of cumulative harm; development of a planning framework; policy and procedures reviewed to ensure special consideration is given to the views of medical and allied personnel who work directly with children and families.
Susan Mansfield, the whistle-blower, brought some of this to our attention, and baby Lemos was the subject of an internal investigation and also an investigation by the commissioner. Following this investigation, a number of processes have been implemented to avoid this unfortunate and extremely sad incident. We must also accept this commenced when the court ordered the child be surrendered to a relative. Some people in the department could not accept it. It was a court order. What happened was unfortunate and tragic; however, the department is bound by court decisions.
There have been coronial inquests for tragic events, and I would be the first to say, as a parent, I feel very strongly when a child, even if I do not know them, suffers. The death of the young girl, I believe, was the most tragic of all. I still cannot believe that …
Mr Bohlin: In your ministerial care.
Mr VATSKALIS: Member for Drysdale, it would be a good idea to read the legislation and discover children are now under the protection of the CEO rather than the minister.
Mr Bohlin: It is a very convenient change.
Mr VATSKALIS: I find it fascinating that we had the Leader of the Opposition preach about child protection; it took him four weeks to reach that point. In the previous parliamentary session when we received the inquiry report, five questions were asked about child protection, and numerous other questions about what the opposition calls boat registration. For them, boat registration was higher on the agenda than child protection. You only have to look at the Hansard and you will find what was more important for the opposition.
The other thing I would not accept from the Leader of the Opposition is his public statement about repealing legislation to protect young Aboriginal girls. That is not only distressing, I find it offensive. You can say anything you like, member for Blain, but the statement stays - not only the one on television, the one written by Camden Smith, who wrote ‘the CLP may repeal sex laws’. Opposition Leader, Terry Mills, and I quote from Camden Smith’s article:
- … has stood by a comment he would consider reviewing laws preventing Aboriginal men having sex with underage females.
Mr Mills told the Northern Territory News on Tuesday he would consider repealing aspects of the government’s controversial gay age-of-consent laws …
The Leader of the Opposition cannot make accusations about ministers not caring for children when he did nothing less than procure young Aboriginal girls for older men to have sex with. I wonder what the member for Macdonnell, who is very vocal about the rights of Aboriginal women, would say about that.
As a minister, I take responsibility for my words and actions. One person who appears not to be responsible for what he says is the Leader of the Opposition. I find it offensive, and I reject being preached to by the Leader of the Opposition about child protection when he made a despicable statement.
It took the CLP four weeks to censure the government. The CLP asked only five questions about the children’s inquiry and the report and numerous questions about boat registration. To the contrary, our government responded within hours - not weeks, not months, not years - hours. Within hours we announced $130m extra and yes, that has been considered by Treasury, Leader of the Opposition. Today, I made an announcement highlighting a first down payment of $9.5m and you will read in the newspaper tomorrow where it is going to be allocated.
At the start of next year we will outline where this money will go. Thirty per cent of the population in the Northern Territory is Indigenous. Never under the CLP government was there a specific Indigenous child protection branch or department - not even a team or a unit. We worked with AMSANT to establish that team and we are working with NTCOSS. We funded a position to identify specific issues, especially in Aboriginal communities. We are now calling on the NGOs to be active participants in child protection. We went interstate and overseas to recruit people, and I am happy to announce 41 job offers have been created and accepted, and new people from interstate will start arriving in the Territory in the beginning of January. Ten New Zealanders will be arriving on 8 December. People from Tasmania are coming to help us, and New South Wales offered assistance to put child protection processes in place.
Within hours this government established a committee which will oversee the implementation of the 134 core recommendations we have accepted. This committee will report, via me, to parliament every six months, not annually.
We now have a group, under the CEO of the Chief Minister’s department, to work together because it has to be a whole-of-government approach. We are working with the Commonwealth government and the police. We have police officers in Central Intake to screen the notifications and, in spite of what the Leader of the Opposition has said, the department has new professionals who are screening every notification which comes through, and they make fully informed decisions on how to proceed with each notification.
The CLP is not serious about child protection. Its policy comes from the previous member for Araluen, who had the welfare of children at heart; she fought for it. All she could get from the CLP was $9m; that was it, that would fix the problem. A problem which, despite the fact we put $135m a year into it, still suffers under the workload and pressure of the increased number of notifications and the demand for children to be in care.
The only thing the CLP wants is to highlight the whistle-blower legislation. The reality is, we support whistleblowers following the process, and I personally gave assurances to people in my department to provide evidence and give statements during the inquiry.
Currently, the CEO of my department is investigating the allegation of Ms Mansfield to ascertain if it is true, who is responsible, and if any person pressured Ms Mansfield; that is quite fair. I feel for her. I worked as a public servant. Unfortunately, I worked during the CLP days when if you dared say anything you would be out of a job. I recall a person high in the CLP made a statement to one of my relatives just before the 2001 election that if I did not withdraw my nomination for the seat of Casuarina I would never have a job in the Territory again. That was the CLP days, and that was the policy on whistle-blowers or people who did not favour that government
We have made a commitment; we know the system is not at fault, it is broken. I said I am not going to build the system; I am going to take it apart and put it back together. It has to be done. We have to do business differently. We cannot apply a system which was suitable for Great Britain in the 1960s and 1970s to the Northern Territory of 2010. The Northern Territory is not a mainstream European country; it is a multicultural community with 30% Indigenous population with their own needs, wants and problems.
We have given a commitment to do anything to ensure children are protected. I cannot say the same for the CLP. It is not about changing child protection - $9m is not going to do much. Looking back at 2005, we allocated $10m for treatment of petrol sniffing and the CLP said we should not spend the money on kids who are sniffing; that money should go to support business instead. During the recent Araluen by-election the member for Araluen was suggesting the ‘fall down before sundown’ policy - selling alcohol earlier in the day was appropriate for Alice Springs. That is the worst policy you could possibly come up with if you are serious about child protection.
Madam Speaker, we want quick response times; we want more timely investigations, with more support for our people in the public service and more support for our carers. We want to make sure kids feel safe wherever they live in the Territory; not only in Casuarina, Nightcliff or Fannie Bay, but also in Yuendumu, Yirrkala or Ngukurr. We are genuine about changing the child protection system - we will change it.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I rise today to censure the Henderson government for the systemic failure of child protection services in the Northern Territory over the past 10 years, and the failure of successive Cabinet ministers to protect the children of the Northern Territory. The key themes of this government’s report card in child protection include: failure; cover-ups; negligence; maladministration; repetition of mistakes; impotence; poor leadership or, indeed, no leadership; and scandal after scandal, which has resulted in the suffering, deprivation and death of Northern Territory children.
It is a matter of extreme importance that I bring to you today the history book of the Northern Territory government’s failure to provide effective child protection services to the Northern Territory. First, I will respond to some of the comments made by the Minister for Child Protection. He mentioned it took four weeks to censure the government on child protection. We do not want to make this a political issue, contrary to the government’s views. We believe child protection is above politics, so we gave you four weeks to provide us with a report card on exactly how you would implement the urgent recommendations of the latest inquiry into child protection.
After four weeks we thought it was reasonable to ask the minister what was happening. What have you been doing? The minister was overseas I gather, in China, so the report card was probably a little delayed; however, he responded from afar and gave us some interesting facts on apparently what the government had been doing. Apparently is the word, because you cannot believe what this government says it has done because there is very little evidence to suggest it has done anything to further the safety of children in the Northern Territory over the last 10 years.
The history of the Northern Territory government’s child protection systemic failures over the last 10 years has been around the failure to recognise problems despite all manner of reports, complaints and clear indicators the system was at breaking point; the failure to provide leadership where leadership was required; and the failure to implement recommendations from the numerous reports into the Northern Territory child protection system. During this time we have witnessed a child protection system in meltdown, a child protection system that has lacked all of the above plus planning, an ability to respond, an ability to assess and implement strategies, to provide proper reporting mechanisms, to provide risk management strategies for children; a system which has failed from top to bottom.
It is beyond my comprehension how the Minister for Child Protection can stand before us and defend the government’s self-made debacle by comparing its track record to the CLP’s track record over decades gone by. It is unbelievable how this government takes no responsibility whatsoever for the mess we call child protection in the Northern Territory.
It is very important the people of the Northern Territory know what has happened in the child protection arena over the last 10 years. As mentioned by the Leader of the Opposition, we have had six changes to the child protection ministerial portfolio since 2001 – Jane Aagaard, Marion Scrymgour, Delia Lawrie, then back to Marion Scrymgour, Malarndirri McCarthy, and now we have Kon Vatskalis. Six shifts sideways, six wishful attempts to make the problems go away. This has not been very successful, as we have all borne witness to.
From 2001 to 2002, we saw the release of the report written by Julian Pocock 2002, State Of Denial, The Neglect and Abuse of Indigenous Children in the Northern Territory. It included 13 recommendations. Julian Pocock said in that report:
- The research found that the child protection system in the Northern Territory is not a system at all and that it is failing to meet its statutory obligations to Indigenous children under the Northern Territory Community Welfare Act of 1983. It found little evidence of any serious or sustained attempt from the Northern Territory or Commonwealth governments to address the underlying causes of child abuse or neglect in partnership with Indigenous communities.
That was in 2002. Pocock went on to say:
- The most useful thing the Northern Territory government could do in the area of child protection is start again.
The Northern Territory government did not start again; it continued to go along its merry way. This, I believe, is when the rot really set in. The 13 recommendations ...
Mr KNIGHT: A point of order, Madam Speaker! For the sake of Hansard, I believe the member for Araluen is too close to the microphone.
Mrs LAMBLEY: Sorry. Thank you.
Mr KNIGHT: You are getting a bit of feedback through …
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: They are very sensitive, member for Araluen. You do not need to be close. You have the call.
Mrs LAMBLEY: I go on to talk about the 13 recommendations of this State of Denial report which, I believe, is very aptly named. It includes recommendations about the Aboriginal child placement principle, which is very familiar - we have read about it in the latest report in 2010. Other themes we see in the 2010 child protection report include: community education and awareness; the focus on child neglect and the concept of cumulative harm; the need to expand Indigenous family support services; expand the amount of funding available to child protection services; and the need for an Indigenous child welfare policy statement. These are all themes of the latest child protection report - nothing new to us when we reflect on what was said in 2002.
These issues were raised in successive reports from 2002 to the latest inquiry written by Bath, Bamblett and Rosebery - all very familiar, repeated numerous times in child protection reports throughout the last 10 years. Apparently, nothing was done to address those recommendations. Interestingly, Recommendation 12 of the State of Denial report was about long-term planning. Pocock obviously saw the need to instruct the Northern Territory government to do some long-term planning in child protection, which I thought was very interesting:
- That the Northern Territory government establish planning mechanisms to ensure that all portfolio areas of government take account of the high proportion of children and young people within the Indigenous population, including by allocating additional funding to cater for the increasing number of Indigenous children and young people.
The Northern Territory government plainly had to be instructed at this point to provide long-term planning into child protection services, in particular to children living in remote Indigenous communities.
From December 2002 to July 2005, we saw the Scrymgour ministry, which has to be characterised by …
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! I know the member for Araluen is new to this House and we are giving her a little latitude, but she should be referring to members by electorate rather than their name.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, Leader of Government Business. Member for Araluen, it is a convention of the Chamber and standing orders …
Mrs LAMBLEY: I am reading from Hansard. Yes, okay, fine.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: … that we refer to other members by their electorate.
Mrs LAMBLEY: Thank you.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: You have the call, member for Araluen.
Mrs LAMBLEY: This was a ministry characterised by apathy, which tended to permeate from the top down. During this time, there was a Caring for Our Children reform agenda in 2003, but the problems were not going away. Between 2005 and 2007, we saw many reports, and many landmark and distinguished events happened in child protection.
In 2005, the six-week-old baby referred to in the Four Corners program, Dangerous Territory, died in a car travelling from South Australia to Alice Springs. This was one of the main cases referred to in that documentary. On 15 May 2006, ABC Lateline featured Dr Nanette Rogers, the Northern Territory prosecutor, who highlighted the problem of violence and sexual abuse of children in Northern Territory Aboriginal communities.
In June 2006, the Chief Minister, Clare Martin, announced an inquiry into child sexual abuse in remote Aboriginal communities under the Inquiries Act, and, of course, during that time, we had the release of the Little Children are Sacred report. Interestingly, with the Little Children are Sacred report, the intention of the Northern Territory government at the time was to not commit to any course of action for three months, but the Commonwealth government stepped in, and control over how that report was to be released and used was swept away from the Northern Territory government and the Northern Territory Emergency Response was put into play.
The Little Children are Sacred report came out with 97 recommendations, and many of the current themes we saw in the State of Denial report were once again featured in this report. Recommendations were around the whole-of-government approach in respect of child sexual abuse; the need for more child protection workers with enhanced training and support; more strategic planned investment in local community workforces; better community services; education and support services in the community; and developing youth services and centres to support youth living in remote areas. The Little Children are Sacred report is of national significance, but many comments were made in that report referring to the impotence and incompetence of the Northern Territory government, even harking back to 2006.
Are there simple fixes, I quote: ‘Of course not’. Our conservative estimate is it will take at least 15 years, equivalent to an Aboriginal generation, to make some inroads into the crisis, and then, hopefully, move on from there. The Northern Territory government is working on a 20-year action plan. When will it start? I have not heard of the Northern Territory government’s 20-year action plan on child protection; I would like to hear about it from the minister. How is it going, and when are we going to hear about it?
The Little Children are Sacred report of 2006 also said: ‘The government must lead’. There is an opportunity to start something which can have a hugely positive impact on the whole of Australia. However, while everyone has a responsibility for the protection of all children, the Northern Territory government must provide strong leadership on the issue of child sexual abuse, and this be expressed publicly as a determined commitment to place children’s interests at the forefront in all policy and decision-making, particularly where a matter impacts on the physical and emotional wellbeing of children.
The report card of how the Northern Territory government has implemented the recommendations relating to it in the child protection system and protecting the children of the Northern Territory - it is not clear, but because many of these recommendations featured in subsequent reports, we can only assume the Northern Territory government has not been successful in its obligation to implement the recommendations of the Little Children are Sacred report.
Moving on in time, we come to the 2007 Northern Territory Community Services High Risk Audit. This report featured 30 recommendations and was written by Howard Bath. The Ombudsman was denied a copy of this report and sought to gain a copy by issuing a summons on Dr Bath. The Northern Territory government refused to make this report public at the time, releasing only an executive summary. An adequate explanation was never given as to why this was so. We can only imagine this marks the era of the cover-up of child protection by this government; the culture of cover-up began. The Northern Territory Community Services High Risk Audit of 2007 highlighted the poor assessment and case management which was being provided for children notified as at risk to child protection authorities in the Northern Territory. It examined 60 files from across the Northern Territory, 20 from Darwin urban areas, 20 from the Darwin Top End remote area and 20 from Central Australia; it was a fair sample.
Of those 60 cases, 52% were receiving case management, 43% had an assessment of individual need, 33% had an individual support plan, and 7% had a risk assessment completed. The figures are very unimpressive. Fewer than 50% were adequately serviced and provided with proper care plans and assessments. The recommendations of this report, 30 in total, focused on: case management practices; risk assessment; case loads; case allocations; staff recruitment and retention; and the need to adhere to time frames through responding and reviewing cases. All very familiar; we have heard it all before. These recommendations were alluded to in the State of Denial report, and we have heard more about these things in the subsequent reports. This was the era of cover-ups – in July 2007 we saw poor Deborah Melville die. On 19 July 2007, minister Lawrie announced an independent audit of child protection clients, which is what I referred to.
In 2009, we had the Review Report of NT Families and Children Intake Service. There were 41 recommendations. More recommendations which sound very similar; it talked about the intake system, backlogs, problems with report writing, improvement to work systems, problems with staffing, manageable workloads, allocation of professional staff, the need for better risk assessments and the need for much improved screening and assessment tools - the same sort of stuff, just a different report. The point is the problems were not going away. In report after report we are getting the same recommendations, the same themes and the same problems which were not being addressed as time went on.
In 2009, three coronial investigations relating to the deaths of children known to family and children services, Forbes, Johnston and Melville, were undertaken. The reports of those coronial investigations included 17 recommendations. In relation to the Deborah Melville case:
- The inquest has heard considerable evidence about the serious deficiencies and systemic and individual failures of the department in:
(a) failing to monitor and review the placement of Deborah in Denise Reynolds’ care; and
(b) failing to monitor the needs of Denise Reynolds and how she was coping, and to provide her with the support she required.
The interesting thing about reading the Deborah Melville coronial investigation report for me was the contribution made by Jenny Scott, who spoke on behalf of the department. Jenny Scott showed a great deal of courage and probably, in hindsight, felt pressured into not being as forthcoming about her position as she was; however, I will refer to that in a minute. The systemic breaches of FACS in the Deborah Melville case were well documented. The report outlined the statutory obligations of the minister which were breached. There were five key breaches of the act by the minister in the Deborah Melville case:
1. the requirement to visit the children at least once every two months;
4. the requirement to renew the registration of the carer every 12 months; and
5. the requirement to be satisfied every 12 months that the children were receiving an adequate standard of care as specified in the act.
The report also says that section 52 of the Community Welfare Act provided that, when a child was placed in the care or guardianship of the minister, the minister shall, subject to any limitations the court imposes, have the same rights, powers, duties and obligations and liabilities as a parent of a child. That should include the obligation to provide for the child the necessities of life, including accommodation, maintenance, education and recreation.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Araluen, your time has expired. I remind members there is no extension of time in this debate.
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support this censure motion. I draw members’ attention to the Four Corners program on Monday, 8 November 2010. It was another sad day for the Northern Territory. It showed clearly to the nation, and the rest of the world, how the Northern Territory Labor government, and Aboriginal members on that side of the House, have let down, in the most shocking way, the children of the Northern Territory. The program showed how, according to respected experts such as Dr Howard Bath and Professor Muriel Bamblett, there is a tsunami of need for Aboriginal children in the Northern Territory, most particularly in Aboriginal communities.
This tsunami of need has been accompanied, according to Professor Bamblett, by a complete absence of any action even though there are atrocious, demonstrated cases of child harm, poverty and neglect. In the chillingly horrific cases presented by Four Corners to the world, it was clearly demonstrated authorities knew these children were at risk but failed to protect them. There was the example of a mother having children so she could claim more welfare benefits to pay for her drug habit, who then starved her children to death. There was the example of a young Aboriginal girl dying in horrific pain in the dirt in the yard outside her home as her foster mother spent days and nights in the Darwin casino. These deaths occurred in the most shocking circumstances, despite the knowledge of child protection workers.
Had the authorities, including senior bureaucrats and ministers, seriously engaged with their responsibilities, these children would still be alive today. Had the Aboriginal members on the opposite side of the House worried more about their elected responsibilities and their constituents and made themselves aware of such situations, perhaps we would not be facing this tsunami of need in such appalling and degrading circumstances.
The case of Deborah Melville, a 12-year-old Aboriginal child who died in severe pain in foster care, can only have one outcome; that is, to demonstrate a comprehensive and complete failure of the child protection system in the Northern Territory under this government.
The Northern Territory Ombudsman told us on the Four Corners program she is currently investigating 52 cases of neglect. It is acknowledged these are likely to be the tip of the iceberg. Many of these are likely to involve very serious high levels of abuse. Her verdict is likely to bring even more evidence to bear about the serious incompetence and arrogance of this government, and the disengagement of Aboriginal members on the opposite side of the House with regard to their responsibilities. The Ombudsman tells us, at this stage of her investigations, of the cases she has investigated to date, 80% of the responses by child protection authorities – and, presumably, the responsible minister - have been inadequate. Of these, there has been no response at all in 50% of cases. This is despite the fact …
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! Is the member reading from a report from the Ombudsman? I do not believe that report has been published?
Mr TOLLNER: I am referring to the Four Corners program, and what the Ombudsman has said, and what I think is likely to occur.
Dr Burns: Thank you, member for Fong Lim.
Mr TOLLNER: I have not been in contact with the Ombudsman, minister.
Of these, there has been no response at all in 50% of cases. This is despite the fact a normal, balanced person would have found, in all the cases, the affected children were in risk-prone, terrible, and harmful situations.
This is a situation of great tragedy and is continuing to occur. Is it really too much to expect those elected to positions of responsibility, or placed in positions of power, exercise those powers to protect those who should come first in our society, our children? Is it not the mark of any civilised society to protect the weak and defenceless and, above all else, our future, our children? How, in the Northern Territory, can we hold our heads proudly and say we are providing examples to others in such crucial areas of government? No civilised society can afford to let such maladministration continue.
How do the Chief Minister, ministers, and this government respond in this crisis? Their first point of call is the CLP. We see ministers hold up graphs and say this is all the fault of previous CLP administrations: ‘Look how little previous CLP administrations spent in the area of child protection, and look how much we, the Labor government, are now spending’ - to say spending is some test or measure for a system that works. As we constantly say on this side of the House, spending is not an outcome.
I have been in the Northern Territory - I was not born here - for well over two decades now, and I remember previous CLP administrations. At no time, in my recollection, do I recall circumstances being highlighted as they are now though the Little Children Are Sacred report, the Growing them strong, together report, through various media outlets and, most notably, recently on Four Corners.
After blaming the CLP, the Chief Minister blithely talked in broad and meaningless generalities about building the system from the bottom up, whatever that might mean. He blames it on crushing caseloads, which is code and spin for blaming the frontline public servants. These are the people trying to deal with complete lack of senior management and ministerial support and understanding of the problems. Why was not something done about the caseloads by the responsible minister? One thing is for sure, there has been no top down level of responsibility and accountability shown from the responsible minister, or any of the Aboriginal elected members on the other side of the House.
The Chief Minister is now trying to pass the buck to someone else. Who will this be? No one knows who is responsible and who is accountable. The normal conventions of a Westminster system of government do not apply under this government in the Northern Territory. No one is accountable, no one is responsible. This system will continue to fail, children will continue to suffer. To make matters worse, there is clear evidence of senior bureaucrats trying to intimidate those brave, courageous people who are standing alone against such arrogance, incompetence and cruelty.
There is evidence of social worker notifications to child protection workers being ignored, and the responsible department refusing to follow up reported cases. Now, those who have brought this information to the attention of responsible authorities are being threatened, intimated and harassed for trying to do the right thing. What has the Chief Minister done about that? Again, he answers with typical meaningless generalisations, but what, specifically, does he intend to do? Is the senior bureaucrat responsible for the threats and intimidation to be disciplined? Of course, the Chief Minister will not answer that.
Madam Deputy Speaker, it is shameful the Chief Minister does nothing about this social and humanitarian crisis which confronts his government other than to talk in vague generalities. It is shameful not one minister or senior bureaucrat has paid the price for the obvious incompetence and neglect shown to the children of the Northern Territory. This shows how arrogant and paralysed this government is to matters of real importance to the Northern Territory. Sadly, the spotlight is again focused on the Northern Territory under this Labor government for all of the wrong reasons.
Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Madam Deputy Speaker, I speak on this censure motion which, of course, I do not support. Much has been said this afternoon about the Four Corners program, which I saw with my family. My feelings when I watched it were, although I had heard details and debate on those cases in parliament and the media, Four Corners is to be congratulated for that program. In many ways it was very fair journalism which tried to portray a true and accurate picture of what had really happened in a number of cases in the Northern Territory. Who could not help but feel for those children, particularly the two cases in the Northern Territory, and the cases mentioned beyond. The message from the Four Corners program was about the inundation of child protection services generally across Australia. There was mention of stresses on child protection services elsewhere.
Unfortunately, what we are seeing in our society is an increase in frequency of child neglect and child abuse. This is becoming a hallmark of modern society in Australia with many complex factors at play. Some have been mentioned; the case in Central Australia of drug addiction, and neglect in the case of Deborah Melville. I agree with much of what the member for Fong Lim said about society looking after the most poor, disadvantaged and powerless. As a member of this government, as a parent, as someone who can participate in the debate and have an effect from inside government, I am committed to this. Our government has attempted to act in a positive and effective manner in relation to this problem.
However, there is no doubt there is a tsunami of need - notifications increasing by 400% since 2000-01; investigations rising from 784 to 3683 since 2000-01; and children on care and protection orders rising from 286 to 696 since 2001.
I hear what the opposition allege: government is trying to blame the former Country Liberal Party for what was not happening in child support and welfare for decades but things do not happen overnight. This tsunami has not happened overnight; it has been growing over decades.
When I first came to the Territory there was evidence of child abuse and child neglect. When we first came to the Territory we socialised with the nurses in the health clinic - they were our next door neighbours and very experienced nurses.
They advised they had issues and were relaying them through the system and responses were tardy. The issues of child neglect and child abuse have been around for a long time. It was around before this government came to power in 2001. I can assure the House this government has endeavoured to do the best it can and put as many resources as possible into this problem.
Four Corners was, in a journalistic sense, critically reviewing the processes and performance of government and the child support system. That is quite suitable; however, I was wondering, particularly in the case of Deborah Melville, where was her father in all this. The program said he was 15 years old when Deborah was born, and my recollection is Deborah died at the age of 12 or 13. He must be 27 years of age. Where was he? He got off pretty lightly in regard to what Four Corners examined. I felt angry; anger, I believe, many members of our community felt towards her father.
It is not for me to judge; however, let us look at this problem. The government has been saying this issue cannot be solved by government alone - it needs a community and family-based approach. I was left wondering, along with many other people, about the carer who was found not guilty by the Supreme Court. I do not know the facts presented to the court; through thick and thin we need to have faith in our court system. We also talk about justice and the right thing being done. There are many elements to this and, not just as a government, not just as a Chamber, we need to take a good hard look at ourselves as a society and a community in the Northern Territory and Australia today.
Those are my feelings. I agree with much of what the member for Fong Lim said. However, I do not believe there has been maladministration on the part of this government, quite the opposite. This government has endeavoured, through the Little Children are Sacred report, to address those issues. We were criticised for being tardy in our response to that; the federal government moved in as the member for Araluen said - Mal Brough came in with the intervention.
When that occurred Rex Wild, and possibly Pat Anderson, authors of the report, said they were upset the intervention as proposed by Mal Brough and the then federal government did not really address any of their 97 recommendations. That disturbed them. Politics is interlaced with the issue of child protection and, as much as possible, we should find a bipartisan position because if government was to change tomorrow you would be faced with the same problems. We need more cooperation over this issue instead of politicising it. It is a major issue and the root causes are deep and complex. Let us get away from the blame game.
Following the 2003 Caring for Our Children reform, a five year package providing $53m including 119 extra staff, increased foster care payments - we can do more, we have heard the message from the Bath report and foster carers. We established Foster Care NT and increased funding for NGOs; we made legislative changes to the Care and Protection of Children Act around that time; established family support services and preventative services around parenting and education; and established the Central Intake and Child Abuse Task Force services, a very important initiative - a partnership between this government and the federal Coalition government. We saw trained investigators having interface between police activities and child protection workers really attempting to find and prosecute those involved, particularly in child sexual abuse.
Following the Little Children are Sacred report, the then government, of which I was part, introduced a five-year $286m Closing the Gap package. That was across a range of areas, including education, health and, of course, child protection. That plan extended beyond the 97 recommendations within the report, and more than $60m was allocated to Families and Children over five years. A great deal was done at that time.
However, the problems remain. I have alluded to the fact there is a tsunami of need, and as a government we are endeavouring to meet that need, and have done everything asked by these inquiries to change the situation. In 2007, the Northern Territory government commissioned the risk audit by Howard Bath, and a number of outcomes flowed from that: introduced structured decision-making; screening and priority tools to improve assessment and decision-making - that is an important step forward; shared case management framework and practice guidelines; development of secure care initiatives; and internal quality control initiatives as well. Flowing from that and other issues, government had the Child Protection Commissioner review the Central Intake and response processes of the department.
There have also been discussions about the coronial findings. Howard Bath and the child protection inquiry have taken up many of the issues the coronial hearings put forward including: recognising what amounts to cumulative harm; policy and procedures review; client information system further enhanced; and there is further support through Budget 2010-11.
Central to this is the department’s placement policy. As my colleague, the member for Casuarina said in no uncertain terms, if the child placement policy is properly applied it puts the safety of the child above everything else. That is a very important policy position. Wherever possible we want to place Indigenous children with Indigenous families. Ultimately, the welfare of the child comes first and should be the bottom line of where children are placed. Both sides of politics would agree. An important message to get out to the community and those involved in the field is that we support that position.
In relation to the Board of Inquiry, my colleague outlined an additional $130m has been allocated over the next five years. He also indicated there will be regular reports to parliament and that we are in the process of recruiting staff from Australia, New Zealand and other overseas countries. He has established the Chief Executive Child Protection Task Force, and project officers from interstate will start engaging with Indigenous non-government organisations in the provision of out-of-home services. We have a senior officer from DEEWR and experienced professionals from Queensland to review systems and processes related to the backlog. Much has been done by this government in the nine years since coming to power. We are focused on this issue.
I take the opportunity to place on the record my respect for the former member for Araluen and the way she brought this issue square and centre during her time in parliament. She was a very articulate person, very passionate, and very genuine in debating these issues. Of all members of the opposition, the member for Araluen was front and centre in this debate. We not only owe it to the children the member for Fong Lim spoke of, in deference to the member for Araluen, as a parliament we need to come together and take a more bipartisan approach to this issue. We need to resolve our differences and do our best for the children.
There has been mention of former child protection ministers in this debate, including you, Madam Speaker, and the members for Karama, Arafura and Casuarina. Some of the observations have reflected badly on those making the accusations. Each and every one of those child protection ministers had the best interests of children at heart. Each one has children of their own, their own families, and extended families, and is well aware of the issues. Each one has tried, to the best of their ability with their heart and soul, to make a difference in this area. It does not do any good to reflect in the way some people have today.
I do not support the censure motion; it took the opposition four weeks to bring it on. I have given my thoughts to the Chamber. We need to work together in a more effective way to resolve this enormous problem within the Northern Territory. People want us to work together to solve this problem, not politicise it.
The Assembly divided:
Ayes 11 Noes 12
Mr Bohlin Mrs Aagaard
Mr Chandler Dr Burns
Mr Conlan Mr Gunner
Mr Elferink Mr Hampton
Mr Giles Mr Henderson
Mrs Lambley Mr Knight
Mr Mills Ms Lawrie
Ms Purick Mr McCarthy
Mr Styles Ms McCarthy
Mr Tollner Ms Scrymgour
Mr Westra van Holthe Mr Vatskalis
Ms Walker
Motion negatived.
TABLED PAPER
Northern Territory Electoral Commission 2009-10 Annual Report
Northern Territory Electoral Commission 2009-10 Annual Report
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table the Northern Territory Electoral Commission 2009-10 Annual Report.
TABLED PAPER
Remuneration Tribunal Determination – Report on Interstate Travel – Member for Brennan
Remuneration Tribunal Determination – Report on Interstate Travel – Member for Brennan
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table, in accordance with Remuneration Tribunal Determination paragraph 3.15, the member for Brennan’s travel report for travel to Canberra from 2 to 6 November 2010.
TABLED PAPER
Council of Territory Cooperation – Third Progress Report
Council of Territory Cooperation – Third Progress Report
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I table the Council of Territory Cooperation’s Third Progress Report.
MOTION
Print Paper – Council of Territory Cooperation – Third Progress Report
Print Paper – Council of Territory Cooperation – Third Progress Report
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I move that the report be printed.
Motion agreed to.
MOTION
Note Paper – Council of Territory Cooperation – Third Progress Report
Note Paper – Council of Territory Cooperation – Third Progress Report
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the report, and that I have leave to continue my remarks at a later date.
Leave granted.
Debate adjourned.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Jobs in the Territory
Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, for a Labor government the most important economic indicator is jobs, which is why I rise to present an important ministerial statement on jobs in the Northern Territory.
In the nine years since the election of a Labor government, job creation has been one of the most outstanding achievements. Government has progressively cut the unemployment rate from the 7.4% we inherited from the CLP to 3.1% today. Since coming to government, around 26 600 new jobs have been created. That is 26 600 Territory families with a source of income. An increase of 26 600 means government has expanded the Northern Territory’s workforce by a whopping 27%. To give this some context, roughly the equivalent of the population of our second-largest city, Palmerston, has found a new job in the Territory; the population of Palmerston has been added to our workforce.
2010 has been one of the most successful years in the history of the Northern Territory in relation to jobs and employment. We have enjoyed unemployment rates at record lows, well below national figures. This year, the Northern Territory has consistently recorded unemployment rates at the lowest level since records began, and we have remained at record low levels. It is currently 3.1%, and compares with the national figure of 5.2%.
At a time when unemployment in many areas of the world is well into double figures, for us to continually record a rate of around 3% has been a remarkable achievement. It is not just around the world, it is reported youth unemployment in western Sydney is around 25%; we compare extremely favourably. Importantly, our workforce participation is high. At 74.1% it is the highest in the nation. This is because people know if you want a job in the Northern Territory you can get one. We have fewer people not participating in the workforce than anywhere else in the country, and whilst we still have a long way to go, we are growing our Indigenous workforce. From 2008 to 2009, the number of Indigenous Territorians employed increased by 6%, an encouraging figure which this government is determined to build on through our A Working Future strategy.
2010 being such a successful year did not happen by accident. It would not have happened without my government’s dedicated and unwavering commitment to job creation. It would not have happened without the following factors: responsible financial management; eight budget surpluses in a row married with a willingness to enter into a deficit position when required to protect jobs; record infrastructure spending - $1.8bn this year compared with $364m in 2010, a five-fold increase; record tax cuts resulting in the lowest taxes for small business in the country; consistent support for our major industries including, but not limited to, mining, oil and gas and tourism; aggressive and targeted investment attraction strategies, including our innovative China and Japan Minerals Investment Attraction Strategy; comprehensive training and education programs; building our workforce of the future, home grown is best; and successful implementation and delivery of Commonwealth stimulus programs during the global financial crisis.
I will talk about how each of these targeted initiatives has helped achieve the best employment outcomes in the history of the Territory. Whilst Access Economics has recently predicted we will continue to have the strongest jobs growth in the country over the next five years, it will not happen just because it forecasts it. I will also talk about the challenges we face to keep creating jobs, and the plans my government is putting in place to ensure we take our record jobs creation legacy into a second decade.
Since coming to office in 2001, the Labor government has sought to systemically strengthen the labour market in anticipation of projected economic growth, and in response to the challenges which have occurred for the Territory during this government’s time in office, not the least being the global financial crisis.
From 2001 to 2009, the Northern Territory economy has grown at an annual average rate of 3.7%. Currently, business confidence is the highest in the nation, and you simply do not achieve such strong economic growth and business confidence without having established a strong reputation for sound financial management. Eight budget surpluses in a row have provided that the government is financially sound and responsible, but equally, our willingness to enter deficit positions when required to protect jobs is a component of our strong financial management and is as important. The alternative view argued in this parliament, that surpluses should be maintained regardless of the financial crisis, is both irresponsible and hypocritical. The alternative policy position would have cost Territorians jobs, and was advocated by people who were members of the last CLP government so infamous for their budget black holes.
The Labor government has slashed taxes and we now have the lowest taxes for small business in the country. Low tax encourages business to invest, to take on employees and help them forge through the financial crisis, as did our record infrastructure program.
Last year, over $1.5bn was spent by government on infrastructure - not just budgeted for, spent. That is $1.5bn to business to create jobs and help grow the Territory, which compares favourably to the $364m spent in 2001, and goes a long way to explain the Country Liberals’ 2001 unemployment rate of 7.4% compared to today’s figure of 3.1%. The infrastructure investment continues. This year government will spend $1.8bn on job creating infrastructure, and will continue working with the Commonwealth on the stimulus package which has saved jobs and will continue to save jobs.
As Graham Kemp of the Master Builders has made clear on many occasions, the construction industry in the Territory faced oblivion without the stimulus program. It would have been wiped out! In particular, the Building the Education Revolution program is providing vital infrastructure building programs at every school in the Territory. There are many policy differences between the ALP and the CLP across many areas; however, in the last year there has been no more important or stark difference than the alternative approach to the BER. The CLP position that this program should not have been undertaken would have cost hundreds, if not thousands, of Territorians their job. Whilst building better schools for our children is a core belief of Labor, the CLP is opposed. The CLP has repeatedly claimed that Territory schools and Territory businesses have been rorting the taxpayer through the BER. Despite being challenged for many months, the CLP has not been able to give one example. The challenge remains: name one school, or one Territory company that has rorted the taxpayer through the BER.
The Commonwealth stimulus program saved Territorians their jobs. It saved their houses and their futures. The CLP will forever be condemned for its opposition to it.
Another area of policy difference between the ALP and CLP is investment attraction strategies, particularly in China. Our minister for Resources has recently returned from one of his regular mineral investment attraction visits to China. On these trips he always takes a delegation of Territory companies eager for Chinese investment. This is important. Chinese hunger for resources means jobs for Territorians, but only if we are in front of them promoting the Territory. Our minister does a magnificent job in promoting the Territory as an investment option in China, and it is paying big dividends with many Chinese companies investing money in the Territory. It was noticeable during his recent trip the CLP issued a media release accusing him of ‘swanning around China’. They do not get it!
Strong financial management, low taxes, investment attraction, and high infrastructure spends have been the most important aspects of our jobs creation strategy, but there are many more initiatives. Since 2001, government has initiated employment strategies and programs to support employment and business growth over a sustained period of time. Government’s vision is Territorians have the opportunity and capacity to participate in the workforce and invest in the economic and social future of the Territory. Government is working to ensure the younger generations can predict a future for themselves in the Territory, and our local workforce, which includes those who have come to the Territory as skilled workers, is encouraged and able to stay.
Through our A Working Future strategy my government has an ongoing commitment to improving employment opportunities for Indigenous Territorians who are yet to access jobs. Similarly, we are committed to enhancing the position of Indigenous Territorians already engaged in the labour market to ensure a strong, skilled and available local workforce across the Territory, particularly in regions where unemployment is not at desirable levels. This government’s approach to employment, from 2002 to date includes: creating jobs; strengthening and building the apprentice market; building stronger relationships with industry in order to target employer needs; meeting the needs of regions; addressing Indigenous employment; growing the workforce; and increasing skilled migration.
A suite of Jobs Plans was released between 2003 and 2009. Their focus and aim was to create jobs to build our understanding of the labour market, and to provide all Territorians with a chance to participate more fully in the economy and gain employment. This foundation has put in place the steps for the Territory to grow and develop its skills base, maximise opportunities for all Territorians, and construct a highly-skilled and flexible workforce. The key themes of the suite of plans are focused on: creating jobs through skilling and training; staying informed, which translates to accurate relevant labour market research and analysis to provide a sound basis for decision-making by government to training providers and employers; building the apprentice and trainee market in identified occupation areas; strengthening partnerships by continuing to build our links and relationships with industry; focusing on regional and Indigenous economy development; and building better pathways, which is about options for school leavers and ensuring they are equipped to take up those options beyond school.
Throughout the life of the three Jobs Plans we built our research capacity to develop evidence-based policy to build the apprentice and trainee market and direct our training and workforce development efforts. Under the initial three jobs plans from 2003 to 2009, we have: provided over 2000 financial incentives to employers to take on apprentices and support their training; expanded the pre-employment program to get people job ready; created the Workwear/Workgear Bonus scheme with over 7490 apprentices and trainees accessing the bonus on their commencement; implemented the Build Skills NT program to upskill and re-skill workers in identified skill shortage areas; and released comprehensive Workforce NT reports in 2005 on the state of the Territory labour market to assist industry in developing its own strategies relating to employment and workforce planning and development.
In 2005, government set an ambitious target of 10 000 apprentice and trainee commencements to be achieved within four years. This target was achieved in 2008, and a new target was set in 2009. During the life of Jobs Plans, the Territory experienced the lowest unemployment rates ever recorded, economy growth rates had outstripped most other jurisdictions in Australia, and the number of Territory jobs increased from 96 700 in 2003 to 120 800 in 2009.
In early 2009, Access Economics forecast unemployment in the Territory to rise from 3.7% to 6% by 2010-11. I reiterate, the Territory’s current unemployment rate at October 2010 is sitting at 3.1%, with the highest being 4.2% in June 2009 during the global financial crisis, further demonstrating what this government has achieved despite the original forecast. The September quarter Access Economics employment growth forecast for 2010-11 in the Territory is 3.5% compared to Australia’s 3.1%, noting the five-year average annual employment growth for the Territory is 2.4%, the highest growth rate out of all jurisdictions in Australia.
We continue to be proactive in the Territory. Whilst low unemployment rates are enviable, we must also ensure we have the skilled workforce required to fill the forecast growth in jobs. Our focus is on having a plan for the future to move beyond the current labour market challenges so the Territory is well positioned during the national recovery. In achieving this, the Department of Business and Employment released a new employment strategy, Jobs NT 2010-12, in May this year. Jobs NT will position the Territory to address the challenges ahead, and will prepare workers and employers in the wider community to be best placed to contribute to and benefit from the opportunities associated with economic growth. Jobs NT provides an overarching policy framework, as well as a short-, medium- and long-term plan for growing, retaining and skilling the Territory workforce. Jobs NT aligns itself to and works towards the objectives and strategy targets of Territory 2030, A Working Future, Indigenous economic development and the Department of Education and Training strategic plan.
With government’s record commitment of $312m over the next three years, Jobs NT has something everyone can benefit from. This commitment aims to support a sustainable workforce, providing not only jobs and training, but also targeted help for business, employers and job seekers. This strategy outlines the comprehensive range of programs and initiatives within the action plan, highlighting inbuilt measures and targets which will deliver the vision of Jobs NT.
Retraining and retention of key skills in the workforce continues to be important, as well as supporting apprentice and trainee numbers to meet demand as new industries and major projects come on line in the context of the economic environment. Government is committed to supporting and developing our young people, particularly through the transition from school to work, which is underpinned by our own Vocational Education and Training in schools. Over $16m will be committed to support school students complete their VET studies and a new approach.
The new approach for VET in Schools provides an exciting direction for our young people in towns and communities to embark on training as part of their schooling, and to link them to jobs once they complete their education. Let me briefly outline some of the Department of Education and Training programs that will support improved employment outcomes in the Territory through more industry target responses: trade training centres in schools across the regions to allow students access to industry standard training facilities; the Get VET Get a Future campaign, which supports approximately 2600 school students a year to undertake VET qualifications; VET in the Middle, as part of the middle schools program to allow students to commence training in hospitality, engineering and manufacturing pathways; school-based enterprise grants to promote enterprise activities in schools; and youth business awards to engage students in the development of business plans.
With a commitment to business and young people, my government maintains a commitment to improving employment outcomes for Indigenous Territorians, those who are yet to access sustainable employment, and to enhancing the position of those already engaged in the labour market. A Working Future, which was introduced by this government in mid-2009, provides a framework for enterprise developments and jobs. A Working Future is a long-term approach to ensuring people living in remote towns and communities have access to employment and relevant training opportunities. Being able to participate in the economy is crucial. If Indigenous Territorians are to have greater control of their future, their families and communities, employment is fundamental to this outcome.
We are working across the industry sectors - government and the private sector - to develop and support responsive programs which can give Indigenous Territorians the best opportunity to achieve economic participation, whether that is a worker, small business operator, or other enterprise. Working-age Indigenous Territorians are a significant percentage of the potential labour force. As at 2009, over 19 500 were employed; however, a large proportion sits outside the labour market. It makes good business sense for government to support this significant population group to be job ready and skilled in response to current and projected employment opportunities.
Government has seen outcomes which demonstrate its initiatives are working. The ABS data released in June 2010 shows Northern Territory Indigenous employment trending upwards during the past two years, with an estimated increase of 1100 people from 2008 to 2009. This is an increase of 6% and compares favourably to the national growth for the same period. We are heading in the right direction. We continue to focus our efforts to increase Indigenous participation in the labour force through: the Jobs NT three-year action plan, which aims to deliver 3000 Indigenous Territorians commencing in employment through programs such as: job readiness programs at $7.8m; NT Public Service entry level Indigenous employment program - $1.3m; Indigenous Training for Employment Program to develop workforce strategies and support initiatives with direct employment outcomes - $4m; and, the Indigenous Business Development Program to assist in establishing Indigenous-owned business - $0.6m per annum.
Agencies are working cooperatively in the development of new employment-related initiatives such as the local jobs for local people framework, which includes a jobs pathway guarantee for successful Year 12 graduates from the Territory growth towns into the NTPS; a jobs compact to align training with local job opportunities and enterprise facilitation components to encourage business development; supporting Indigenous employment and Indigenous business and enterprise development through refinements in procurement policy; and supporting workforce planning and development with industry sectors, employers and shires to ensure pathways are in place for Indigenous Territorians to enter employment and advance their careers in the public and private sector.
As an employer, the Northern Territory government continues to progress the A Working Future strategy through the launch of the Indigenous Employment and Career Development Strategy in 2010. This strategy includes a 10% Indigenous employment target to be achieved by 2012 for the sector. Currently, the level of Indigenous employment is 8%; this compares to 4.6% in 2002. We are heading in the right direction. We are also supporting the roll-out of the Australian Employment Covenant in the Territory and I have committed up to 200 jobs in the NTPS under this initiative. Two new programs have been developed and are expected to deliver sustained employment outcomes for Indigenous Territorians to support this commitment.
The Strategic Indigenous Housing Infrastructure Program continues to deliver employment for locally employed Indigenous people and is well on track to exceed its 20% employment target. Indigenous employment for SIHIP is currently tracking around 30%, and we are working to ensure as people come off the SIHIP project they are transitioned into ongoing employment opportunities. Indigenous employment remains a priority for this government and we are working strategically and in partnership with the private sector to halve the gap in employment outcomes by 2018. The effort is constant and expanding and we are committed to meeting the challenge. With small to medium enterprises making up more than 90% of the Territory’s active trading businesses, supporting growing business is crucial to developing the Territory. It means more jobs and a stronger economy. The Territory government sees this as the way forward and has put in place a number of initiatives.
As part of our commitment to develop industry sectors, the Territory government is introducing a Jobs NT workforce planning program across the Territory for small to medium businesses which will achieve a workforce planning and development strategy which allows businesses to place themselves in a better position to address the current and projected competitive labour market needs. The new Jobs NT workforce planning program allows small to medium businesses to engage suitably qualified consultants to build a plan for their future workforce which leads to increased productivity, being better prepared to take up the opportunities major projects such as INPEX may provide, reduce the impacts of skills shortages and increase Indigenous employment.
The future workforce need of industry is supported through delivering workforce planning and development projects in identified industry sectors such as transport and logistics, child care, and oil and gas. This is about government supporting industry to develop industry-wide workforce plans which include skills needs and current and future occupations shortages, and identify options to overcome these. My government’s priority primary focus in addressing skills shortages will always be on training and upskilling local workers. However, we recognise with the Northern Territory’s unemployment rate being one of the lowest in the country and its participation rate higher than other states and territories, attracting skilled workers from within Australia and overseas will be necessary.
We will sell the message ‘if you want a job, come to the Territory’. It is vital if we are to build the Territory skills base to support our economic development and deliver services throughout the Territory. In 2008, the government established Workforce Growth NT which combined all elements of the Territory government’s national and international skilled worker attraction programs, and achieved a greater coordination of effort. The Jobs in the NT Campaign targets skilled workers through marketing and job shows nationally and internationally, and promotes the Territory as a place to live and work. The Territory Worker Database provides interstate workers an online opportunity to profile their qualifications and skills to Territory employers. It also allows employers to profile their job opportunities. We will continue to market the Territory to attract people whose skills are always in demand. We need doctors, dentists, nurses, social workers, welfare workers, and teachers to work in remote regional communities; and tradespeople in the electrical, plumbing, air-conditioning and refrigeration, and carpentry fields. Professionals in the hospitality industry, and building and certification fields are the major focus of our attraction campaigns. There is a shortage Australia-wide of many of these skills, and we need to continue profiling employment opportunities in the Territory to attract the skilled workers required by industry.
We are committed to continuing our partnership approach with the Territory’s private sector to match labour and skills developments and supply and demand to meet employers’ needs, particularly in the regions. This systematic approach has ensured job shows and skilled worker attraction campaigns initiated by government have been strongly supported by industry. For example, in March this year the Northern Territory was a major sponsor of the Reinvent Your Career job show in Brisbane, and our team, Territory Approach, included representatives from industry and business.
The Jobs in the NT Campaign 2011 was developed in partnership with industry and released earlier this year. The campaign includes innovative methods of advertising, including sponsoring national conferences in Darwin and Alice Springs. Underpinning national and international activity is the need to continue supporting local business through advice on business and skilled migration, helping to understand workforce developments, and the Australian government’s skilled migration programs.
Recent ABS reports show migration from overseas is making a significant contribution to growth in the Territory’s population. According to the most recent figures published by the Australian government, in 2008-09 skilled migration made up 72.5% of the Territory’s international migration intake. It is immensely important for us to continue to strategically promote the Territory as a place to live and work in those areas of migration which deliver positive outcomes.
The partnership between the Department of Business and Employment and CDU in delivering seminars and information sessions in key international student markets is one example of a targeted approach. Under the partnership between government and the university, intending students are encouraged to concentrate their studies in fields where occupations are also in demand in the Northern Territory. This means many of the students, on completing their Australian qualifications, make ideal skilled migrants to the Territory.
In 2011, international student markets to be targeted through these joint activities will include Indonesia, India, the Philippines and China. Many Territory employers are using, or have used, the 457 temporary work visas as a mechanism to address general skills shortages. Territory employers are now using a range of alternative visa mechanisms to gain access to the skilled workers they need. The Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme is providing one such conduit. This scheme, specially designed to facilitate regional employers’ access to suitably qualified and skilled workers, is becoming increasingly popular. The Department of Business and Employment is the Northern Territory’s regional certifying body for this scheme. In this role, as well as certifying Territory employer nominations, it provides information and support services to public and private sector employers to aid their understanding of the sponsorship process and their responsibilities.
In 2009-10, the department certified 516 employer nominations covering 1253 skilled workers and their families. This is more than double the number certified in 2007-08, and current nomination trends suggest this number will be exceeded in the current financial year.
Whilst there are changing trends in the way Territory employers are using migration for skilled workers, the policy changes have also required the Territory government to reassess its future efforts in attracting international migrants. There is now growing evidence the economic difficulties in some European countries are resulting in an increased interest in Australia as a migration destination. We, too, are seeing a greater interest in migration to the Northern Territory from traditional markets such as the United Kingdom and Ireland.
Seeking to capitalise on this, the Territory government, in partnership with industry, participated in a Skills Australia Needs migration exhibition coordinated by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship at Australia House in London in September 2010. This expo was invitation only, and attracted 1276 hand-picked professionals and tradespeople. Once again, the Territory’s presence at this international expo was strengthened by the support of representatives from the construction industry and the Chamber of Commerce. While we need to respond to international migration trends, the government will continue to work closely with our Territory multicultural communities in all our migration activities. The international networks of our communities will continue to be an extremely valuable source in attracting and retaining business migrants and skilled workers. Developing and maintaining these linkages has the potential to deliver quality students and migrants who have strong support networks in the Territory.
In conclusion, the Territory government will continue to focus on developing robust strategies to link all Territorians with employment opportunities across the Territory. My government is making every effort to retain the skilled people we already have and to connect workers with employers who need their skills. In facing the challenges of the changing economic environment, it is important not to lose focus on connecting, retaining and growing a skilled workforce in the Territory. Our recent Treasury forecast highlights Territory economic growth is projected to grow strongly to 3.6% in 2010-11. The Access Economics Business Outlook September 2010 also provides an optimistic projection of the future of the Northern Territory economy, with forecast figures of 4.8% of economic growth for 2010-11.
It is anticipated economic growth forecast will improve when a final investment decision on the future of INPEX is made. Territory businesses are experiencing the strongest trading conditions in the nation, and business confidence remains high. The Territory retains its position at the top with the highest business confidence of all jurisdictions. The Northern Territory government recorded the highest approval rating from small- and medium-size business compared with other Australian jurisdictions. Small and medium businesses believe the Northern Territory government was more supportive of small business and recognised its needs.
My government has an enviable jobs creation record. 2010 has been a high-water mark in the history of the Territory in relation to employment. It is an achievement all Territorians should be proud of, and is an achievement my government is determined to build on. We will continue to support jobs through low taxes, high infrastructure spends, and investment attraction. We will continue to build our workforce for the future through training and education.
As I mentioned to the Prime Minister last week, the Top End is the economic future of Australia and Darwin is the heart. We face enormous opportunities and challenges. My government has the runs on the board and is determined to continue to work together as a united vibrant government to deliver jobs and opportunities for all Territorians.
Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
____________________
Visitors
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of the electorate officers from the electorates of Blain and Brennan. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
______________________
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I welcome the Chief Minister’s statement. There is no more important indicator as to the capacity, strength and vitality of a community and economy than to be able to produce jobs. To quote a phrase Peter Costello used in a conversation I had with him in 2004: ‘The best welfare program that could be devised is a real job’. I agree with that.
I support the thrust of this report and the recognition of how important it is to have a real job. That is a very valuable indicator. However, there are certain issues I am required to draw attention to which have not been focused upon in the Chief Minister’s statement to any substantive degree. They are important issues which require thoughtful responses rather than, in the words of the member for Fong Lim, ‘broad generalities’.
The first one is the recognition across the Northern Territory that there is no overarching strategic plan for land use which, as a result, produces lack of confidence for those who are going to make the decisions as to our economic development. To put in place an overarching strategic plan through making decisions is a core business of a government. Supply and demand is the core element that allows a marketplace to operate, and the core business of a territory or state government is to balance supply and demand, specifically in the issue of land release.
If we want to create meaningful employment, we need release of land in a timely manner. Government will react in any reply coming after this, saying: ‘Yes, we have fast-tracked’. They like to use words such as that. However, in the fast-tracking, which is a reaction to acting under pressure in the absence of a strategic plan, we have problems. Those problems would be best addressed now. Government should turn its attention to a properly considered strategic plan so after we have gone there will be a program of what is possible. That needs to be done because, with the global economic centre of gravity moving closer to our region, we need to be prepared.
Perhaps I am cynical; the Labor administration points to this, that, and the other regarding economic activity within the region as being something it is responsible for creating, and acknowledges its endeavours into China have caused all the good things they talk about regarding jobs created, confidence, etcetera, as though they are the centre of the universe. This phenomenon has had its impact upon all the resource-rich states. There are forces at play that are not wholly your creation, that being the resources boom. We are fortunate, like Western Australia and Queensland, to be resource rich. That is one of the factors.
The Australian Labor Party, when coming into office in 2001, did not create resources in the Northern Territory. Recognise now that we have the resources and there are global trends in play which give us the opportunity. The specific policies which should be put in place to allow our resource-rich status to be properly utilised and capitalised on goes back to the need for a strategic plan so we have the core business of a port, the use of land and space in the marketplace for those on modest incomes to get ourselves ready. Those things should occupy the mind of government, and we have not seen evidence of that.
We have the highest rents across the country; we have ABS figures indicating 700 more people left than arrived in the last two collection periods. The ABS identifies the reason for departure from the Northern Territory - the deficit of 700 - is directly attributable to the cost of living. I am hearing this is the worst situation ever with regard to home affordability, and the worst pressure on families is being experienced at the moment. People, particularly in Winnellie, are troubled. They are concerned about a number of things, largely around the capacity to recruit and retain workers. Right now they have a problem - because of the cost of living, workers are finding it very difficult to stay in the market.
Because we do not have a strategic plan, there is no sense of direction in what comes next in the marketplace, and increasing the capacity of infrastructure, particularly utilities, they will be under the pump when the INPEX project is finally confirmed. As with ConocoPhillips, it will draw workers to that supply of work, and they move away from the small businesses in Winnellie, Katherine and Alice Springs. They will be drawn to that place and it changes the marketplace. That type of preparation needs to be put in place now by being far more aggressive with the provision of places for people on modest incomes to live so there is security in the labour force.
I am sure government is aware of this, and it is a shame we are getting closer and closer to major projects being confirmed and we have the impending problem of holding onto workers, worrying about what comes next. It is hard enough to hold a worker because of the cost of living in the Northern Territory, but if they get an increased wage by going to work at ConocoPhillips or INPEX, how will they be replaced? That is a real issue. I hope members on the opposite side who respond will give us some detail of the thinking around that.
Another issue which needs to be well addressed and understood is the port. If high employment is the indicator of the strength of an economy then the key piece of infrastructure is a port linked by rail and fed by road networks to allow that which is produced, particularly in a resource rich phase, to be exported. There are big concerns about the port and there needs to be recognition of the existing problem and a frank admission of the impediments the port has to our capacity to respond. What is going to happen? The marine supply base has been mentioned for a long time and is still not in place. Some of the businesses I speak to in the East Arm area say that is well and good but it should already be there. We should have our mind on something else now rather than a marine supply base which made sense five years ago and should have been in place three or four years ago. We need to extend our capacity at the port so there can be a separation between the different operations on the port and a clear plan put in place so everything that happens is recognition of the problem and a response to the problem.
Turning to Indigenous employment - I read a recent report on the employment covenant. It is very interesting that when the employment contract covenant was launched at Kirribilli House, the then Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, announced the federal government would invest $20m in it and the Australian Indigenous Education Foundation would provide scholarships for marginalised Indigenous kids. Andrew Forrest put his weight and significant resources behind it, and Rupert Murdoch provided support along with Noel Pearson and a whole range of people. There is huge support for Indigenous employment, and the bold pledge of 20 000 jobs guaranteed under this pact was soundly supported and heartening to see. However, after several years we do not have 20 000 jobs. The jobs are there but have not been filled. We have 2800 jobs.
This, in my view, highlights a problem. We have the desire and resources of the corporate world and major employers to employ Indigenous kids and the pact to guarantee 20 000 is solid. That is a good thing. How is it we only have 2800 places filled and have no data on the retention rates? The answer has to be the quality of employment being provided to well-educated and job-ready Indigenous kids. We need to sharpen our focus on what is happening in education away from that which is broad and speaking in general terms to something far more specific.
There is a demand but not a supply of Indigenous kids who are well-educated and job-ready. On the weekend I spoke to an experienced teacher who has worked in Indigenous communities for a number of years who said yes, there are kids who have graduated from Year 12 and are keen to work but need assistance to get ready for work. Getting to Year 12 is not the magical threshold where you will pass and instantly get a job. There is still work to be done, and the worst thing would be to go through the exercise with the expectation and hope something magical will occur when you pass Year 12, that you will get a job. Real life is far from that. For many of these people the worst thing would be to have that expectation destroyed. We need some response. How many go on to meaningful sustained employment?
Of the 2800 in employment across the country in this pact, we do not have retention figures. That is the real challenge around what is happening in the education space, how we could improve literacy and numeracy and add to those basic skills some work-ready capacity, apprenticeships, and then real employment. The work the Larrakia Development Corporation has embarked upon – I inspected the facilities recently - is encouraging. I will watch that with great interest, and I am sure government will provide support for those projects.
I would like to go back to the effect the cost of living has on an economy. You have to find places in the housing market for our key workers and those on modest incomes. A KPMG report, Spotlight on Australia’s Capital Cities, has identified Darwin has the second-lowest ranking against COAG criteria. The key issue is the space in our capital city, which is replicated across the Territory. The same applies in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine and Palmerston - it is difficult for someone on a modest income to find somewhere to live. On a personal note, my son is returning home because of that. How many choose not to make a commitment to the Territory because of that? We know 700 have left. This has a significant economic and social impact.
I urge the Labor government to be very careful when it comes to this issue. Suggesting Weddell is the solution is nave. Weddell is over there and far off. Right under our nose is the requirement and the more difficult challenge to find in the market for those on modest incomes.
Bankwest puts out the housing affordability for key workers index. The Northern Territory, Darwin specifically, is very low, and in 2009 the report said although Sydney was more expensive it had improved. However, it said Darwin had deteriorated significantly in its capacity to provide a place for key workers. We have reached a point where there is nowhere for a key worker - a nurse, a teacher - let alone those to service whatever comes with INPEX. We need childcare workers. If there is no space in the marketplace we will have a very different community. We have to move into that space now.
It has been a long time, and I remember the debates when the problem was denied and the assertion the opposition - a very small opposition at the time - was going to wreck the marketplace by requiring government to release land. Now, because of the delayed reaction from government, we will have economic and social dislocation into the future. That issue needs to be addressed specifically.
Weddell does not answer the question. Weddell is an answer to a different question. The place for key workers here and now requires urban redesign and some difficult decision-making. What is happening at Parap may be a step in the right direction. We are yet to see details on that. However, that is the place we need to go.
Madam Speaker, I trust the comments made will be of some value to government. I hope for detailed responses to this, particularly around the cost of living, the effect that has on the provision of jobs, and the need for a long-term strategic plan which will require some careful analysis and decision-making. The modest resources of opposition have provided a significant document for discussion, and we look forward to government’s thoughtful consideration. I accept the banter which may flow across the Chamber for political game playing; however, there is some good material, the purpose of which is to stimulate debate and discussion and, ultimately, decision-making. Much work needs to be done on the need for the port and basic infrastructure feeding into the port.
Concerns from business in the region and beyond are very real, such as what will happen to small businesses having difficulty today holding onto staff when there is increased demand by INPEX and ConocoPhillips. How are they going to cope? We need a response. The response has to provide a space in the market to have the cost of rent reduced by having other options.
There are issues around the employment covenant. We need to work harder and smarter with education because the supply of jobs is there. There are 20 000 guaranteed. Not even 3000 have taken up positions. Clearly, we need to provide to those ready to offer employment a far better supply of skilled, job-ready, young Indigenous kids. There is a challenge there. We are fortunate to have the supply of jobs, but we do not have the supply to meet that demand.
Last, the reference to China and the media release about the minister swanning around - it should not be construed as you should not go to China. The opposition recognises it is one of the things government does, and is pleased government is doing that work in China and, it appears, is doing a good job. The comments were around child protection, a minister needing to respond to certain matters, and being in a different place with competing portfolio responsibilities. It was not the fact he was in China; it was because there were pressing issues which needed addressing in child protection. That is where the comments were coming from.
I will finish with Asian Relations and Trade. The economic activity within the region is largely centred in China. We have been buffered because of the demand for resources by China; we are closer to China than any other state or territory and have benefited from that. The nation has been buffered against the global financial crisis. Opportunities come knocking on the door and walk straight through; it is fantastic.
The other matters I have raised are the real work. There will be much movement in the region, which is why continued focus on matters around Asian Relations and Trade, having a well considered and whole-of-government coordinated approach and linking all components of government together would put the Territory back in the position it once had. We are benefiting at the moment because of the demands within the region, but there is work to be done in linking all the components of government together to have a well-coordinated approach.
Now is the time to make hay while the sun is shining. If things change in the region, if China re-values its currency, if the demand drops slightly, if the dollar goes through the roof even more and the demand is modified - we need to be working now. It is not always going to be like this and the Labor government has had opportunities with GST coming its way, with the strength of the Australian economy being resource rich. The government is fortunate, but the real business of government is what I have referred to and which needs a response.
Madam Speaker, with those words, I look forward to a response from government members on the issues raised.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I congratulate the Chief Minister for his Jobs in the Territory ministerial statement today, because it underpins the strength of an economy to ensure you have people who are productive, people in jobs, and you benefit with enhanced social outcomes as well.
Job creation has been one of our government’s greatest achievements. When you go from an unemployment rate in the high sevens down to the high two percentage points in just under a decade, it shows a significant amount of effort is paying dividends for Territorians in protecting the jobs Territorians have and, all importantly, creating new jobs. Seeing 26 000 jobs created since August 2001 did not happen by accident. It happened as a direct result of our government creating a Jobs Plan. Previously, no plan had existed. We have ramped up each Jobs Plan through successive budget cycles, focusing on skills attraction, skills retention, and skilling up our own, with significant investment in education and training to skill up our own.
The Leader of the Opposition raised the effort of Twiggy and others, and government is very supportive of the private sector. This government is putting its effort into public sector training and initiatives. That is a real example of industry working with traditional owners. If you want to look at getting skilled job-ready entrants into the workforce, look closely at the trade training centre INPEX has invested in with the Larrakia Development Corporation. A good example of how successfully, with the support of industry, they are preparing people for opportunities coming forward.
An unemployment rate of 3.1% has more Territorians participating in our labour market than anywhere else in Australia. The Territory enjoys the highest participation rate in the country at 74.1%. Everyone knows if you want a job come to the Territory. That is what Manpower, an employment agency in Queensland, said last year. That holds true through this year if you look at our unemployment and job participation rates. It has been interesting to see the number of subcontractors’ utes around the streets of Darwin and Palmerston with interstate number plates. They have come to the Territory to get a job; our economic activity is vibrant in our large regional centres of Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs. Nhulunbuy is underpinned by the resource giant there.
The job numbers are all the more remarkable given we were able to create additional jobs post the global financial crisis. The impact of the global financial crisis was moving through the private sector and governments had to respond decisively, deliberately and swiftly. We took the initiative in Budget 2009-10 to deliver a record infrastructure spend designed not only to protect jobs in that important sector, but to continue to grow the jobs so our construction sector was as best placed as it could be ahead of major projects on the horizon such as INPEX and an expansion of the existing DLNG by ConocoPhillips. There is opportunity for an additional train out there.
We have seen the direct levers moved by government through its budget allocations, supported by the Chamber of Commerce and the peak construction body, the Master Builders Association. They recognise the critical importance of those two year-on-year record infrastructure commitments in the 2009-10 financial year. We saw actual expenditure at $1.5bn, and with the 2010-11 financial year a commitment of a $1.8bn infrastructure spend.
In stark contrast to those industry organisations, the CLP has clearly stated it would not have invested in the infrastructure stimulus. It would have kept a lid on spending, created savings as a result and stayed in surplus land. That has been articulated by the CLP; however, it stands alone in that. Even the International Monetary Fund has said to governments, post the global financial crisis: ‘Spend swiftly and stimulate your sectors’. We have seen the results of that. The gross state product figures announced last week for 2009-10 show a 1.3% economic growth through that tough financial year when we had predicted a moderate 0.4% growth in our budget predictions. Underpinning the growth was the public spend. We saw a 50%-plus jump in public spend to support what washes through to about a 3% GSP growth propped up by the public spend.
It is a clear result of our fiscal strategy that the stimulus is now showing through in the Territory’s figures where we are bucking national trends. We are saving and creating jobs. The Leader of the Opposition thinks this government is not doing anything but we are directly making the tough, brave and bold decisions to stimulate, create jobs and provide opportunities to keep unemployment at record low levels and keep labour participation high. It is not surprising in that environment we have the highest business confidence in the nation.
In the 2009 year alone we recorded the nation’s highest retail trade, the highest job growth, highest building approvals and the lowest unemployment of all states and territories. Our gross state product data for the 2009-10 financial year shows without the significant lift in the public spend the Territory economy would have been at risk of contraction. Contraction, in real terms, means high unemployment and a high jobless rate. We moved decisively and boldly against the opposition coming from the CLP and have seen the merits of that action going through in the GSP data recently released.
Our strong financial management has kept Territorians in jobs and, importantly, has created new jobs. In stark contrast, what do we see around the world? The United States and Europe are grappling with unemployment levels at 10%; the United Kingdom at 7.8%; Germany at 7.1%; and Spain at a high 20%. Across Australia, compare the unemployment rate of 3.1% to the 8.6% in far north Queensland or, indeed, the 7.7% in central western Sydney. We are punching above our weight, bucking national trends and delivering jobs, a critical economic indicator.
We all know a job not only provides an income, it provides a sense of community, belonging and achievement, and we are contributing to the future prosperity of the Territory by providing jobs for Territorians. A strong economy and a jobless market do not happen by accident. They are a direct result of the responsible economic and fiscal management this government has embarked upon since 2001.
We have seen eight budget surpluses in a row. We have the lowest taxes for small business in the country. We have training programs which have supported well over 10 000 new apprenticeships and traineeships. When we first went out publicly with our commitment to create 10 000 new traineeships and apprenticeships, we were hailed down by the CLP opposition; told we would never achieve it. We achieved it ahead of time and are going in for another 10 000 and supporting it through training initiatives like the Workwear/Workgear package which supports about 7500 apprentices and trainees to take up a trade. We have continued that record infrastructure expenditure creating the jobs for industry.
Small business is our biggest employer across the Territory, which is why we have maintained the lowest taxes for small businesses in the nation, creating an environment for small business to hire additional workers. Since coming to government we have slashed payroll tax and cut red tape. We estimate this has saved Territory businesses $291m. The Territory has a broad and diverse economic base. Mining is a significant driver to our economy and the largest industry contributor to our gross state product. Data released last week highlights the mining industry made up 25% of the 2009-10 GSP, adding some $4.2bn to the economy. We have over 3000 Territorians directly employed in the mining sector and thousands in supporting businesses.
We may be a resource-rich state but it is through the inaction or, indeed, action of government that you achieve the opportunities. When we came to government a backlog of 792 exploration applications were waiting to be processed because the ideology of the CLP said it would not give in to native title which exists across vast areas of the Territory. We have turned that around with strategies to attract international investment in mining ventures in the Territory and it is paying off.
Exploration expenditure in the Territory reached a record of $149.4m last financial year. Whilst the Leader of the Opposition recognised our close relationship with China and the good work being done by our Resources minister, the member for Casuarina, in China, he failed to recognise the attraction strategy we have embarked on with Japan, not only in the critically important area of LNG, also the opportunities presenting themselves in rare earth exploration. We have some very exciting exploration occurring in the Territory.
The role of government has been, through successive ministers and the Chief Minister, to spruik the opportunities of mining investment in the Territory, and we do not just go with rhetoric. We go with well-resourced and researched brochures which provide direct detail to potential investors in China and Japan around companies open for investment in the Northern Territory detailing the specific mining exploration occurring. The feedback from China and Japan is very strong. They say we are the most aggressive of all state jurisdictions in looking for investment opportunities and give the most information. That is why we have seen a dramatic increase in investment in exploration expenditure, hitting a record $149.4m last financial year. Talk to the embassy staff of China and Japan and they say we are by far the most consistent and aggressive in approaching exploration opportunities and investment in the Territory.
In the construction sector, a lifeblood of our economy, we see more than 13 000 Territorians in work. These people have benefited from our direct initiatives to invest in infrastructure. We have a strong pipeline of infrastructure spending which has allowed companies to invest in growing their business, growing jobs, and growing their trainees and apprentices. The construction and engineering sector has also benefited from the all-important national stimulus plan. Similarly, the retail sector, a critical sector in the Territory, has benefited from the stimulus spending with more than 18 000 Territorians employed across our retail sector.
Our tourism and hospitality sector is also a strong employer, supporting about 18 000 jobs. Some great work has been done by successive Tourism ministers and the tourism industry to respond to changing markets and market opportunities, and to go after additional flight and capacity opportunities for the Territory.
The Defence industry employs over 6000 Territorians, and we recognise the value of the Defence spend in the Territory. That is why we are developing a parcel of land near Robertson Barracks to enable Defence-related businesses to co-locate at the Defence Support Hub. We are also working very closely with Defence Housing Australia to ensure they are able to turn off Lyons and provide additional housing for officers and staff. Equally, we are working closely with the turn-off of Muirhead, and we have a memorandum of understanding for them to purchase into the new Palmerston east suburbs of Bellamack, Johnston, and Zuccoli, which are all in train at the moment.
It is interesting the Leader of the Opposition said: ‘Okay, you have your plans for Weddell but what are you doing right now?’ I know the Leader of the Opposition lives in Palmerston; perhaps he could go for a drive. Talk to anyone looking at the houses being constructed at Bellamack and the significant work under way at Johnston.
We have also attended to - and this is a very valid point debated in this Chamber from time to time - the need for affordable housing. This government has put in place an affordable housing policy. We are turning off affordable housing land packages at Bellamack capped at $140 000 for land. We created Bellamack Gardens, again with condemnation from the opposition, around using a smaller footprint to turn off affordable housing.
All those planning and construction levers to create an affordable housing environment and a market entry point, provided through Homestart NT, have been totally ignored by the opposition. It is burying its heads in the sand and pretending that has not occurred.
Innovatively, because it had not been done by any previous Territory government, we enshrined 15% of affordable and social housing in new land release. That has provided an opportunity in the marketplace for an affordable housing environment and the construction of additional public housing, which includes seniors villages. The importance there is recognising you need a range of housing styles in any new subdivision, and we are going to spread that through the marketplace.
Charles Darwin University’s Palmerston land release will set aside 15% for affordable and public housing. Equally, we have successfully negotiated with Defence Housing to have 15% of Muirhead for affordable and social housing as well, and the new suburb of Kilgariff will have 15% set aside for affordable and social housing. We are pulling all planning levers available to not only fast-track land, which is occurring through our direct investment in infrastructure in successive budgets, but also ensure there is an affordable element to the land being turned off.
Regarding forecast, independent analysts praise the enviable position of our Territory labour market. Access Economics has forecast the Territory will continue to outperform the rest of the nation over the next five years, predicting the Territory will have the strongest jobs growth in the country and the lowest unemployment rate. However, we are not resting on our laurels; we will continue to pursue the big projects to take the Territory’s economy to the next level.
I recently returned from Japan where I met not only with INPEX, but JGC, undertaking front-end engineering and design, and investment banks JBIC and Mizuho, as well as METI, the government agency. They are all excited about the INPEX project. Whilst we recognise there is a thorough environmental process under way, it was interesting to see the Japanese perspective and their support for the INPEX project in Darwin. We are not just looking at the opportunities in and around that, we are also exploring rare earth opportunities in discussions with Japan.
We are well positioned to be an oil and gas supply hub, which is why we went to the market with expressions of interest for a marine supply base. Six strong bids were received, and we have publicly articulated that we are short-listing. We are positioning Darwin to be the premier oil and gas hub for the region, which will cover a service opportunity for the entire Southeast Asia region. We recognise the oil and gas and mineral resource industries will underpin our economy going forward, and are aggressively undertaking the work to ensure we realise the opportunities and the flow-through effects to our economy.
We are investing in training in this sector. We have the Charles Darwin University initiative, and have also created a school of excellence in maths and engineering at Darwin High School. There is also great excitement about strengthening the science program at Dripstone High School. The projects mentioned will have a tremendous flow-on effect to a number of other industries, including retail and hospitality, which will fuel further job growth.
A Working Future is a significant area of effort for government. We are trying to turn around decades of neglect by past CLP governments which simply ignored Territorians living in the bush, consigning them to poverty and unemployment. Through the A Working Future policy, this government is committed to improving employment opportunities for Indigenous Territorians. We are investing in Indigenous education in the bush, with additional teachers as well as turning off new classrooms and, in some cases, new schools. Secondary education did not exist in the bush previously, to the eternal shame of the CLP. It now exists, and we are delivering high school education throughout the bush. Investment in the bush, hitting a new record of $980m this year, is focused on core infrastructure to support economic development, including housing, schools, roads, and power and water services …
A member: Interstate consultants, you forgot them.
Ms LAWRIE: Our Indigenous workforce is growing …
A member: What about the interstate consultants?
Ms LAWRIE: Our Indigenous workforce is growing …
A member: That would be a good one.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms LAWRIE: … it is up 6% in the year 2008-09. Since coming to power in August 2001, 26 600 jobs have been created, equivalent of a 27% boost in just nine years. We will continue to pursue jobs, job opportunities and protect jobs. We will continue to focus on broadening our economic base and foster economic opportunities across the Territory to ensure all Territorians, regardless of where they live, can benefit from our strong economy and have an opportunity to build a prosperous future.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend the Chief Minister on his statement.
Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support the statement on jobs delivered by the Chief Minister. The Chief Minister has always been a strong advocate of investment and training for Territorians in infrastructure. This investment is vital to a sustainable future for Territory families, businesses and workers.
I now turn to education infrastructure. Infrastructure investment creates jobs, provides training and career opportunities, improves our quality of life, and positions the Territory for future growth and prosperity. $550m has been allocated to the Territory under the Commonwealth Nation Building and Jobs Plan. The Territory’s allocation includes $205m to build or upgrade infrastructure in government schools, and a further $65m for non-government schools. This package delivered vital economic growth and jobs to the Territory in the midst of the greatest economic downturn in the world economy in 75 years. The Henderson government is committed to providing a quality education for every Territory child. Infrastructure is fundamental to providing students with the education they deserve.
Work is continuing on the $59m Rosebery Primary and Middle Schools in Palmerston. These schools will cater for 1450 students when they open at the beginning of the next school year. Our current program of works involves $246m in school infrastructure upgrades which began in 2008 and will be completed in 2012. Seventy-four government primary schools and large group schools will receive $300 000. A further 85 primary, middle and senior schools, community education centres and homeland centres across the Territory will receive significant upgrades. Special needs students will receive substantial infrastructure improvements with $30m over four years, including a new school in the Palmerston area.
The Australian government’s Building the Education Revolution has been a boon for education and industry alike. It is not just about bricks and mortar; it is about businesses, contractors, architects, engineers, suppliers, tradesmen and, of course, apprentices. In short, real jobs for real Territorians.
The Northern Territory government funds Vocational Education and Training, or VET, which supports present and future needs of industry and the community. Funding for skills shortages and capacity building leading to employment is a priority. Training provided is nationally recognised in accordance with the Australian Quality Training Framework. A peak industry group has been established to guide training investment by government in areas of skill needs, occupational shortages and employment opportunities. A total of $84.4bn has been contributed to the delivery and support of the VET sector in 2009-10. $52.2m has been committed to VET recurrent funding for CDU, BIITE and other service providers to deliver a broad range of vocational education and training programs in urban and remote centres. $24.1m has been committed to support and train apprentices and trainees.
Funding is allocated across the following areas: $17.2m in training delivery; $1.8m towards apprentice and trainee travel; $1.4m to apprenticeship centre funding; $1.3m to Workwear/Workgear funding; $1.1m in employee incentives funding; $400 000 in pre-employment training; $900 000 for work ready programs; $6m has been committed to the productivity places program; $2.6m committed to Indigenous response programs; and $1m to support six training advisory councils. The NCVER outcome survey recorded 89.1% of trainees were satisfied with the overall quality of training received, and 92.6% achieved their training outcome through VET participation - the highest in Australia. The Northern Territory has the highest VET participation rate for people aged 15 to 64 in Australia.
Indigenous Territorians also access mainstream recurrent training and apprenticeship traineeship programs. $2.6m is invested by government in training programs in regional and remote communities aligned to local job opportunities. In 2009, 10 823 Indigenous students undertook units of training in programs ranging from pre-employment to apprenticeships. As at May 2010, 717 Indigenous Territorians were in training, apprenticeships and traineeships, reflecting 22% of the total in training. In 2009, Indigenous responsive programs delivered 139 programs to 1021 students in 51 regional and remote locations to meet emerging employment and economic development opportunities and provide personal or community capacity building.
In the 2010 calendar year, there are currently 3577 apprentices and trainees in training against the target of 3400. With 2216 commencements to date for the third quarter, the government is on track to meet the 10 000 apprentice and trainee commencements over four years. The priority area for apprenticeship funding includes skill shortage occupations in traditional trades. The uptake of traditional trades apprenticeships has increased 69%, from 497 in 2001 to 842 in 2009. There has been a 29% increase in the non-traditional trades.
The Workwear/Workgear bonus is provided to eligible apprentices and trainees to assist in meeting costs of buying work wear and safety gear. A bonus of $1000 is paid to trade apprentices and $300 to all apprentices and trainees. Since July 2005, 2745 Workwear/Workgear bonuses have been allocated to skill shortage trade apprentices, whilst another 4890 apprentice trainees have received the $300 bonus. $1.3m is allocated as a contribution towards apprentice and trainee travel where training is not available locally. The completion rate for the period 2001 to 2009 is 48% and is comparable to many other jurisdictions.
When talking about the good work happening with apprenticeships and traineeships, I must pay tribute to one of my predecessors, Syd Stirling, who really drove the agenda around having a jobs plan, with the Chief Minister, implementing many of the measures I have mentioned tonight, and setting the original target of 10 000 trainees in the first four-year period. Our target is now 10 000 in the second four-year period. Syd Stirling really drove this and was passionate about it.
The Chief Minister, when minister for Education, as well as Business and Employment minister previously, was very keen to have an employment and job strategy. Prior to Labor coming to government there was no strategy, and it is something this government can point to as a positive achievement in vocational education and training and encouraging people down that path, particularly in skills shortage areas, and also providing support.
We also realise we are facing further shortages. There is ongoing massive economic development in the Northern Territory with INPEX and other projects. There will be continuing demand and skill shortages so we cannot rest on our laurels. We have to continue the good work and keep producing more apprentices who will become tradesmen, particularly locally-grown ones who will stay in the Northern Territory.
The National Centre for Vocational Education Research, NCVER, destination survey has revealed 92.6% of Northern Territory apprentices and trainees who completed training are in employment, 76% of non-completing NT apprentices and trainees were employed following the cancellation of their training contract, and 82% of Northern Territory apprentices and trainees were satisfied with their off-the-job training. Strategies to improve apprenticeship and traineeship completion rates in the Northern Territory include: Try’a Trade program; pre-employment courses Workready Program; Workwear/Workgear bonus; and more vigilant monitoring of training contract cancellations by the Northern Territory apprenticeship centre.
We have allocated $1.8m and the Commonwealth has contributed $4.2m for job seekers. This will assist them to access employment. An additional 955 training places are available for existing workers to re-skill or upskill in Certificate III in higher qualifications. This training provides a range of qualifications with strong engagement from industry, identifying skill shortages and emerging skills on access requirements for employment.
I now turn to housing infrastructure. In Budget 2010-11 a record $1.8m was foreshadowed to be spent on infrastructure. Unlike members opposite, the Henderson government supported the $550m allocated to the Territory under the Commonwealth’s Nation Building and Jobs Plan. The CLP did not, and does not support this package, even though it delivered vital infrastructure, economic growth, and jobs to the Territory in the midst of the greatest economic downturn in the world economy in 75 years. Honourable members will recall this year’s budget delivered a record $695m for affordable housing, and new and upgraded public and remote housing across the Territory.
The building and construction sector is vital to creating and maintaining a strong economy. The Australian Bureau of Statistics has estimated every $1 committed to building and construction projects generates $2.73 in economic activity. On this basis, government’s $695m will result in $1.897bn in economic activity in the Northern Territory. Importantly, this will result in jobs for Territorians involved in direct building, construction, and supply sectors, as well as ancillary support and administration services.
Our strong economic growth has generated increasing demand for public and private services across a range of sectors, particularly in the vital area of housing. In 2010, $49m was committed to build 150 new homes over three years, including 76 homes across three seniors villages, an 18-unit village at Larapinta, and two new villages at Malak of 28 units, and in Johnston, 45 units, and 59 one- and two-bedroom units. Works are also continuing on the $10m 40-unit Bellamack seniors village. A further $5.5m parcel of land has been purchased to construct 18 two-bedroom units for seniors accommodation at Larapinta. It is anticipated the project will be completed in September 2011. A parcel was set aside by government to construct 12 one-bedroom and 28 two-bedroom seniors public housing in Bellamack at a cost of $10m.
Around $30m has been allocated for repairs and maintenance of public housing in 2010, with $15.1m being allocated to repair and refurbish existing public housing dwellings vacated in 2010-11. I will talk a little about that. I have mentioned the money figures, but to visit sites where contractors are working on public housing, and the business places of those companies and see the people employed and the work being done by local contractors, you can see the spend by the Housing department on repairs and maintenance provides employment to a considerable number of people on an ongoing basis, and supports the development of trades within the Northern Territory.
The social housing initiative under the Nation Building Economic Stimulus Plan is another example of cooperative arrangements between the Territory and Commonwealth governments delivering for Territorians. In the Northern Territory, the social housing initiative delivers $59.7m from the 2008-09 to the 2011-12 budgets to construct 208 new dwellings and refurbish another 136 existing public housing properties across the Territory. Stage 1 of the initiative delivered $7.12m to construct 22 new dwellings for public housing. These dwellings are now complete across the Territory. Stage 2 will deliver $48.45m to construct 186 new dwellings in 2010-11, and building has commenced on 141 of these dwellings. It is anticipated all dwellings will be completed by December 2012.
In relation to stimulus money coming to the Territory and its impact on Alice Springs, it has been my pleasure to visit the new Bath Street and Percy Court accommodation centres. A whole range of projects is occurring in Alice Springs; I have only mentioned a few. Refurbishments and upgrades are being carried out on many existing buildings, particularly those owned by non-government organisations. It is pleasing to see so many young apprentices starting their working life working on these sites. Alice Springs is running red hot economically with all the construction work happening; it is a real boon for the Alice Springs economy. In my conversations with Alice Springs businesses, they recognise the economic activity occurring in Alice Springs. It is great to see and hear.
Turning to Darwin, a further 45 dwellings will be part of the village at Parap, which is of particular interest to the member for Fannie Bay. This development is due for completion by June 2012. A total of 298 dwellings were refurbished or repaired through stimulus funding. The target of 136 dwellings was exceeded by more than 200%. It is great to see we are using the stimulus money effectively. We are doing more with the stimulus money and providing more benefit to citizens of the Northern Territory, to those in need, and also supporting business.
The budget delivers $2.7m to operate five new short-term accommodation facilities in Alice Springs and Darwin to house visitors from remote communities and outlying areas as part of the Alice Springs Transformation Plan and the Australian government stimulus package stage 2. I mentioned the Percy Court transitional village to house up to 70 people; construction is nearly complete. Construction has commenced on the Bath Street Lodge in Alice Springs to house up to 40 visiting renal dialysis patients - I have visited that site. Construction is also under way at Goyder Street, Alice Springs with eight single units. I mentioned the Alice Springs Accommodation Park which will house up to 150 visitors. There will also be a new domestic violence and crisis transitional accommodation facility in Malak to house up to 26 people, including children.
I now turn to SIHIP. There will be debate during the two weeks of parliament on SIHIP and I am ready for that debate. I have been out and about inspecting many SIHIP projects. I have heard what the member for Braitling has to say. I say bring on the debate; I am ready, I am equipped, and it will be an interesting debate. It is an important program with a minimum target of 20% Indigenous employment and is averaging around 30% and more in some regions; 323 Indigenous people working on the biggest housing investment in Northern Territory history, the remote Indigenous housing construction project. Each Indigenous employer will have a career management plan …
Mr GUNNER: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! I move an extension of time for the minister, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will not be long, and I thank members for extending my time.
Each Indigenous employer will have a career management plan in place to assess the employee’s skills at the beginning of employment, identify a training pathway, discuss aspirations, and identify a long-term career plan. The remote rental framework now provides a basis for ongoing training and employment of Indigenous people who have been working within the SIHIP program. To date, the vast majority of Indigenous people employed within SIHIP have been unskilled or semi-skilled; the specific type of work Indigenous employees undertake varies depending on the unique circumstances of the works package.
It was pleasing to go on site in Alice Springs and see firsthand a very good carpenter. From what little I know of carpentry he seemed a fantastic carpenter, but what really made this man special was he had four or five young Indigenous blokes he was showing the ropes to and he recounted his time as an apprentice and all the people who helped him. His major motivating factor was to help these young blokes find a career to help them on their way in life the way he had been helped. That was fantastic. More than a job, more than a tradesman, he is someone special and we are lucky to have people like that in the Territory who give so much of themselves.
That has been a real plus to see as I inspect the SIHIP sites and talk to Indigenous employees and contractors. It has become evident SIHIP is more than building houses; it is about employment, community development, self esteem and a lifetime journey.
In the package of work at Wadeye, approximately 16% of the Indigenous employees were plant operators. This reflects the use of concrete from the local tilt-slab factory, which I also inspected. I saw the young blokes involved in making tilt-slabs, cutting the steel, welding and fabricating. The young Indigenous blokes were busy. They were right into the work and were supporting the effort to meet the incredible deadlines set for the SIHIP project. The alliance partners develop training and employment opportunities for each Indigenous employee based on their aspirations, levels of literacy and numeracy and formal training and education. There is remedial work to be done as well. As the alliances work with the shires who undertake ongoing repairs and maintenance, local people will develop the skills directly transferable to ongoing housing maintenance roles in the communities post SIHIP.
This government’s investment in the infrastructure and training areas is vital to the future of the Territory and is ongoing. We see jobs as providing a way for people to provide for their families, to enjoy life to the full, to enjoy their potential, to bring up families and build the Territory in the major urban areas, the rural areas and our remote regions. It is very important work; it represents an enormous challenge and this government is committed to it.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend this statement to the House.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Deputy Speaker, I was a little frustrated during Question Time today knowing this statement was on this afternoon yet all questions from government related to jobs. We are now debating a ministerial statement about jobs. The one thing this government is good at is advertising. McDonald’s could take a leaf out of your book, the advertising is fantastic.
There is an old saying: ‘build it and they will come’, and one of the biggest issues in the Northern Territory today, whether it is Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Alice Springs or the more remote areas, is housing. If we can believe ABS statistics - and being a former employee I believe in their statistics - the nett migration is high at the moment with more leaving than coming to the Territory. There are plenty of jobs, which is great for the economy, but people need somewhere to live.
The government must always wear rose-coloured glasses; people bring real issues to my office on a daily basis. Jobs at the moment are a little like window shopping. In Sydney last week I stood outside shops I could only dream of purchasing items from. It was not very welcoming having a security guard glare at me; he must have known what I had in my wallet was not going to get me through the door. Maybe I had that look about me. The Northern Territory is like that at the moment. Yes, there are jobs, but where do people live? The unfortunate thing is, bad planning has placed the Territory in this position.
At lunchtime yesterday I drove down The Esplanade to Mindil Beach, past the Ski Club, past Vesteys Beach out to East Point. The number of Indigenous and non-Indigenous people congregating in those areas was remarkable. I met someone I used to work with during my time at Darwin City Council on the Public Places Program. It has been 14 years since I worked on the Public Places Program; however, during that time I never saw as many Indigenous people sitting around the Ski Club, Vesteys Beach or East Point as I saw yesterday. These people have no homes and there are probably many reasons they have come into Darwin. People have said it is a result of the intervention, alcohol restrictions, many reasons, but the fact remains they do not have houses.
It is not just these people. People come into my office upset and crying because they do not have a home for their family. It is no use going to Territory Housing; the waiting list is remarkable. I have tried to help many people and, in some cases, have had success; however, writing to the average minister - and I use the term ‘average’ lightly – I find the response is sometimes no better than the answers during Question Time. There is no answer in the letter; it is just rhetoric. What is the point of writing to a minister? It is like some of the briefings we receive. We are only told things you want us to hear. You always say: ‘Why don’t you get a briefing on the matter?’ Sometimes the briefings - no offence to the public servants who are under strict guidelines and if they step out of line will be castigated, probably have their phone records searched and their job will be on the line. Many public servants come into the office of opposition members and openly talk about issues within government. Some things are not friendly. I grew up thinking the Labor government of the day was supposed to support the workers. I find some of the issues raised with me disgusting.
The bad planning of this government has left us with some of the highest housing and rental costs in the nation. Good people, according to the ABS, are leaving every day. Why? Not about jobs - plenty of jobs. There will be more jobs because as people leave they will have to be replaced. It is not about jobs.
I have told this story before. I had a nephew who uplifted his family from Adelaide to Darwin. He is a refrigeration mechanic and we need plenty of those. He moved to Palmerston with three children and lasted six months before he had to move back to Adelaide. It was not even about the money because he was earning hundreds of dollars more per week than he could in Adelaide. It came down to the cost of housing. He could not afford to live here because of rental costs.
I am sick of hearing people are leaving this fabulous place we call the Northern Territory. Every single day people say: ‘Had enough, cannot do it’. You read letters to the editor, talk to friends, talk to family and it is the same story: ‘Love Darwin, love the Northern Territory, but guess what? We cannot afford to live here’.
I have lived here since 1985 and appreciate it has always been a relatively expensive place to live because it is a remote location compared to the eastern seaboard. There will always be additional costs and we have to appreciate that. People who live in Darwin and the more remote places in Australia, whether in Queensland or Western Australia, have to appreciate there will be additional costs. However, it is so out of hand the average income does not keep up with it.
We talk about problems with families and children. Some of that may be because parents do not spend enough time with their children. Why? They need two incomes to pay the high rents, the high electricity prices, and the high mortgages. Bad planning from government in failing to release land for so many years has forced prices up. Ministers pull out graphs every day in this House. The opposition can pull out graphs and show you the cost of housing, particularly in the last few years - all because of bad planning. Recently we had a planning session and someone asked: ‘What if we do not want Darwin to grow any more? What if we are happy with the way it is at the moment?’ Unfortunately, no one is going to build that gate. If anything, I would like to be remembered as someone willing to plan for our future. We need to plan where future freeways will be. One day there will be a bridge to the Cox Peninsula; major roads and a second airport will be required. Whether it is 30, 50, or 100 years, it will happen.
Look at Sydney today, look at Melbourne. Take Sydney as a case in point. I was quite scared one morning driving through a tunnel I did not think would end knowing there were suburbs above me. Darwin has a relatively small population. Wouldn’t it be great for politicians sitting in this Chamber in 30, 40, or 50 years from now to say: ‘Gee, politicians back then were wise enough to plan for the future’? It would be fantastic if we were remembered for being good planners and the corridor for this bridge was put in place now so we do not have to build tunnels under suburbs which come with a huge cost like in Sydney.
I recall my dad asking me: ‘Pete, as a politician, if you could be remembered for one thing what would it be?’ It is a hard question because I try to use the starfish approach; help one person at a time. Sometimes in opposition that is all you can do. If I could be remembered for one thing it would be people thought: ‘Those people in 2010 had the wisdom to plan for a city with one million people or, in 100 or 200 years’ time, two million and beyond. Unless we plan today, we are not going to get ourselves out of the problem we are in.
Conversely, I am hearing horrible stories where people have bought at the top of the market and are seeing their investments falling because the bubble has burst. Perhaps we have seen the peak and people’s investments are going backwards, interest rates are going up, and the pain is going to be far more extreme. It is disappointing that people are struggling with high mortgages, high rents and high electricity costs because the government has failed to plan. Is this the worst government the Northern Territory has ever had? I believe it is, and it comes down to one thing: how wrong can you get it?
So many things have gone wrong recently, whether it is electricity or planning - you only have to look at Tiger Brennan Drive at the moment to see the issues facing that massive piece of infrastructure - $110m. I went to a public meeting recently and, to his credit, the member for Daly turned up. He did not have much to say; he sat in the crowd, but at least he was there. I could not understand the answer to a question I asked: how can infrastructure the size of the Tiger Brennan extension with the amount of planning that went into it be so wrong in so many areas? Surely, when it was designed, road use would have been considered.
The answer given shocked me. Apparently some regulations regarding safety had changed since the initial design and therefore changes had to be made to meet the new safety regulations. Well, hello! Road trains have not become shorter; they are still the length they were two years ago, three years ago, or five years ago. The original designers of that infrastructure must have known how long a road train was. What were the risks of going around a corner and rolling? Perhaps the cambers of the road needed to cater for those trucks. Who would design something where a road train needed to cross three lanes of traffic to get to another road? Fair dinkum, this is basic stuff. I am not an engineer, but I could see that was going to be an issue when I saw the road being designed.
How can you get it so wrong? What is it with planning? Why can’t we plan for our needs? I appreciate things change here and there, but this needs massive changes. The minister said today it is going to require government money to invest in the changes. You have to ask, were they tasked with designing something to meet the needs of the community and those needs were not met? Someone has made a mistake, and the costs should at least be shared to correct this. I am amazed.
I mentioned writing to ministers on different issues. Sometimes the responses I receive astound me. In fact, for a while I took them on board thinking I had received an answer. I then write to the original complainant saying: ‘All is well, I have written to the minister and this is the answer. Thought I would follow up with their response’, to be told later the issue had not been dealt with. In fact, I have one relating to a crossing in Palmerston where the minister responded saying the department would review the crossing and enter into some kind of arrangement or review with Palmerston City Council.
In 2006 the matter was being reviewed, and we are still reviewing it in 2010. What interested me with the letter was - because I had asked that the lights at this crossing, after witnessing two people in wheelchairs nearly hit because drivers were not paying attention - be upgraded. The letter said the lights had been upgraded and new LED lights had been installed. Well, hello! No, they were not. The lights are still the same. Again, I take the minister at his word; send this letter on to the original complainant saying: ‘Look at that. The good minister has taken action and the issue has been solved’. No, it has not. The lights have not changed. Yes, they are working, but they have not been changed to LED lights. Who is giving you advice before the letters are drafted to send back to shadow ministers?
It is amazing, and this is the small stuff. How can we have confidence in this government delivering on the big stuff? You cannot; Territorians cannot have confidence.
We talk about jobs. There are plenty of jobs but no houses. Who would want to live here with some of the issues I hear about in my office?
How many people have had issues with patient travel services? We pay $30 a day for patient accommodation interstate. What public servant or politician would go interstate for $30 a day. It would not happen; no one would hop on a plane. How is someone supposed to live on $30 a day? Fair dinkum. Most people get more than that in a meal allowance. Look at the rates for politicians and public servants. Look at how much private industry pays for accommodation, incidentals or meal allowances when they send people interstate. Appreciating the fact most people would have a house in Darwin, Palmerston, anywhere in the Northern Territory, they are still paying rent or meeting their mortgage repayments but are interstate and receive a measly $30 a day.
There is a real disconnect with this government and business, this government and people, this government and the average person. There is a real disconnect because people who come into my office do not come into your office, or is it only your friends come into your office and therefore are not going to tell you the bad things which are happening. Housing is just one of them.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I watched Four Corners the other night and I had tears in my eyes. We heard the Treasurer say today how much government was advertising the Northern Territory as the place to go if you want a job. When people see shows like Four Corners, which was horrible, what kind of advertising is that to attract people to the Northern Territory? People would and should be scared because this is the worst government the Northern Territory has ever had.
Ms McCARTHY (Indigenous Development): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, it is a relief that on this side of the House we see the problems across the Northern Territory and are prepared to do something about them. We see a future in the Northern Territory for all people; we do not talk the Territory down or trash the Territory. Part of standing here is about leadership. It is about saying this is the vision we have for the people of the Northern Territory where we can walk together - a vision which members opposite cannot begin to understand.
I am pleased to speak in support of the Chief Minister’s statement on jobs in the Northern Territory. The ministerial statement goes to the heart of what the Henderson Labor government is all about: developing an inclusive, progressive Territory where all Territorians, no matter where they live, have the opportunity and capacity to participate in a workforce and benefit from a thriving Northern Territory economy; and ensuring the opportunity to engage in the mainstream economy for all Territorians to have this opportunity to explore all the world has to offer, to build strong, healthy and happy families, and to contribute to the economy. I am proud many of my portfolio responsibilities lie at the heart of this work: Indigenous Development, Regional Development, Tourism and Women’s Policy.
Our A Working Future policy to develop local business and maximise opportunities in our 20 Territory growth towns is central to our plan to build local economies around our remote growth centres and ensure Indigenous Territorians, more than 70% of whom live outside of our major towns and cities, can join and benefit from our growth economy. While I am proud to be part of a government which has helped increase Indigenous employment by 6% in just two years, there is an incredible amount of work still to be done.
As a government we have committed, through the national commitment to close the gap on Indigenous disadvantage, to halve the gap in employment outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians within a decade.
Indigenous jobs required to meet the COAG Closing the Gap targets in the Northern Territory are estimated at between 11 400 and 16 000 by 2020. We are not daunted by the scale of that work, a legacy passed to us as a consequence of years of neglect by previous governments. A key pillar of A Working Future is building economic profiles, a town prospectus; job profiles for each of our towns. Building on this work will be our Futures Forums, opportunities for residents of our bush towns to explore the possible real opportunities for individuals, families and committees. A key challenge in this work is linking labour with capital. While government services and jobs will be key features as we build access to services in our towns, real results and real growth in jobs will only come from business activity. Our Futures Forums planned for each growth town will be a key opportunity for the business and finance community to explore with local people, local business and investment opportunities.
I have stood in this House on several occasions talking about the first Futures Forum held in Ngukurr in August. Over the next 12 months we will be looking at the 19 Futures Forums we have yet to do across our growth towns. These Futures Forums are based around local empowerment. It is about Indigenous people across the Northern Territory standing strong saying: ‘This is who we are; this is who we are as a people of Ngukurr; this is our vision for our town; this is the way we want it to grow based on cultural identity, on language and on fundamental respect with those who live around us’.
I also stress these forums are not just about our growth towns. They are about regional development, remembering 80% of the people living remote are within 50 km of our growth towns. Developing our regional economies and jobs will also require significant new investments and necessary roads and communications infrastructure to connect our towns to the mainstream economy. The necessary investments are well beyond the capacity of our own government and I am working with my ministerial colleagues, both locally and nationally, to bring attention to our need in that area and new investments in that new infrastructure.
Coordination and integration of effort with supporting federal government investment is a key feature of A Working Future. We cannot meet our objectives from within our own Territory budget and it is in the national interest to address Indigenous disadvantage and support regional developments in the Northern Territory. I highlight the fact within our own Northern Territory budget this year we made historic steps in almost $1bn towards our growth towns. That is $1bn in all areas we need, and we know that is only the first step. That is why the relationship with the federal government is pivotal in ensuring we not only secure added funding, but that it is ongoing for years to come.
Last week, I had the opportunity to meet with my ministerial colleagues in the portfolios of Local Government and Regional Development, as well as Indigenous Development. I had the opportunity to discuss with minister Simon Crean, minister Jenny Macklin and Senator Mark Arbib the importance of supporting us and working with us on the growth towns, and the importance of ensuring there will be jobs; jobs for now and into the future.
Locally, we are coordinating government work through the Regional Operation Centre, ROC, and our own service delivery coordination unit. We are connecting with local people and their priorities, demonstrating our commitment to their towns, and building and delivering a shared vision for thriving places with job opportunities for townspeople.
As part of our plan to progress this urgent work, we are also establishing across-agency economic development teams for our growth towns to cut through red tape, coordinate government activity, develop local economic activity, and help build a business-ready and job-friendly investment environment. Key precursors for successful participation in the workforce include reasonable health, capacity in education, and skills and alignment between a person’s interest and the work they are engaged in.
A Working Future also includes investment - nearly $1bn this year - in education, health, housing and supporting strong families, all important in supporting participation in employment. They are also important in engendering strong families and strong self-confidence, including the confidence to leave families, friends and clan groups to learn about different places and work with other people outside the comfort zone of one’s own mob. It is a big thing to do, as many members representing bush constituencies would know.
Returning to the theme of a business-friendly investment environment, we are working with the land councils to provide certainty and security of tenure for business activities. This includes the Territory Labor government continually working to resolve outstanding Aboriginal land and native title claims by negotiation and agreement rather than combative litigation. This is the path to certainty and new business opportunities.
My aim, as Minister for Indigenous Development and Minister for Regional Development, is to work with land councils, landowners and the business community to maximise opportunities and job creation. A key part of working with the land councils is developing lease arrangements to underpin business investment on Aboriginal land.
As Minister for Regional Development, I also have carriage of the Indigenous Economic Development Strategy 2009-2012, which targets the following achievements by 2012: 3000 more Indigenous Territorians will commence employment across the private and public sector; 10% Indigenous employment in the Northern Territory Public Service; and 200 new Indigenous businesses. These are ambitious targets we are committed to reaching with the support of industry.
My Regional Development portfolio also supports job creation through our Indigenous Business Development grant scheme. Since the program’s inception by Territory Labor in July 2005, individual IBDP grants of up to $30 000 to support small business developments have assisted around 140 Indigenous businesses and organisations, resulting in an estimated 290 Indigenous Territorians employed by these businesses. It is pleasing this government initiative has resulted in such real results. In October this year, the value of the program was recognised with the Aboriginal Benefit Account contributing a further $500 000, growing our 2010-11 grant pool to $1.1m.
As Minister for Local Government, I am aware of the important role local government plays in our communities, both as a service provider and employer. Collectively, local government councils are the largest employer in the Territory’s rural and remote areas, with our eight regional shire councils employing more than 2500 people. Indigenous workers comprise approximately 75% of this workforce. The female/male split is approximately 45% female and 55% male. Independent research comparing shire council payroll reports with those of former community government councils show fully-paid employment has grown by approximately 600 positions or 35% since the formation of the shire councils two years ago. The research also indicates the major component of shire council employment is engaged in the delivery of core municipal services.
Part of this employment growth is linked to Northern Territory and Commonwealth programs to transition CDEP positions in services such as aged care to fully paid jobs. A large part of this employment growth is also due to the commitment of the elected councillors to leverage the professional capacity of the reformed local government councils to ensure their council provides employment and skill development programs for local residents.
Unfortunately, in the 2010-11 year the Commonwealth has not participated in the matching funding program which assists councils to transition former CDEP participants to jobs in core council services. The Northern Territory government has had to fill the void; however, I am stressing to my colleagues in Canberra the importance of these positions in local government and the ongoing necessity for Australian government support to meet our shared objectives to strong local government and better remote service delivery in the Northern Territory.
On a more positive note, a key result of our local government reform is councils are now providing individual career and skill development plans for their workforce. This is the first time this has happened for some Indigenous members who have worked for decades in local government. The Northern Territory and Commonwealth governments have jointly funded $200 000 for a workforce development position in LGANT to assist the regional shire councils coordinate and develop their Indigenous workforce planning, recruitment, retention and training from a whole-of-industry perspective.
As Minister for Local Government, I have responsibility for the Northern Territory Aboriginal Interpreter Service. The AIS is one of Australia’s largest single employers of Indigenous people. Close to 400 Indigenous people are actively engaged by the AIS to provide interpreter services. The service covers over 100 languages and dialects, and its employment benefit is widespread, as is its language benefit. The majority of this employment is part-time, but there is a growing number of qualified interpreters who are earning the equivalent of a full-time wage through this employment, which is fantastic news for the Northern Territory. The service commenced mainly as an essential element of Justice and Health services. However, more recently, the real value of effective communication has been increasingly recognised by government agencies. The number of bookings made by the service has almost doubled in recent years. In 2010-11, it is projected the Aboriginal Interpreter Service will make 7000 bookings, which is equal to more than 130 interpreter bookings per week.
Until recent years, the service has been coordinated by government agencies operating out of Alice Springs, Katherine, Tennant Creek, Nhulunbuy and Darwin. The service has now established offices in Yuendumu, Maningrida and Wadeye, with a total of 10 interpreters and operations staff now locally employed in these offices. AIS offices are planned to open in another four Territory growth towns by the middle of next year, providing more local jobs in those communities.
As Minister for Tourism, I well understand, as does the government, the importance of the tourism sector as a vital economic driver of the Northern Territory economy. The vitality of the tourism industry has a broad impact upon many other industry sectors and tourism generates a significant number of jobs in the Territory. Around one in six employed Territorians has a job as a result of the tourism sector. Tourism’s contribution to the Northern Territory’s gross state product totalled $1.73bn, or 11% of total Northern Territory GSP. The tourism industry is one of the Territory’s largest employers and was estimated to support, directly and indirectly, 18 000 full-time equivalent jobs, or 16.3% of the Northern Territory workforce in 2007-08. This is more than double other states and underlines the importance of the sector to the Northern Territory economy.
Two of the key sectors making up the tourism industry, retail trade and accommodation and food services, supported over 13 000 full-time and 8000 part-time positions in August 2010. That is 14% more jobs than August 2009. Over the past 12 months the Chief Executive of Tourism NT, Maree Tetlow, has chaired two of the key working groups of the Tourism Ministers’ Council focusing on employment in this sector. The first one was the Indigenous Tourism Development Working Group and the second was the Labour and Skills Working Group. The invitation for the Northern Territory to chair these national committees reflects the value given to our work, and the work by the committees will be a positive outcome on job creation for Territorians into the future.
The Labour and Skills Working Group is developing an outlook for the industry’s labour and skills requirements over the next five years. A key will be improving the ability to attract and retain labour in an increasingly competitive environment. This will be done through better planning, improved training procedures and providing greater career opportunities. Work is also under way to promote careers in tourism in high schools, encouraging students to consider tourism as a real career choice. The tourism market can be varied and seasonal, and while we work hard to flatten the edges of the busiest periods and extend the season, it is challenging for employers to find and retain staff at the levels they need. This is particularly so in the regional areas and something I am keen to help resolve.
The Indigenous Tourism Development Working Group is a key focus area for the development of future employment opportunities, particularly those which can be created in our regional and remote areas of the Northern Territory. There is no doubt the Northern Territory is well placed to capitalise on the emerging Indigenous cultural experiences our visitors are seeking. The Territory government continues to support Indigenous operators to offer …
Mr McCARTHY: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be given an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms McCARTHY: I thank my colleague for the extension and the House - it is a terrific news story. The Territory government continues to support Indigenous operators to offer quality tourism experiences and maintain a strong market presence. Tourism NT is working on emerging grassroots Indigenous tourism opportunities with the aim of exporting market-ready tourism products. All sectors of the market are being targeted to ensure an even spread of development to enhance profitability, sustainability and employment outcomes for Indigenous operators.
I recently attended the celebrations of the 25th anniversary of the hand back of Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, including the launch of the park’s Tourism Directions: Stage 1 report. Tourism NT has been working closely with Parks Australia and the tourism industry to deliver new tourism developments into the future. This approach will create sustainable jobs for local residents and reflects the importance we attach to tourism at Uluru as the pillar of the Central Australian economy and a spiritual icon, the heart of this country - it really is a special place.
At the same time we heard the exciting news of the Indigenous Land Corporation’s purchase of the Yulara Resort and partnership with the Australian government and local Anangu tourism businesses to establish a National Indigenous Training Academy at Yulara. I met with the ILC and Shirley McPherson and discussed their plans to employ 670 Indigenous staff at the resort by the end of 2018. These are ambitious plans, but plans this government believes in knowing this is about the future; these plans are generational and we have to make a difference for the children today so they, and their children, can have these jobs well into the future.
Turning to my role as Minister for Women’s Policy, I am keenly interested in the issue of increasing women’s participation in the workforce. In the Northern Territory, the workforce participation rate for women increased from 63.1% in January 2000 to 68.8% in January 2010; 54 900 women participate in the Northern Territory workforce with 39 000, or 71.4%, of those female workers engaged in full-time employment.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, the Northern Territory government is committed to building on this progress. A key area for further work is that of workforce participation by young women. We have established a Young Women and Unemployment reference group to work with us developing effective strategies to improve the equitable participation of young women in the workforce. This will be a focus for future policy development to ensure women, as well as men, have the opportunity to engage in the ongoing economic development of the Northern Territory. Given next year will be a significant year as women across the world celebrate 100 years of International Women’s Day, it is an important time to focus on the agenda.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, it is a pity this statement came at 11.30 pm because I had left. Previous speakers have proclaimed how wonderful the job rate is; it is in Darwin, there is no doubt about that - plenty of jobs if people want them. Overall, the economy is fairly steady and if you want a job in the major centres of the Territory you should be able to get one. The Chief Minister says the unemployment rate in the Northern Territory is 3.1%, which is good.
However, we should be concentrating on people who live in remote communities, which we continue to gloss over. I will give you some figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics for March 2010: the unemployment rate for various places in the Northern Territory - Madam Deputy Speaker might be interested to know the unemployment rate for Bathurst and Melville is 12.1%. That is four times higher than Darwin. The Daly is not far behind at around 12%; Alligator is about 9%; Finniss is about 8%; lower Top End is about 7.5%; and the Barkly is 5% - one of the lower areas - Darwin City, Palmerston and Litchfield Shire are all around 2.5%.
A figure of 3.1% can be quite deceptive. An article written by Professor Jon Altman and Dr Nicholas Biddle from the Australian University published on Friday, 4 June 2010 said:
- Yesterday, employment data for 2008 and 2009, the first two years of the Rudd government, were released. And the figures suggest that rather than delivering on the ‘closing the gap’ pledge, the Australian government might have exacerbated the expansion of the indigenous unemployment gap it has committed to halve.
It uses some ABS statistics and says:
- The annual ABS publication, Labour Force Characteristics of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: Estimates from the Labour Force Survey is the key instrument available to track the employment situation of indigenous people. Data is available annually going back to 2002, although the release for 2008 was delayed due to issues with benchmarking.
It warns about interpretation; however, Professor Altman says:
- Some headline information provides a damning indictment of the COAG strategy. Consider the following:
the estimated number of indigenous people employed decreased from 163 200 in 2008 to 161 200 in 2009, a decline of 2000;
the gap in employment percentages between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians of 23 percentage points in 2007 increased to 24.4 percentage points in 2009; and
the increase in the gap in unemployment rates was even greater, growing from 9.6% in 2007 to 12.6% in 2009.
Much has been said today about employment; however, those national figures are reflected in the Northern Territory. If CDEP does not continue, those figures will become worse. I quote from a speech by John Paterson, CEO of the Aboriginal Medical Service Alliance of 11 and 12 November 2010:
- CDEP was established 33 years ago here in the Northern Territory, at what was then known as Bamyili. It was set up consequent to an explicit demand by Aboriginal people of the time that they needed a way to escape the dead hand of life under ‘sit down money’. Despite the revisiting of history by some, including many in media and government, it was a deliberate attempt to move away from welfare towards productive work by Aboriginal people, and supported by policy makers three decades ago.
- As we know, the Northern Territory Emergency Response - better known as the Intervention - has included the gradual starving and abolition of CDEP. We are seeing - as was predicted three years ago - a move from work to welfare: the exact opposite of what we were told would be the result.
This will have potentially appalling effects for our people in regional and remote areas of the Northern Territory. There are indications that remote area unemployment may climb towards 50% as CDEP is finally dismantled this year. That is a direct attack on family wellbeing.
I will go on. Some of this is part of a speech he was giving on food security:
- And here in Darwin - over the next couple of days - the hopes of our people to actively engage in providing food security to our families hangs in the balance, even as we are talking about best practice and new opportunity.
Starving CDEP will potentially add to the starvation of our children.
And while you may be talking about technical issues of best practice surrounding growing, marketing and distribution of food, you will also be talking about contributing to best practice in terms of child protection.
That is why the federal government must urgently review its position on CDEP projects such as the ones you will be discussing today, from household and community gardens through to the larger scale horticulture. Not only is it simply untrue that CDEP is mere welfarism, it is contribution towards preventive measures surrounding the health and well being of our children.
And that is what it is all about.
- The Australian government’s CDEP program assists unemployed Indigenous people. The program contributes to meeting the government’s commitment to halve the employment gap between the Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians by 2020.
Operating mainly in remote areas, the CDEP program aims to help Indigenous job seekers find and keep jobs.
- CDEP providers will work in partnership with Employment Service and Indigenous Employment Program providers. Working together to deliver integrated services at the local level means CDEP and Employment Service providers can offer a better range of employment and support services that lead to real jobs for Indigenous job seekers.
They are fine words but they do not relate to the world as it is. Two years ago a mining magnate launched a program to find 50 000 jobs for Aboriginal people. It has only produced 3000 jobs. In many of our remote areas the reality is that there are no real jobs. We have to either create jobs or put in infrastructure to allow these places to have real jobs.
The member for Arnhem was talking about the number of jobs at Yulara. That is fine. Yulara has infrastructure allowing it to create jobs - interstate and overseas airlines connections, a good road network and an all-weather bitumen road. What does that infrastructure do? It allows tourism to operate and real jobs to occur. However, Palumpa, Peppimenarti or the Laynhupuy Homelands do not have any connection to interstate and overseas airlines, they do not have an all-weather road, and real jobs cannot be found in those communities - very limited.
When talking about jobs in the Northern Territory it is fine to look at the good picture but the real issue is that we are not capable of providing Aboriginal people in remote communities with full employment, and we have a Commonwealth government which says the concept of removing CDEP by the middle of next year is so people will become work ready or get involved in community projects. Most people will be involved in the community project side because there are no real jobs in many of these places. You have to face the facts: unless there is a big mine somewhere there are not many jobs. If you live at Lajamanu you might get a job at Rabbit Flat or the Granites; however, there will not be many and they will not employ the whole community.
What other real jobs are there? There will be artificial government jobs like the Aboriginal Interpreter Service. They are, to some extent, real jobs, but are dependent on government. Tanami is not dependent on the government; it creates wealth from what is under the ground. Tourism comes from people visiting and spending money. Governments can put money into communities and say it is a real job - in reality it is an artificial job.
The member for Arnhem spoke about the number of people employed by councils. Many of those jobs are agency jobs not council jobs; they are taken on by council because government will not do it. You can have a figure saying council employ X number of people. If I asked, how many people would council employ in council-type work, the figure is not very big. Our CTC report has asked for those figures. How many jobs were created by the amalgamation of the councils? Take out the agencies - how many jobs? We are waiting on that.
We need to oppose the destruction of CDEP. I would rather it was not CDEP; people should receive a full wage. Government jobs, regardless of which department, should not be CDEP jobs; they should be paid fully by the government. There is an opportunity for councils to become the main employer in communities. We owe it to those people not to give them welfare, but to create jobs within their own community. They may not be the greatest jobs in the world, and some people might say - this was published by Treaty Republic, with headings of Sovereignty, Genocide, Land Rights and Pay the Rent issues. An article headed ‘Slavery returns to Top End’ is about the walk off at Kalkaringi and Dagaragu. I am not asking people to be slaves, but I am not asking people to live on welfare. Where there are a limited numbers of jobs some people will be doing fairly mundane work.
The SIHIP program is about building houses, but building houses on its own is not going to help these communities. What will help is getting pride back, working in the community to clean up the streets, plant trees, fix the oval and paint the dilapidated houses. You use your workforce to create a community people can be proud of. I have been to quite a number of communities lately and would not be proud of some, yet people have no work. I see long grass, I see rubbish and I see an oval with goal posts that need a coat of paint. There is work but I do not see people working. The longer we allow the welfare mentality to go on the harder it will be to get people into real jobs because they will not be job ready. Much work needs to be done in that area.
I want to raise SIHIP. The member for Johnston praised the number of Aboriginal people employed in the SIHIP program. The theory is fantastic. To employ 20% of Aboriginal people in the SIHIP program is a good concept, finding out whether it is doing something is much harder. You might be employing 30% Indigenous, but how do we know the same people are employed all the time. Does 30% mean 100 people turned up at different times? We employed 50 then we employed another 50, and some of those people came to work and some did not. Who was trained and what were the outcomes? The CTC has asked - and these figures have not come our way - that every six months training and employment data for SIHIP is made publicly available. This data is to include a breakdown of employee and subcontractor numbers, labour hours, training hours on site and in the classroom and the trade people are trained in. The government agreed to that. Someone told me it may be on the website; however, I would have expected the CTC be given that information. That is the sort of information you need before you comment on whether the program is helping individual Aboriginal people receive the training they want. Twenty per cent sounds good but does it mean actual people? How many of that 20% are being trained? How many are turning up to work? How many of them end up with a certificate?
In theory, people employed by SIHIP will be able to get jobs when they have finished building and refurbishing houses. That is what you hope - we have not seen that yet. Some of these places have not finished their building program. A number of Indigenous people were employed to refurbish houses at Milikapiti and they do not have jobs. We train people to maintain houses but they have no job. Jobs were promised. Are we lifting people up with grand statements which sound good in the media? The federal government also likes to boast about this. How many people will have jobs when this is completed? Will we let people down? That is the worst thing you can do. You train them and all of a sudden they do not have jobs because there are very few real jobs at Milikapiti. How many people do you need to look after houses? Maybe one or two on a continual basis is probably all they can employ. We need to ensure people have some work when they finish and do not go back onto the dole. It may not be in the trade they learnt, but they at least turn up for work regularly. We have taught them to come to work, at least ensure they have a job.
There has been talk about …
Mr Knight: Do you want some more time?
Mr WOOD: Yes, please.
Mr KNIGHT: Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I seek an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: Figures have been quoted on how many people work in the Northern Territory Public Service. I ask the question: ‘How many remote Indigenous people will be employed in the public service?’ That is where the high unemployment rates are.
According to Dr Jon Altman, employment rates nationally are rising. We can say there will be more Indigenous people working in Darwin. I know many Indigenous people who are - my daughter is one, but does that make any great difference to the people in remote communities? If you are serious about getting people trained into the public service you will have to get them from remote communities, otherwise we are not addressing the real problem.
I may sound alarmist but if we do not give people jobs - if they continue to have nothing to do even if we build nice houses - we will not change things. The gap will not close. Chapter 6 of the child protection report gives reasons why children are abused: unemployment, alcohol and overcrowding. Where you have people without a job and nothing to do, people living in overcrowded houses with alcohol problems, you can guarantee there will be child abuse. Children will not be protected. We need people with pride in themselves, pride in their community as a good place to live, and we need kids in that community to know they are wanted and have a future.
It is more than the structures we build; it is about changing the way people feel. It is about giving them a chance, and we do not give people a chance if we keep them on welfare. We need to turn the CDEP policy around. As much as Peter Murphy thinks I am the world beater, government is in power, and your friends are in power in Canberra. You have to make a bigger effort because I believe, Dr Jon Altman believes, John Paterson believes, and other people believe if we do not have employment for Aboriginal people other than working for the dole we will take some gigantic steps backwards.
If you are serious about the protection of children ensure parents have a job. If this government has to march on parliament, I will come with you; even if parliament has to go to Canberra to say Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory need work - they need a wage and a decent job. Do not drop them, because we will have problems in the future.
Jobs in the Northern Territory is an important issue. I wish I had more time to prepare for it today. I wanted to go into it in more detail. It is no good beating one’s chest and saying how wonderful the unemployment figures are at 3.1% when it is around 12% to 14% unemployment in many communities. Do not forget, if you took CDEP away, which is not counted as unemployment, you would have a figure similar to that suggested by John Paterson, around 50% unemployment. CDEP masks that and we have to be very careful we do not hide it.
Councils have a prime role as an employment centre for many Aboriginal people in remote areas. They have managers, they have infrastructure, administration, and if the federal government will give them enough funds for capital equipment and materials, and give people a real wage, not only will the councils and the communities benefit, Aboriginal people will benefit much more. They will then have the opportunity for real jobs. If they cannot find jobs on their community they can go elsewhere. The member for Arnhem mentioned this in relation to Bathurst Island - there are not enough jobs for people in some of the small communities. Eventually, people have to decide whether to move or not, as in all other parts of the world.
We cannot rely entirely on Commonwealth or government funds for these jobs. People will have to move. That does not mean it is not their home; they will have to find jobs. First, let us find people a job. It may not be the greatest job in the world but, if it can be used to develop community pride, pride in oneself, and give kids a better chance of living a good future, the government should make an effort. It should not be words and platitudes in parliament. Although we are the Northern Territory with 200 000 people, put continual pressure on Ms Macklin who, I believe, does not have her feet on the ground. People like her need to understand this will be disastrous. When people say CDEP will be replaced by real jobs, they dot not know what they are talking about. They do not have their feet on the ground; they do not understand reality. They talk to southern people to make it sound good and, in the end, it will come back to bite them. It will be the shame of the Commonwealth government.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I hope this government makes the effort. It is of the same political ilk. Make the effort to save jobs for Aboriginal people.
Mr KNIGHT (Business and Employment): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement today. I will make a few comments about the member for Nelson’s contribution, some of which I agree with, some not.
With respect to CDEP, I totally agree. I am not sure I will go to Canberra with him - Canberra is still getting over the Gerry and Dave show of last week ...
Mr Tollner: We did much good work last week. We might have a win.
Mr KNIGHT: Yes, it might be a win; however, it was an odd couple, Dad and Dave heading down to the big city ...
Mr Wood: Dave was the Independent candidate for Nelson, and I am the one who won it as the Independent.
Mr KNIGHT: That is right. I remember that.
I have quite a good understanding of CDEP. I ran a 300-person CDEP at Timber Creek. Coming from another resource centre …
Mr Giles: You got the sack from it.
Mr KNIGHT: I am one of a few members in this parliament who has worked in a remote community. Everyone is an expert; no one has bothered to work on one. Oh, no, it is too hard out there ...
Members interjecting.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Order! Minister, direct your comments through the Chair.
Mr KNIGHT: I have had five years on a remote community and everyone else is an expert.
I have a genuine understanding of CDEP and the benefit it brings to people. I grew CDEP with the council from 170 up to 300. Anyone who did not have a job and was of adult age was on CDEP, so the amount of contribution made in each community was tremendous. It was no work, no pay – strict rules; always tough rules to apply. It really had benefit. Coming from Julalikari Buramana, another outstation resource centre I worked for which did not have CDEP, trying to work with those outstations was very difficult.
The community development part of CDEP is probably the biggest benefit brought to a community. Getting small projects - fencing projects or whatever - uplifts the community, motivates people and gives them a sense of ownership and worth. If you ask people: ‘What do you do? What job do you have?’ ‘I am a CDEP worker’, they say with pride. They are on different teams doing different things.
It is difficult to transition people. If you have been unemployed, perhaps generational unemployment, going to a full-time job is a huge step into the work culture. However, CDEP, where people are doing four hours a day on a regular basis, allows people to have some work knowledge, a work uniform, and gain skills on the job. It is a great program. From my experience, it is vital for a community, vital for lifting the community up, and lifting people up to a level to jump to a full-time job.
Mr Giles: Do you condemn Jenny Macklin for her changes?
Mr KNIGHT: Member for Braitling, I will be working with them to help understand CDEP in the Northern Territory is a very successful program. The wages component of CDEP is Centrelink, so that proportion of money will change from being delivered by a CDEP provider to being delivered by Centrelink. The capital and recurrent cost is the same as the training programs government would have to run if it abolished the program. It is a very good program; the local project developed by local communities brings a great sense of ownership.
With respect to local government grants and local government funding, the member for Nelson knows a formula is developed by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, emulated by the Northern Territory Grants Commission, and it is per person with some other factors built into it. Basically, you get a set number for a set number of people and you have to work with that.
Mr Wood: The government said it would create more jobs.
Mr KNIGHT: I accept that. You receive a set amount of dollars per person in the community and you have to work with that. That is where CDEP can come in. CDEP was not developed by some bureaucrat in Canberra; it was the Beswick community in the 1960s or 1970s. The community said: ‘We do not want to sit down, we want to work’.
Mr Wood: Yes, it was over at Bathurst Island too.
Mr KNIGHT: Yes. It was a home-grown idea where people were sick of young people sitting down doing nothing.
With respect to SIHIP, I understand you are getting more information - this is the most scrutinised program in the world. They are trying to build houses and are receiving more and more requests for more and more information …
Mr Tollner: And it is still worse than the insulation debacle.
Mr KNIGHT: They spend more time with the accountability side …
Mr Tollner: You would think you would learn.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: … than doing the project. Basically, I agree. When we talk remote Indigenous, the answer in the short term has to be mobility because it is all about the economy. Jobs are created, whether in Darwin or Katherine, around the size of your economy. The economy will support certain businesses; those businesses will employ a certain number of people. That is the logic of an economy. Where you have a small economy, you cannot do that. Where you have a small economy, you cannot start a business because you do not have enough sales, and you cannot employ enough people to support those sales. It is quite logical - a small economy, few jobs.
The answer in the short term is mobility. Where you have the skills, the inspiration and the educational level you have to move to where the work is. We have this great culture in Australia of fly in/fly out. I went to Perth a couple of weeks ago; Perth airport has 10 million movements a year, people coming and going. That is the whole of Perth airport. The fly in/fly out airport at Perth has two million movements a year, so there is a population from Tasmania to the top of Cape York moving around. This is the culture of Australia, especially with the resources boom, so why can’t it happen in remote communities. After sittings, I have a …
A member: It happens in Darwin.
Mr Wood: Education is not up to it.
Mr KNIGHT: I agree with that. After sittings, I have a four day trip to one of my outstations, Emu Point – the member for Nelson would know the Sams family. I am taking those young blokes out to some mines and saying: ‘You can work there and you can bring your money home. Do not think the money is going to come in through the front door. You go out, get it, put it in your pocket and bring it home, spend it on your family. Spend it on getting a decent car for yourself to go backwards and forwards’.
What struck me about the Port Keats, Palumpa region is, back in the 1960s and 1970s, they would pack up at the start of the Dry Season and walk down through the valley, across the Fitzmaurice through the Koolendong Valley, work at Auvergne, work at all the stations in the VRD. As soon as the first Wet started they would go all the way back and sit down for the Wet Season. It is about mobility. It is a cultural fact Aboriginal people moved around where the resources were so why can we not have a population which moves?
That is an answer which poses problems. You have to have the education levels, as the member for Nelson mentioned. You have to have somewhere for people to go as well as home life skills. There are some challenges with mobility. Hopefully, we will have a major gas project in Darwin which will bring a range of workforce demands. Why cannot remote Indigenous people work there? Not the high school level; there will be few opportunities even with the current skilled workforce in Darwin to obtain those highly skilled gas project jobs. The semi-skilled - get a foot in the door, get some experience, get to live and work in the capital city, and get your foot in the door of independence.
That is the other problem. Moving to a job is about family understanding independence and ownership of money; all those things. The member for Nelson understands the money obligations and the things which bring problems to the work life. On Monday, I launched the Department of Business and Employment Indigenous Employment Strategy, which talks about understanding getting someone, perhaps an Indigenous person, in the door is the easiest part of their life because what happens after they go home, at night, or in the morning, can be more challenging than being at work. It is about understanding, respect and providing an opportunity. We have to keep doing it.
I thank the member for Nelson for his important contributions. I agree with him regarding employing remote Indigenous people in the Northern Territory Public Service. That is who I would like to see make up the 10% by 2012; getting young boys and girls from the bush into Darwin, or transition from Darwin back into jobs in their home community, or working in our regional centres. Let us give those boys and girls a start in the public service and they can go from there into the private sector or wherever they want.
I support the Chief Minister’s statement on the achievements of the Jobs Plan and our workforce priorities moving forward under Jobs NT, which I had the pleasure of launching. The Chief Minister outlined achievements to 2009 under the previous three Jobs Plans. I am pleased to outline to the House the cumulative achievements this government has delivered since the first Jobs Plan in 2003, which includes work to date under the new strategy Jobs NT. More than 2385 employers have received incentives for taking on apprentices and trainees in identified skill shortage positions and areas of need. Over 8564 apprentices and trainees have received Workwear/Workgear bonuses to assist with the cost of commencing their apprenticeship and traineeship.
In 2003, 2216 apprenticeships and traineeships commenced work, compared to 2927 in 2009. That is a 32% increase. Importantly, the number of trade apprentices in training has more than doubled from 2001 to a total of 17 056 in October 2010. There was an increase in Indigenous apprentices and trainees from 516 in 2001 to 760; just under 20% of all apprentices and trainees in the Territory - a great result. As at October 2010, approximately 27 200 additional jobs have been created - a 28% increase in the workforce since 2003. These achievements for employment in the Territory do not come by chance; they reflect the hard work done by this government. This government has an ongoing commitment to the development of a skilled workforce through education and training.
In May 2010, I launched the new workforce planning and development strategy: the Jobs NT Employment Strategy 2010-2012. The new employment strategy has been developed on robust information built up through previous job plans and consultation with industry. It has a deliberate focus on workforce planning and development with business and industry sectors, skilling and retaining Indigenous Territorians, and skilling and transitioning our young people. Jobs NT delivers opportunity and support for these priority groups so they may meet the challenges associated with labour demands, skills shortage and delivery of appropriate skills development and training. It is an investment in our future.
As the Chief Minister highlighted, in May 2010 this government committed $312m over three years to the Jobs NT plan. This commitment aims to support a sustainable workforce providing not only jobs and training, also valuable assistance for business, employers and jobseekers. This includes new funding of $11m over three years to continue this government’s ongoing commitment to support apprentices and trainees, school-based trainees, and increase Indigenous participation in the workforce. Jobs NT comprises $280m for skilling, training, student support and infrastructure administered by the Department of Education and Training; $25.85m for business support, growth, workforce development and planning; and $6.3m for enterprise development.
Supporting Territory businesses and employers is a key to successful employment of Territorians. Jobs NT has set a target to grow the size and skills of our workforce, including supporting businesses to either adopt or change some aspects of their business practices. $11.5m over three years has been committed by the Henderson Labor government to support this target through initiatives such as upskills, business coaching and business enterprise-centred workshops, ecoBiz NT and Territory Business Growth to name a few. $59m has been committed over three years to support employers to increase their intake of apprentices and trainees. As mentioned earlier, the Henderson Labor government set a new target in 2009 of an additional 10 000 apprentice and trainee commencements over four years.
I am pleased to say, as the Chief Minister highlighted today, we are on target. Some 5100 apprentices and trainees have commenced to date. While government can offer the necessary support, employers must be congratulated for their continued commitment to apprentices and trainees over the last two years. Even during the global economic crisis, employers remained committed to growing their own skilled trades.
The Chief Minister outlined a number of initiatives that are skilling our young people in schools. As a government, we believe that young Territorians should have the opportunity and support to develop knowledge and skills they need to participate in an effective workforce. Jobs NT sets a target of a 5% increase in the number of young Territorians achieving at Year 12 or equivalent Certificate II qualifications by 2012. The Henderson government is ensuring it not only has a range of strategies and initiatives to target this, but also a focus on transition for further education, training, and also employment pathways. Through the Beyond School Guarantee, senior secondary students who fulfil base requirements will be guaranteed a pathway to work or further education or training. $560 000 has been committed annually to support 40 school leavers attain their first degree. Currently, the Northern Territory public sector apprenticeship and traineeship scheme has been expanded to include 40 school-based apprentices and trainees annually, with a focus on the youth of the Territory growth towns.
As the Chief Minister mentioned in his statement, employment for all Territorians has been a priority for this government since coming to office in 2001. It is important to acknowledge the achievements of Indigenous Territorians in the labour market, and those organisations and businesses that are truly making a difference.
One example is the Larrakia Trade Training Centre. The centre showcases what can be achieved with collaboration across public and private sectors. The trade training centre is a result of the Australian and Henderson Territory Labor governments, Larrakia Development Corporation and the Ichthys joint venture partners, INPEX and TOTAL, working to support the development of an available and sustainable Indigenous labour force. My Department of Business and Employment is currently working with INPEX and has commenced planning for the future skills associated with the expansion of our gas manufacturing industry. The Indigenous employment strategy is an integral part of this plan.
This government’s 2009 A Working Future policy includes employment and economic development commitments. The local implementation plans, which have been developed in collaboration with communities, map out actions to stimulate economic development. Local implementation plans include commitments and pathways through education and targeted training to meaningful employment. The Indigenous Training and Employment Program, ITEP, supports employment initiatives in regional and remote areas.
Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move the minister be given an extension of time.
Motion agreed to.
Mr KNIGHT: Madam Speaker, we have committed $4m to the ITEP program to date. The program has sponsored 47 projects through the Territory, and assisted 40 organisations and businesses, including Indigenous non-profit organisations, and shires. It has achieved outcomes for 750 Indigenous people by way of employment and workforce development. It is a great program.
We have also implemented Jobs Guarantee, a guarantee of employment pathways into the Northern Territory public sector for students in growth towns who achieve a Year 12 certificate. That is a great step forward for young people in the growth towns trying to get work. We also have a range of initiatives in the bush. We are trying to attract more people into the Northern Territory.
I pick up on the comments by the member for Brennan who said everyone is leaving town. He was right, but …
Mr Giles: Have you got a graph? Here we go. Hold it up.
Mr KNIGHT: I have a graph. It is a lovely graph. You are right, people are leaving town; however, you have the wrong time period. You are talking about a period when the CLP was in office ...
Members interjecting.
Mr KNIGHT: You had a nett interstate migration. This is the important one - this yellow bit shows more people leaving than arriving. In the period 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 and rolling into 2002, the CLP wrecked the economy; people were packing up their utes and driving out of town. Then we have the period of the Labor government, and the population is growing and nett migration is in the positive.
I understand the member for Brennan worked for ABS? Is that correct?
Mr Chandler: That is correct.
Mr KNIGHT: You worked for ABS. He would be aware of nett interstate migration. I have some information from the ABS. During 2008-09, there were 359 900 movements of people interstate; a similar number of movements to those recorded in the previous year. In 2008-09, nett gains were also recorded, a positive – the Northern Territory had 750 people nett, which was more than Victoria and Tasmania - a nett gain in the Northern Territory. You would know, member for Brennan, you were in the ABS. You are misleading the House. A nett increase …
Mr Bohlin: Oh come on, withdraw!
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, I ask you to withdraw those comments, please.
Mr KNIGHT: Madam Speaker, I withdraw those comments. You were not telling the truth, member for Brennan. You would know this is made public. A media release was put out yesterday by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, member for Brennan – and he lives in Palmerston, a great city. The headline is, ‘Palmerston’s Fastest Growing Region:
- The population of the Local Government Area of Palmerston in the Northern Territory grew by 5.1% per annum between 2004-05 to 2008-09 to 29 346, making it the fastest growing Local Government Area according to the latest National Regional Profiles, released today by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS).
Mr Chandler: What do you consider low cost, you moron?
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Brennan!
Mr Chandler: I withdraw that.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you very much, member for Brennan.
Mr KNIGHT: Member for Brennan, we have massive land release because people are moving here for jobs. First you say everyone is leaving town, then you say we need to release more land because there are not enough houses for people who live here. We on this side know, and the ABS - the organisation you worked for - knows people are moving here. They are coming here because this government has run a tight and well-balanced budget. We have businesses and major projects coming here and we have people coming for the high paid jobs.
The major projects require higher skill levels, which is why we have programs in place allowing people to transition their skills, uplift their skills so they can share in these major projects. We are working with the business community around the labour force demands that will be created by the major projects. We will have more to say about that as things move on.
Madam Speaker, this is a great statement brought by the Chief Minister. It shows we are doing things right in the jobs area. We have the lowest rate of unemployment and the highest participation rates in the country. I acknowledge that we have to do much more in the bush. However, we have strategies in place; we have to implement them and get people to take them up.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Speaker, the member for Daly mentioned remote communities and people being able to fly in and fly out. I have mentioned this before in this House, and it is appropriate to reiterate some of the comments in relation to the prospect of Darwin becoming the only fly in/fly out capital city in the country.
I was talking to some local people recently who fly their staff in for a period of time and put them up in dormitory-style accommodation because they cannot find accommodation at a reasonable cost, and then fly them out. This is the hospitality industry, not mining companies in remote areas; businesses in Darwin and in the CBD flying staff in and then flying them out because they cannot find reasonable accommodation. We also have people flying in and out from mining operations in the Territory. They fly into Darwin, sit in the Qantas Club, and then fly to Bali, where they live.
The member for Daly suggested people in remote communities can come and go, earn their money and take it home. Because many people do not live here - and I am aware we have a global workforce in some of the skill sets we need, these are ordinary people who do not have the high skill sets required for some sites who reside in Bali because it is cheaper. They fly to Darwin, spend a couple of hours in the Qantas Club enjoying the hospitality, jump on the plane and two hours later are home in Bali. Where are they taking their money? Not to Darwin or the Territory. They are taking it out of the Territory because it is cheaper.
We in the Territory, and the government on our behalf, spend a great deal of money advertising interstate to attract people to the Territory. The title of this ministerial statement is: ‘Jobs in the Territory’ and that is great. We attract people; they come but cannot afford to live here.
I was doorknocking recently and spoke to people who had moved to Darwin several years ago. They are mid-level public servants. They came to Darwin, bought a boat, got a great house going, and they said: ‘We love the Territory but cannot afford the rent. Both of us are working, we have a couple of kids, but we cannot afford to live here’. Unfortunately, having spent enormous amounts of money moving people from interstate, these people will leave the Territory, take their experience and local knowledge with them, and we have the expense of replacing them. These people work in an industry where there will be a large number of resignations at Christmas for the same reason. It is the topic of discussion at their workplace. None of them can afford to pay the rent in Darwin. Life has become too hard, too difficult and they are moving.
I have been approached by a number of parents of apprentices. These young people cannot afford to leave home; they cannot afford to buy anything. They are stuck in a cycle because rents are horrendous, again brought on by the lack of land release. The member for Daly mentioned releasing suburb after suburb as if there are thousands of blocks of land for all and sundry to purchase an affordable block of land. I would like to know the address please; I will buy some for my kids! I do not know where they are. Could the member for Daly give us an address so we can buy affordable blocks of land? This puts pressure on young families and is tearing families apart. Young people, unfortunately, cannot stay and need to move interstate where they can afford to rent a house and, if they work hard, can afford to buy a home. Unfortunately, that is not the case in the Territory.
The family I mentioned previously had a nice boat in their yard and I said: ‘Obviously you like fishing’. They said: ‘Yes, we love fishing. The problem is most of our money goes in rent and the cost of living and we cannot afford to run the boat’. They could not afford to buy petrol to have a great weekend of fishing and enjoy what we had in the past, the great Territory lifestyle.
I understand many small businesses are struggling. Things are supposed to be good - the government tells us everything is great. We have an increase in population. Small business says they do not know where these extra people are; some are 30% down on this time last year, and in some months even more. The price of renting a property in the northern suburbs - I am more familiar with that area than Palmerston and Alice Springs - is so high families have to pay an ever increasing proportion of their income in rent which prevents them spending money on entertainment, on their kids going out to the movies, or having a good time.
In fact, the disposable income of families in the northern suburbs is on the way down. That is borne out by talking to business. Ask how things are going and they say: ‘We are struggling a little; power has gone up; the cost of running the business is going up; and our daily turnover is going down’. This is happening to the point where people are starting to lower stock levels; shut down anything which consumes power; turn the air-conditioner off when they can to save money because they are not making the dollars to pay the expensive bills.
The other aspect is numbers are shifting in relation to skills and services in the northern suburbs. It is interesting talking to schools and looking at the projected figures. Young families are not staying in the northern suburbs. There are vacant houses and school numbers are down - young families cannot afford to pay the rent.
You find mid-level public servants cannot afford to buy a house. People are saying: ‘I rent the place and there are three of us living here’. One person earning about $75 000 a year told me recently they could not afford to buy a house. Houses are so expensive they are out of reach for many people. People are struggling. Three people, all on good incomes, in a house struggling to pay rent. Their ability to enjoy the great Territory lifestyle has been stymied by the cost of rent and the cost of buying a home.
That was not the case a few years ago. The government says things are great; there are many jobs. However, how will we keep people here to fill those jobs? The number of job vacancies I am hearing will occur this Christmas is alarming. In the New Year there will be more vacancies; we will struggle. Government will need to spend enormous amounts of money advertising to attract people. When people ring estate agents and discover rental costs they lose interest. Why has this happened? The lack of land has forced prices up; there are not enough houses; we have people living in caravans; people living in small rooms underneath elevated homes paying exorbitant prices.
A member: How will 1000 soldiers affect the nett migration?
Madam SPEAKER: Order! The member for Sanderson has the call. Order!
Mr STYLES: It affects a range of things. This is a bad time of the year. Try to get a refrigeration mechanic fix an air-conditioner or a fridge. You cannot find one. A group of refrigeration mechanics were renting a house in a suburb in my electorate and all have left the Territory because it is too expensive to live here. Five refrigeration mechanics have left the Territory.
Where will we find the people for the great projects the government says are coming on line? All sorts of things are in the pipeline. The government says all is wonderful and there is going to be great growth and expansion. Where will all these people live? What will that do to house prices? People who built this Territory have children struggling to get a deposit to buy a home. Every week, because of the lack of land release and lack of planning by the government, they are forced further out of the market to the point where they leave.
When these big projects come on line what is going to happen? Darwin will become a fly-in/fly-out city. Civil engineers and people who understand the land release process will tell you it cannot be done overnight. They say planning is not there. We hear the rhetoric; the planning is not there. The government says it is; it has been telling Territorians that for years but we do not see the results. We see it across so many different areas. We are talking about child protection today, and we see the failures there. A private member’s bill will be introduced tomorrow regarding smoke alarms. This is as a result of a coronial inquiry. There is a lack of action by the government on that issue. What is the government doing for young people desperately trying to buy a house? What is it doing for people who want to enjoy the Territory lifestyle, yet are hampered by the lack of planning by this government?
I have three adult children living in the Territory. They struggle and it is up to parents - most parents I talk to want their children to remain in the Territory. Even though their kids have good jobs, they still struggle to get into the housing market and parents are assisting them. If you want to keep your family here, increasingly parents have to help children with deposits and payments, and help keep them going for a few years until they are on their feet. That is fine if parents are in a position to do that.
Many Territorians struggle to survive with the high cost of living and the high cost of rent brought on by a lack of planning by the government. They struggle to survive, let alone help their children. It saddens me when I have people sitting in my office crying. They are struggling to survive, their kids are struggling, and they ask: ‘Why can we not get assistance? Why can we not get into a Housing Commission home? Why will the government not help us?’ I have to make suggestions and write letters to the minister. People writing letters for the minister are trying to do the right thing and give people hope but the waiting list is enormous.
Madam Speaker, when we say jobs in the Territory, we need real action across the board from the government, not pieces of paper which say how good it is. People are struggling - good Territorians; children of people who built the Territory. Government needs to have a close look at itself and say: ‘We desperately need more land released; we need to do more for young Territorians’. When we offer people jobs in the Territory we need to offer support services such as health, education, law and order, and all the things to ensure people enjoy the wonderful Territory lifestyle.
Mr HAMPTON (Central Australia): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on jobs in the Northern Territory. My contribution will be in two parts: one from a personal work background - I had 12 years experience in the employment and training area before coming into parliament; and the other part is in my portfolio responsibilities through Natural Resources and Environment, Parks and Wildlife, as well as Sport and Recreation, and ICT, and the many opportunities coming from those portfolios, particularly jobs in the Northern Territory and creating more jobs for future generations.
Turning to my work experience, back in 1989 I began working with the Commonwealth Employment Service as a trainee AO1. I joined through public service entry exams, and it was probably my first real job. That is the important part the public service has played in the Northern Territory, particularly for Indigenous people. It is where many of us had our first real job. The member for Nelson said the public service has a very critical role in Indigenous employment and creating further opportunities for Indigenous Territorians. For me, starting at the bottom of the public service as a trainee AO1 in CES 1989 was a big step. The public employment area in the Commonwealth Public Service changed names several times over my 10 years in the CES.
That is one of the serious problems we have when talking about creating more jobs for Indigenous people. We have governments - more at the Commonwealth level - continually changing policy and programs when it comes to the public employment and labour market. People in the bush often become lost and overwhelmed with the changes; not only the names of departments and names of different labour market programs. When we talk about CDEP we are talking about work for the dole. In 1989, there was a Training for Aboriginals Program, with two smaller programs under that policy. One, known as A31, was a work experience type-program, where employers could receive a wage subsidy of 100% to employ an Indigenous person for six weeks, and another program called A30, which was more for longer-term projects over three months or so. The government would provide a subsidy to employers for a particular project.
My first real job was through the Commonwealth Public Service and over the 10 years I worked there I saw various changes to Commonwealth employment and training policy and programs which, in the Northern Territory, have had a significant impact on Indigenous employment.
Listening to the Chief Minister’s contribution, and to my colleagues on this side of the House, we have much to celebrate in employment in the Northern Territory. For me, there are still many challenges in the bush we need to tackle to achieve true equity in jobs in the Northern Territory.
Going back to my personal experiences in the CES, there were many changes over the 10 years I worked there, particularly during the era of Paul Keating being Prime Minister. We had labour market programs and …
Mr Tollner: The golden years, Karl.
Mr HAMPTON: Well, they were golden years because …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr HAMPTON: I was probably fortunate, member for Fong Lim; I had worked in the public service during two completely different styles of government. We had the Keating era, then the John Howard era, where we saw privatisation. We saw privatisation of employment during the Howard years, particularly public employment. That had a detrimental effect on Indigenous employment, particularly in the bush. As I said, through my 10 years in the CES I was fortunate enough to go through two different eras of government. Not being too critical, but the biggest changes to public employment we saw in Australia’s history were during the Howard years when he took on the public service. He went in with an iron fist and cut back on public service numbers. That was his objective. What occurred was the privatisation of public employment, which had a significant impact on delivering employment programs in remote communities. There were problems with training for Aboriginals program and subsidies - 100% for work experience prior to Howard - and the beginning of the national employment program.
We saw privatisation of many remote employment and training programs which serviced many remote communities in the Northern Territory. Privatisation of public employment services under Howard saw a withdrawal of public employment services to the bush. That had a significant impact on the situation we have today. I was at the coalface; I was delivering some of these programs to remote communities in Alice Springs and around Central Australia for 10 years and saw firsthand the significant impacts of privatising public employment. Not only did it have a big impact on the office in Alice Springs - the CES had something like 60 staff working in Alice Springs to deliver these programs, when it was privatised, staff dwindled to 10 or 15. That has a significant impact when talking about delivering employment and training programs to people in such a vast and remote area as Central Australia. That is my personal experience. We are still seeing the ramifications of Howard privatising the CES to employment national and the Job Network today, particularly in remote communities.
I also had the opportunity to work for a mining company and for the Central Land Council, particularly focusing on Indigenous employment. My year of experience at the Granites with Normandy Mines when it was run by Robert de Crespigny was during an era where mining companies became focused on being good corporate citizens, focusing on Indigenous employment and supporting Indigenous businesses. It was a great time to be employed by the mining industry and my short time at the Granites saw me setting up the Indigenous Affairs department, working with the land councils and focusing on getting Indigenous employment up to 15% at the Granites and Tanami gold mines; that was a challenge. The member for Daly talked about his experiences in managing a CDEP program and the enormous challenges in getting Indigenous people into real jobs and keeping them there. I had that experience during my time at the Granites Gold Mine.
We talk about the challenges – numeracy and literacy are right up there in getting Indigenous people to a standard where the mining industry is able to employ them. During my time there were challenges with young Indigenous men holding a job, having to deal with jealousy issues with their partners and being away from their home community. We made a conscious effort to bring those Indigenous people into the mining culture by putting them on the same roster, two weeks on one week off, which provided challenges. Sometimes we were not flexible enough.
We focused on getting people into jobs on the same rosters and routines as the other miners. That presented even more challenges because jealousy is a significant issue for young Indigenous men; having to work at a mine site and live in a mining camp away from home. Two weeks on, one week off is hard enough for non-Indigenous workers but for young Indigenous men it presented real problems and had a significant impact on retaining young men after their first two weeks and their first pay. That is the other big issue; many of these young Indigenous men came from not only illiterate backgrounds, but from backgrounds where they did not know how to spend money. They have cultural obligations to support a larger extended family group. They have issues because of their cultural obligations, whether it is through business, ceremonies, sorry business, that sort of thing.
There is a range of things the members for Nelson and Daly mentioned which are real issues. We can talk about success - and many of my colleagues have talked about success – however, in my experience of 10 years in the public service through the CES, 12 months at the Granites Gold Mine and the 12 months I worked for the Central Land Council focusing on the mining industry, there are still huge challenges for us as a government, and for the private sector, in getting Indigenous people out of the too hard basket. That was the title given to these people in the CES. Most were long-term unemployed Indigenous people. We would put them in the too hard basket and often they would be left there for many years. I suppose many of those people are still there. The challenges are there. As a government I have confidence in some of the policies we are bringing out in A Working Future, the growth towns …
A member: Which ones?
Mr HAMPTON: A Working Future, the growth towns. There are huge challenges.
Mr Giles: Which ones do you not have confidence in?
Mr HAMPTON: There are obligations, member for Braitling, both on government and the private sector. Government cannot do this alone. We need to bring the community with us. We need to talk to those young fellows about some of the challenges they face with real jobs.
When I worked with Normandy, and with the Central Land Council, I learnt we do not talk much about encouraging Indigenous people to set up their own businesses - encourage Indigenous entrepreneurs. I was involved in a joint venture with the Granites and Roche Brothers, who were operating the open cut mine contract, and with Yuendumu Mining Company and Sid Rusca, and it was for a joint venture on the backfill project with Callie Underground goldmine.
The whole experience showed me there is a great deal of work to do with the private sector. The mining, supply and service contracts are sometimes so huge it is overwhelming for Indigenous contractors to break into that environment. As a government, we have to encourage Indigenous contractors to access the supply contracts, particularly in the mining industry. We also have to encourage Indigenous entrepreneurs. That is one area I would like to see our government focus more on. Much of that has to do with government procurement and tender processes; however, much is in the private sector. Much is about negotiating these things in mining leases; it is one area we need to work on. My short time working in the mining industry saw the setting up of one joint venture which resulted in some jobs, although it is not there now. It probably lasted five or six years then the joint venture ceased to continue.
There are many more challenges in the bush. I would like to see government focus more on the too hard basket; getting Indigenous workers out of that basket into real jobs and it is the responsibility of everyone. It is the responsibility of government and the private sector. That is why, when minister for Regional Development, I worked on the Indigenous Economic Development Strategy. We had some ambitious targets and outcomes I wanted to see achieved in relation to the strategy.
I will mention those targets. As a government, we have set that 3000 Indigenous Territorians will commence employment across the private and public sectors by 2012. The second outcome is 10% Indigenous employment in the Northern Territory Pubic Service and my colleague, the member for Daly, has recently launched our Indigenous Employment Strategy. The third ambitious target was to set up 200 new Indigenous businesses. Since the portfolio change I do not know where we are with that. I will be finding out and hopefully my colleague, the member for Arnhem, will inform us during her contribution. I also wanted to provide tax incentives for not only Indigenous businesses, but for people to create business opportunities on Indigenous lands using tax incentives to achieve that. In my time as the Regional Development minister I pushed for some things, but it is very difficult. We still have a long way to go.
From a personal point of view, I had good role models. My father worked continuously in the bush as a grader operator/plant operator, and my mother worked as a domestic in the hospital. Two or three generations of Indigenous kids do not have those models, particularly when it comes to work ethic. They are the principles and foundations we need to get back to and provide these young Indigenous kids with good role models and leadership, and the profiling my colleague, the member for Arnhem, is doing in the growth towns and the opportunities that exist.
I also join my colleague, the member for Johnston, in his comments on SIHIP, in Alice Springs particularly. As Minister for Central Australia, I have taken the opportunity to visit many of the town camps and look at the success. We should not be ashamed to say some things are working. Some are having success ...
Mr Tollner: Some things.
Mr HAMPTON: If you get out to Morris Soak and the Trucking Yards in the electorate of Braitling, you will see young Indigenous men doing apprenticeships on SIHIP’s projects. That is success and we should be proud of it. Talking to those young men, as my colleague, the minister for Housing has, they are very proud of their achievements. We should not be knocking them down every time they achieve. There is a long way to go. Going to Morris Soak and the Trucking Yards and talking to those young Indigenous men, they are as proud of their getting apprenticeship as I was when I got my traineeship as an AO1 in the CES so many years ago.
I agree with the member for Johnston on the success of the transformation plan. We can talk about how many houses we have built and renovated, but the Indigenous employment target has been well and truly achieved in this project. It is around 30% at the moment. There is a role to play. There are flow-on effects of programs such as SIHIP in the town camps. The minister also talked about Mt Gillen House in Alice Springs, where I had the pleasure of handing over keys with minister Macklin not long ago. That is providing accommodation; Aboriginal Hostels is managing that. It has created many jobs for Indigenous apprentices. We have Percy Court, the accommodation park, the lodge. Many things are happening in Alice Springs and it has been a great boost for the local economy.
The Chamber of Commerce recently held a forum with 30 to 40 businesses attending. The business community was right behind that. It has been a successful program, and I am sure there are going to be great outcomes. The Indigenous employment outcome has been fantastic.
Turning to my portfolio of Parks and Wildlife, it is very important this government has invested strongly in the infrastructure of our parks. We know how important they are to tourism and the regions, particularly in joint management with traditional owners. It will create more jobs for people on country. The Henderson Labor government has invested heavily in our parks, and I will mention a few: $7.5m over the last few years for upgrades at Litchfield National Park; $5.2m for upgrades of Leanyer; $2.1m for …
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I move that the member be given an extension pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr HAMPTON: Madam Speaker, I thank colleagues for their support.
Going back to parks: $2.1m …
Mr Conlan: This has been going for five hours.
Mr HAMPTON: Sorry?
Mr Conlan: Five hours.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Minister, you have the call.
Mr HAMPTON: What did you say?
Mr Conlan: The statement has been going for five hours.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, you have the call.
Mr HAMPTON: It is an important statement.
Mr Conlan: It is not an important statement; it is a joke.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Greatorex! Order!
Mr HAMPTON: I am entitled to speak, as is everyone else, without getting …
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask the minister direct his comments through the Chair.
Madam SPEAKER: Indeed, member for Braitling. I am sure if there was not the cross-chatter it would not be an issue. Minister, you have the call.
Mr HAMPTON: This government has invested strongly in our parks: $2.1m to upgrade essential services at Nitmiluk in my electorate of Stuart; $3m on upgrades to Howard Springs; and $3m to the West MacDonnell Visitors Centre. Many dollars have also been put in via capital works, minor new works, and repairs and maintenance across the Territory every year.
Turning to my sporting portfolio, we have invested strongly in sporting infrastructure projects including: $4.2m in the athletics track redevelopment at Arafura Stadium; $4.6m into the drag strip upgrade at Hidden Valley; $3m to other major sporting infrastructure works at Hidden Valley; $1.62m for upgrades at TIO Stadium; $495 000 for upgrades at Traeger Park; $8.1m into the aquatic centre in Alice Springs; as well as significant upgrades and works towards the Katherine sporting precinct and the Purkis Reserve in Tennant Creek. We continue to roll-out these job-creating projects with new construction due to commence in the coming months, including: $29m Palmerston sporting facility; $13.6m at Palmerston Water Park, and many other opportunities and commitments to our growth towns.
Turning to my Environment portfolio, we have the EnvironmeNT Grants program; the Environment and Heritage division provides operational support to a range of environmental non-government organisations such as the Environment Centre of the Northern Territory, Arid Lands Environment Centre, and Keep Australia Beautiful Council of the Northern Territory. Operational grants support these organisations in a number of ways, including providing the funding to employ personnel, while the Environment and Heritage division provides operational support to the Top End COOLmob and Desert COOLmob in Alice Springs, which is utilised to employ program managers for these organisations.
The Environment and Heritage division is also leading the establishment of the Northern Territory Cash for Containers scheme. The scheme will operate throughout the Northern Territory, and I will be introducing legislation this week. It is expected to create new jobs in urban, regional and remote areas in the recovery and recycling of beverage containers. Preliminary estimates are approximately 50 jobs will be created at collection depots across the Northern Territory. On my trip to Adelaide earlier this year I was able to visit several depots and the super collectors - a very labour intensive-type environment - and I am sure those jobs will be suitable for many people in the growth towns.
Through the Active Remote Communities funding program of the Indigenous Sports Unit, we provide funding for 57 community sport and rec officers across the Northern Territory. The agency is working with the Department of Education and Training to develop a pilot program to use art, sport, and Parks and Wildlife concepts in the school curriculum. I look forward to working with my colleague, the member for Barkly, on that as a means to attract and retain remote Indigenous students in school. Numeracy and literacy levels are so important in getting those kids into real jobs.
Mr Conlan: What is your action plan, Karl?
Mr HAMPTON: You are so cheeky and so rude.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr HAMPTON: The Alice Springs Desert Park has developed an apprentice work ready program for new apprentices commencing in the Northern Territory Public Service. This is an eight-day program which builds upon the successes of the Desert Park. This offer was extended to all Northern Territory Public Service agencies in Alice Springs last week.
Madam Speaker, I could go on talking from my personal experience of 10 years in the Commonwealth Public Service at the CES, in the private sector with Normandy at the Granites, the CLC, particularly in the mining industry, and through my portfolios. I support the Chief Minister’s statement. I believe there are many challenges ahead, particularly to get people in the bush out of the too hard basket.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, the Northern Territory government is overseeing a banana economy underpinned by welfare and social programs, with a complete lack of focus on economic direction, industry growth and job creation. Today’s statement is reflective of exactly that. We talk about jobs created in a welfare sector, how much money in programs the government has put in, but nothing about what it has done for industry development and job creation, nothing at all.
When we look at jobs we have to look at the government. When this statement came out at 11.45 pm yesterday, or whatever irresponsible time it was, I thought what a perfect opportunity to talk about the government and its performance. We have 12 members of the Labor government of the Northern Territory, and a number of ministers who are doing a poor job. When you put that in the context of a banana economy underpinned by social programs, the welfare class, and a lack of attention on the economy and job creation, it is important to reflect on what has been said tonight, and what ministers in this government continue to say.
The Chief Minister often talks about his portfolio of Police, and law and order, in the Chamber and publicly. The Minister for Alcohol Policy is also the Treasurer and Minister for Racing, Gaming and Licensing. She talks about alcohol policy. We know the Enough is Enough campaign is happening, and some proposed alcohol reforms in Alice Springs to limit alcohol supply up to 2 pm - another socialist regime coming into place in the Northern Territory. The Minister for Education and Training cannot get kids to school, cannot educate people and has NAPLAN results going backwards. He is also the Minister for Public Employment with the public service unhappy, and the Minister for Public and Affordable Housing - we know the situation with housing in the Territory and are all aware of SIHIP, which happens to be another welfare program in the Northern Territory.
Ms Walker: Houses for people.
Mr GILES: It is not building houses, member for Nhulunbuy. The Minister for Health has problems in the hospital system and child protection. Fortunately, he attempts to do something in his mining portfolio, but he cannot get the other parts right.
We have the member for Daly, the Minister for Essential Services, with the lights going out, donkeys hitting power lines, snakes on the lines, and so forth. We do not hear him talking about business, employment and job creation. He did not speak about that tonight - he spoke about how good CDEP is. That was his speech: how good CDEP is; nothing about job creation. He does not talk about Asian Relations, he has no idea of Defence Support and how we develop that industry, and he seems to have completely forgotten senior and young Territorians. When the member for Barkly was minister for senior and young Territorians we heard about it.
We have the member for Arnhem, the Minister for Local Government, which is a complete shambles. The shire system in the Territory is an absolute disgrace. She does not talk about Regional Development. The member for Stuart spoke about when he was Minister for Regional Development; he did much more in that area. Indigenous Development – she will speak on a statement but there is not much happening. The thing we hear most from the member for Arnhem is her statements on statehood. As if we are going to achieve statehood when they run such a shambles here!
The minister for turds in the harbour, the member for Stuart, we do not hear …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, I ask you to withdraw that, thank you. This is the parliament, member for Braitling.
Mr GILES: I withdraw. The minister for the poo shooter, as it is commonly known in voter land. We do not hear anything on climate change. All we hear about is E. coli and bacteria levels in the water. The member for Barkly, minister for corrections, seems to talk so much about prisons.
There is not much in this House about jobs and job creation. When the ministers have to look after their portfolios they are missing in action. The minister for SIHIP missing in action and the CEO had to represent him. The Minister for Child Protection was in China. The minister for bringing people back to Yuendumu from Adelaide was sunbaking in New Caledonia - all missing in action. When we talk about jobs, it is important to talk about ministers who are not doing their job.
I will reflect quickly on something the member for Stuart said. He spoke about the importance of the housing developments in town camps, and particularly spoke about Morris Soak and the Trucking Yards. He made assertions being negative about the SIHIP program is being negative to those employed. That is not the case at all. Those people should be in training; they should be in long-term jobs. The issue is the amount of waste which has occurred getting those houses built. The fact you spent $500m building 88 houses is what you should be looking at.
You talk about tax incentives on Indigenous lands. Tax incentives and economic zones are fantastic ideas; however, you have just had $672m, now $1.2bn, to build 750 houses despite the fact you are getting rid of 750 houses, when that money could have gone into infrastructure with public/private partnerships or some industry and business sector development to create jobs.
You talk about Indigenous people getting jobs. The member for Daly thinks CDEP is his employment program and is how to do things as Minister for Business and Employment. You had money sitting there you could have used.
A debate will happen tomorrow in relation to the NBN. Stacks of money will be spent in the Territory on the NBN. We should be considering how best to utilise that money for job creation, economic growth and productivity gains in the Northern Territory. It is not just about laying the fibre-optic cable. There are other ways to do business. I know you will vote it down because you have Senator Conroy in Canberra and have to follow political lines.
You cannot think outside the welfare program prism; you cannot think in an economic context. That is what you should be thinking about. You had the opportunity to do this with SIHIP, you will have it again with NBN in the Territory - will it deliver anything here?
For all future SIHIP spending you should stop the alliance model, work our public/private partnerships with the shires and get long-term investment into communities, not just a slap and tickle house job.
It is interesting reading the CTC report the member for Nelson presented earlier today. The CTC is saying they want to move away from the alliance model and look to the shires. That is what is coming out of the report. The minister for SIHIP has made jokes about how I believe we should remove the alliance model. Now we are seeing the CTC - two members of government sit on the CTC - say the same thing. You have to look at how industries are developed in the Northern Territory. We are in a position to …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr GILES: I cannot hear. I have noise in the back of my ear.
The Territory is a banana economy. We are in a prime position with direct links to Asia. We have the opportunity for expansion, to become part of Asia - not to forget Australia – we need to think about things. The minerals and gas developments in Western Australia - the four major projects - and the two in Queensland are going to starve the Northern Territory of labour. The member for Sanderson was right when he said the Territory is becoming a fly-in/fly-out town. Some of our most senior bureaucrats fly-in/fly-out on a weekly basis. I will not get into the housing side of it - how the member for Johnston has failed in housing, along with Chief Minister and all his merry men and women.
We have a perfect opportunity to redirect ourselves. We should not forget how, in 2008, the Chief Minister went to an election 19 months early on the back of an impending INPEX announcement. If we are not careful we will have no workers in the Territory because they have all gone to Western Australia and Queensland. There is a need for urgent release of land across the Territory so we can get housing supply in affordable markets, where the market will still determine the price and the supply will not have a negative impact on current housing stocks but will ensure we have a plethora of housing to bring people to town. We can then work on our construction industries and other areas rather than the industries we specialise in at the moment. We can have a complete paradigm shift in how the Territory operates from being a mendicant state to one where we are contributors to the Australian economy, not just receivers - people with their hands out all the time.
It is interesting to look at some of the 2006 census data. Whether it is Alligator, Barkly, Bathurst, Melville, Central NT, Daly, Darwin City or East Arnhem, look at employed persons by industry by those statistical divisions. The leader in employment across the board is public administration and safety, then healthcare and social assistance, then education and training. You have to go a long way down the list to find private sector employment. Warranted, jobs in education and training are important, and public administration and safety are necessary; however, we have to have jobs in the private sector to contribute to the rest of the economy.
All the debate around the world on climate change and the need for action on carbon is very important. Whilst I do not always agree with the different strategies, climate change is real and we need to do things. We have a significant opportunity in the centre of the Territory to develop research and development industries around solar, and how we can improve solar, not just for Alice Springs, but Australia as a continent, its population and the world. There is an opportunity to move into research and development in many fields, whether it is uranium mining, nuclear enrichment, solar technology, or a number of other things to assist in the climate change debate which is very topical around the world. We should be looking at these things, not putting our head in the sand like the Chief Minister did at the Araluen by-election, discounting uranium because he thought it was politically exciting.
This is an industry opportunity, subject to environmental safety nets, we have thrown out. We see at Roper River, with Sherwin Iron and Western Desert Resources, opportunities for iron ore and the potential export. I have not heard anyone talk of those positive opportunities. Of course, everything goes through environmental protection; however, these are massive opportunities. We talk about opportunities for Indigenous employment. I am firm believer in economic zones, and I have spoken about these many times.
Where you have economies and jobs, we should be turning off the welfare tap. The welfare tap should be working where we cannot develop jobs or cannot get industry working. Where there is an industry with jobs - and Roper is a prime example of where we can develop an industry; whether we need to build a train line, new port services in the Roper, or we come through the port - wherever that may be - there is an opportunity to build jobs and get people off the dole.
We need to refine the housing system to a private market housing system so we do not have to keep putting SIHIP against the wall all the time. This is how we reform our economy, reform the Territory and look forward. We have to do these things. We do not have any champions on the other side leading the approach. All I have heard tonight, apart from a few things from the member for Stuart, maybe one or two things if the member for Barkly speaks, has been about welfare, programs, Indigenous employment and CDEP. Get over it! CDEP should be a tool in a suite of services, not the be-all-and-end-all. Let us get everyone on CDEP and put our hands in our pocket and play tiddlywinks. What are we doing? Pocket billiards? This is ridiculous.
I cannot go past tax incentives the member for Stuart spoke about; the opportunity to develop our economic zones, work through tax incentives. You, as a minister, have to do things. It is a difficult area - I worked in this area in Canberra years before I came to the Territory. It is tough to get this through. Many are against it, especially interstate jurisdictions. You can work on this. Combine economic zones, taxation zones and welfare zones and say: no more welfare; there are jobs here. There are jobs in Alice Springs, and there are jobs in the Territory. The reason things were bad in the mid- to late-1990s was because we came out of the Paul Keating recession we had to have. It became better, not because of the economic brainwave of the Labor government of the Territory, but because John Howard was in Canberra enacting economic reform with Peter Costello. We were getting jobs; we were getting change. That is what it was all about.
I would not be waving the Chief Minister flag saying: ‘Look at what we saved’. There is another reason, and the member for Sanderson touched on it. If you do not have a job in the Territory you cannot afford to live, unless you are lucky enough to get a SIHIP house, a tin shed, a sleeping bag or a tent, depending on where you are. Unemployment is low because people who do not have a job or cannot afford rent are leaving.
We talk about job creation; let us talk about childcare. I touched on it in the last sittings several times. Childcare across the Territory is in a bad position. A working family needs childcare. This is an issue across the Territory not just in my electorate of Braitling. My colleagues, the members for Greatorex and Araluen, experience this. It is a problem in the member for Barkly’s area, the member for Katherine, and through Palmerston and Darwin. There are better solutions in remote communities now than previously. As part of the intervention, there were some changes with childcare and preschool. In the major communities and townships it is a problem because there are not enough places. There are not enough workers to fill the centres, and if new centres were built, there would not be enough workers. Training for childcare is also difficult in the Northern Territory.
I recently received an e-mail, as have my colleagues in Alice Springs, from constituents in Larapinta who have raised the idea of getting the wives of workers at Pine Gap involved in the childcare industry. That is a fantastic idea, and I would like the Minister for Central Australia to consider how that might be done. It will be difficult because you cannot receive training for childcare in Alice Springs.
This is as about jobs, which relates to Kevin Rudd and his working families. I have a flyer - FaHCSIA 1422.0309, the Australian government Department of Family and Community Services, Making a Difference titled, ‘What happens when a childcare service does not have enough places for families wanting care?’ It goes through the priority list, which is very important in the context of jobs and how we support our economic growth. It says:
- The Australian government funds child care with a major purpose of meeting the child care needs of Australian families. However, the demand for child care sometimes exceeds supply in some locations. When this happens, it is important for services to allocate available places to those families with the greatest need for child care support. The Australian government has determined guidelines for allocating places in these circumstances. These guidelines apply to centre-based long day care, in-home care, family day care and outside school hours care services. They set out the following three levels of priority, which child care services must follow when filling vacant places.
It is important to put that in context. In the context of jobs and working families, this is how child care organisations have to allocate placements:
priority 1 - a child at risk of serious abuse or neglect;
priority 2 - a child of a single parent who satisfies, or of both parents who satisfy, the work/training/study test under section 14 of the Family Assistance Act;
No mention of jobs or working families.
Ms PURICK: Madam Speaker, I move that the member be granted an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, I advise you the House adjourns at 9 pm; you can see how you are going at that time.
Mr GILES: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
priority 3 - any other child.
- Within these main categories priority should also be given to the following children:
children in families on lower incomes;
children in families with a non-English speaking background;
children in socially isolated families; and
children of single parents.
Not once does it mention working families. I am not denigrating people in those categories but surely we have a responsibility to look after children from working families.
This statement is about jobs and I have not heard anyone talk about childcare and how we look after working families. I have not heard anyone talking about the people who have to leave the Territory because they cannot find childcare. We hear about housing when raised by the Country Liberals, who are socially conscious and have an economic focus on the Territory; however, we do not hear about childcare. I encourage the Minister for Central Australia to look into the American non-employed workforce in Alice Springs being trained to work in childcare to help address the need for childcare in the Territory, particularly in Alice Springs.
We heard much about jobs for Indigenous Territorians and the minister for Employment, the member for Daly, spoke about how important CDEP is for the Territory and how good it is to get Aboriginal people on CDEP. It would have been better if he spoke about how many Aboriginal employees are trapped in a denigrating employment position. Many Aboriginal employees work in positions of ACPOs or teacher assistants and are never given the opportunity to move into full-time jobs. People have been Indigenous education assistants for 20 years and cannot break through to become a teacher - have never been able to set a class lesson because they have not been given the opportunity. It would be good if the minister for Education could talk about the training received at Batchelor in a school-related environment with opportunities for teacher assistants to move between communities rather than being stuck in one community because that is where they were trained. It would be good to transition people from Aboriginal Community Police Officers to police officers.
I would have liked to have seen much more about job development in this statement. If the great, big, white hope of INPEX does not happen, what is our future? Many people across the Territory and I, as a representative, wonder if INPEX is coming. What if it does not? We have hung on this hope for two years. What if INPEX does not come? What is our future? What will we do? We have not seen a growth in our minerals mining sector in the Territory like Western Australia, Queensland, and other parts of the world. We have seen a socialist, green-grabbing preference notion put forward by government which sends out signals it is anti-mining and anti-uranium.
This is a prime opportunity to be saviours of the climate change debate. I encourage government to get on board and have a say about the future of the climate in the world, how we address greenhouse gases, how we solve power problems, how we ensure the developing nations are not emitting so much gas it will be to the detriment of all societies, including Australia, including the Northern Territory and all electorates within it.
I encourage the government to change its paradigm and move towards a job creation and industry development paradigm rather than this socialist, welfare-based, mendicant status where it seeks to take money from the federal government and manage programs so poorly nothing seems to change. We end up with a negative debate about the failures of government. I would love to be celebrating how …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, it is now 9 pm. You may finish if you wish to.
Mr GILES: Madam Speaker, I will finish at a later date.
Debate suspended.
ADJOURNMENT
Madam SPEAKER: The Assembly is now adjourned, pursuant to Standing Order 41A.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, the government is investing more into the Territory Arts and Museums sector than ever before. The NT Arts budget has grown steadily since 2001 and support for arts organisations has also increased.
Statistics compiled by the National Centre for Culture and Recreation reveal that the per capita spend on arts in the Northern Territory in 2008-09 was $45.31, a full $12.17 above the national average of $33.14 per person. The Northern Territory per capita investment for total cultural funding, which also includes libraries, arts, museums and environmental heritage, is $324.34 per person, more than twice that of any other jurisdiction and approximately three times the national average. A quick comparison of budget papers shows that in 2000-01 the estimated funding for Arts NT was $3.5m and by 2009-10 the funding for arts and screen arts is $11m.
The addition of screen arts reflects the establishment of the Northern Territory Film Office, a new initiative of this government recognising the value of this sector. We have boosted funding available through the Northern Territory Arts Grants Program from $2.2m in 2000-01 to $5.9m in 2009-10.
These figures relate to Northern Territory funds only and do not include the additional resources that come from the valuable relationships the government has developed with external agencies, such as the Australia Council for the Arts, bringing in extra funding also managed through the program for the benefit of Territory artists and arts organisations.
In 2000-01, the total paid for annual funding to 13 arts organisations, including the Darwin Festival, was $1.6m. By comparison, in 2009-10, the total paid to support 25 arts organisations, not including festivals, was $2.9m with an additional $1.1m paid to the Darwin and Alice Springs Festivals in that period, representing an increase of $2.4m.
I take this opportunity to commend the Darwin Festival on its impressive growth and success. The popularity of the festival with the community is a credit to the organisers, and the linkages with the national Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Art Awards and the Annual Indigenous Music Awards, makes this a very special time of year in Darwin for art and music lovers.
The most recent increases to the Arts Grants Program include an increase of $250 000 per annum to the Indigenous program, including $150 000 allocated to an Indigenous music touring circuit; an additional $200 000 per annum for remote regional and community festivals; additional funding of $100 000 per annum for arts projects; and a further $325 000 was granted for the lease of Chambers Crescent over the period 2008-11 through Darwin Community Arts.
In addition to these increases in funding to the sector, I am pleased to announce that I will soon release two very important policy documents developed after extensive community consultation right across the Territory. My personal thanks and acknowledgement go to all the committed Territorians who gave their time, knowledge and experience to influence and guide these consultations in a manner that has resulted in policies and strategies unique and appropriate for the Northern Territory.
The first, Living Arts, starts from the proposition that arts and culture should be central to the life of Territorians. Through Living Arts we seek to place arts within the central circle of the Territory 2030 strategy wheel as a critical tool for education, life-long learning, health and wellbeing.
Community consultation in 2009 informed the initial development of the proposed new direction for the arts. A further series of consultations in 2010, through public focus group workshops, were held in Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and Darwin. Priorities identified included strategies to encourage arts development through the funding program; support quality audience and participant experiences through festivals, programming and touring; increased regional and remote access to programs and arts services; grow employment in the arts, including technical and support roles; and strengthen community-based arts service infrastructure.
The opposition has continued with its complete lack of interest and vision for the arts. Its spokesman for the arts, Mr Bohlin, has not attended even one of these public meetings. In addition, I have not seen Mr Bohlin at any of the arts gigs I have attended across the Northern Territory this year. In stark comparison to just knocking like the CLP, or making uninformed statements to the media, I advise the member for Drysdale to take an active part in the wonderful opportunities on offer in the arts throughout the Northern Territory, and especially encourage him to take an active part, as an MLA, in the growing and developing Palmerston Festival.
All the Northern Territory government policy directions, particularly A Working Future and Territory 2030, are now being incorporated into a draft, overarching Northern Territory government arts policy. The other important initiative is the development of a strategic 10-year plan for the Northern Territory’s museums and galleries sector - Building Our Museums and Galleries Sector (BOMAGS) - the Northern Territory government initiative announced in April 2008. The initiative aims to better position the Territory to respond to the needs of a growing and more regionalised population, and increase tourism.
The BOMAGS Working Group has been established to develop the 10-year plan in line with major Northern Territory government policies and plans including Territory 2030 and A Working Future. The working group, comprised of 18 members representing the Museum and Art Galleries of the Northern Territory Board, major stakeholders, and sectoral interests, has been established and has met twice, with the next meeting scheduled for early December this year. Community consultation was held throughout the Territory in October and November to engage local stakeholders in identifying priorities and initiatives for the 10-year plan. A draft copy of the plan will be available for public comment in early 2011.
This year, there has been change in the department, and I take this opportunity to welcome Mr Hugo Leschen, the new Executive Director for Arts and Culture, and also thank all the staff in the department for their hard work and dedication in 2010. I look forward to working with them in 2011 and continuing this important and exciting work.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I wish to talk on a couple of issues. One is to offer my compliments to St Francis of Assisi Primary School in my electorate where I went on Remembrance Day. All the schools have functions of different types, but St Francis had a flag raising and they paid homage to soldiers and people in the Defence Forces who had fallen on the 11th of the 11th, and after that. I provided them with a new Australian flag because I believe it is important all schools have a good Australian flag they can feel proud of. They tell me each day the students fight to raise and lower the flag, which is good news. They also sang the National Anthem, with both choruses, which was excellent.
I thank the Principal, Neal Maxwell, for the invitation; also Eileen Breen, the Administration Officer; Robert Burns who coordinated the day; and Mel Bolwell, the Deputy Principal. Father Milton, the Catholic Priest at St Francis of Assisi Church also attended and read Psalm 23 and also The Divine Shepherd. It was a very good day, albeit a little hot, but the students definitely enjoyed themselves, and so did I. Congratulations to the St Francis of Assisi Primary School.
The other issue I raise - and I have written to the minister in regards to this – is the problem experienced on the Wells Creek Road in the Coolalinga area. Wells Creek Road comes into the Henning Road intersection, and Henning Road leads to the Coolalinga lights section. I have written to the minister for Lands some weeks ago with some quite graphic photos of problems with drainage and flooding resulting from what I believe is some of the construction work done on that intersection.
I have spoken with many of the residents on that road now our Wet Season has started and they are experiencing some severe flooding through no fault of their own. It is a combination of Northern Territory government and Litchfield Council roads; Litchfield Council manages the Wells Creek Road. I did a doorknock and letter-drop all along that road, and I have had very good response from people. They are concerned with the high level of flooding and the water flow. There are no bike paths or walkways on that road, and the school buses come along the road in the Wet Season, during downpours, to drop off schoolchildren. I have been down that road in a storm; we took photographs which I have sent to the minister’s office. I am sure he has seen them because I have a letter of acknowledgement in regard to my letter.
I have been told by the department they are looking into the intersection and water flows, but I would like to hear more than just ‘looking into it’. There are serious safety issues in regard to the water flows down one side of the Wells Creek Road. For some reason the water is diverted on to the western side, which is causing extreme problems and safety issues for the families there. I have had two families come to me saying in the heavy storms and heavy downpours they do not allow their young children, under six years of age or thereabouts, out because they are very concerned about them falling into the water and possibly getting washed away. There is another property with a very elderly lady on it, and they are having real problems getting in and out of their property when the rain starts, not because it is boggy, but because of the water flow.
I have undertaken to try to work with the residents, the council, and the NT government to (1) investigate, engineering-wise, how we can fix the problem; and (2) how the residents can help themselves in regard to drainage, or receive some advice from government or council engineers how they can best help themselves.
The other disturbing thing about it is not so much the water flows, but the level of litter washed down the drains and onto these properties. I have been on a couple of the properties and talked to the residents and they have told me an enormous amount of litter, not only bottles, bags, nappies, Coke cans and that type of thing, but also syringes have been washed down in these huge water flows, which is of great concern, particularly to the people and families with young children. Mind you, they also told me they found money floating down the river, so there has to be a little of an upside to it; paper money, $50 notes and the like.
I urge the minister for Lands to give some serious and dedicated attention to this issue; and if the government and the department is looking into the issue, if there can be some advice to my office, or to the Litchfield Council, so we can address this issue because, as I said, it is presenting serious safety issues to the families, and is causing distress to some of the more senior people because they get rather frightened with the water flow.
I have seen it, minister, and you know from the photographs I sent you that it is a problem and we need to try to fix it.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to talk about two particular issues.
I would like the Defence Force in the Northern Territory to look at the number of AJs riding around Darwin on black motorbikes and in camouflage gear. I believe it is quite dangerous because it is very difficult for people to see them on the road, and I have had a number of people complain to me about how dangerous it is. It is always dangerous for people to ride black motorbikes, but it is particularly dangerous when they are wearing camouflage on black motorbikes - I think it is quite silly - for people to see in their rear view mirrors. It is like the statistics on people driving green cars.
The second thing I want to talk about is irregular maritime arrivals, in particular irregular maritime arrivals in South Australia. In the Department of Immigration Citizenship 2009-10 Annual Report there were 323 irregular maritime arrivals in South Australia. That is 15% of the illegal maritime arrivals granted visas and settled on the Australian mainland. Also, on a daily basis, there are Greyhound buses taking people to South Australia from many different states; there are planes arriving in South Australia from different states bringing in tourists, residents, business people, and so forth; there are trains going in there, and people drive to South Australia.
I have to say I was quite concerned two months ago when the South Australian Premier, Mike Rann, decided to dog whistle the fact that some 100 residents from Yuendumu had decided, off their own bat, to move to South Australia seeking asylum to protect themselves, their families, and their children. I thought the racial undertones in Mike Rann’s comments as he dog whistled throughout South Australia that a swathe of Indigenous Territorians were moving across the border was one of the saddest things I have heard in Australia for some time.
These people are Australian. I have not heard Mike Rann complain about the irregular maritime arrivals granted visas in South Australia, and I have not heard him screaming from the rooftops about the proposed centre in the hills outside Adelaide, but his concerns about people who moved from Yuendumu to Alice Springs and then to Adelaide were quite delirious.
Then the Chief Minister, the Deputy Chief Minister, and the Minister for Central Australia jumped on the bandwagon saying how irresponsible it was, and other language was used which is unparliamentary, in regards to assistance I may or may not have offered people in their personal endeavours, which they chose to do before I had even spoken to them. It was unwelcome and further inflamed the situation to the point it is at today, which we are all aware of.
Let the facts be known that I was called by people who were camped in an accommodation facility near Alice Springs airport. I was asked to go there and I sat down and had a chat with some people. They told me of their situation and their desire to move to South Australia, temporarily, until they could work with the senior leaders of Yuendumu to come up with a resolution to balance law and customary law. That was their decision; that was their position. I asked them what they needed me for, and they said they needed help with transport. I said: ‘I am not a government person; I do not have a stack of money; I do not have program dollars. I cannot help’.
I asked why they did not call Karl Hampton, who is the member for Stuart and the Minister for Central Australia. They said he would not help. I said: ‘Why do you not call Warren Snowdon, he is happy to get your votes at election time?’ They said: ‘He won’t return our calls’. I am relaying what I was told. I said: ‘It is a dire situation’; and they said: ‘We have to protect these children’. And there were children everywhere, about 150 people. I told them I would see what I could do.
I went away and met with some police officers who were not in the station at the time, and I told them of the dilemma. I asked them what they thought, and they told me they thought it best for those people to move to South Australia to calm the situation down, take the violence out of Alice Springs, and protect the children. So, I rang some people to see what I could do.
I returned to the accommodation facility at the airport four or five hours later, in the afternoon, to find Tracey Brand, from the Chief Minister’s office in Alice Springs, there with folder and paperclip in hand. Tracey is a good person and a good worker, and I am not speaking derogatively about Tracey. I saw Samara Hanley there, who is the GBM for the town camps in Alice Springs, a federal government employee; and I am not speaking derogatively about Samara. I know these two people, so I said hello and asked them what they were doing; and they were assisting in the transition of these people to South Australia. They were buying them blankets; getting them accommodation; and they informed me they were calling Centrelink to help them transition their payments to South Australia so they could still use their Basics Cards, and so forth. This is what was happening.
This is at the same time as the days and weeks went on when the Chief Minister, the Deputy Chief Minister, and the member for Stuart were all coming out and condemning the stupidity of the member for Braitling in sending these people to Yuendumu. They chose to go. Six of them drove cars full of people, let alone the buses.
But there were some people there who were trying their best to help these people, to keep it out of the media and the public, and protect those women, children and men - trying to give oxygen to the elders and the senior men and women from the Adelaide group and the Yuendumu group to try to deal with this. There were things going on behind the scenes.
I tried my darndest to keep it out of the media; I thought the ABC at the time was completely irresponsible in their reporting, and further inflamed the situation. Then I found out the Chief Minister and the Minister for Central Australia had brought these people back. I knew they were coming back on the 11th. I had phone calls from the media; I had a phone call from The Australian newspaper saying the Chief Minister’s office in Darwin had told them the people would be back on the 11th - they confirmed it.
Then I got a personal phone call from the Minister for Central Australia, which I appreciated, telling me exactly what was happening. That was courteous and good politics, and he said he was not going to talk about it. No worries. He has a responsibility as the Minister for Central Australia, and the local member, and a Warlpiri law man, to try to bring calmness to this situation, because time and cool heads are required in this situation.
But what happened when these people came back, when it required political leadership, when it required no media, when it required cool heads? He took off to New Caledonia - flew the country! Politics 101: when it is too hot in the kitchen, get out. That is completely gutless! He should be ashamed. He has family out there. There are people injured with broken bones; people who have been hit in the head. Anyone who saw the media tonight saw the weapons that were used, and saw it was a riot - that is not cultural payback. I know it is a sensitive issue. I know there are two laws; there is law as we know it, and there is cultural law. We have to abide by our one law, but finding the way to that point is difficult. It takes time; it takes negotiation. It is tough; it is sensitive.
We did not need all this other stuff, all this gaff the Chief Minister put us in. He said on ABC radio that the police guaranteed protection of the people at Yuendumu. What sort of a guarantee does he give? Now that the Minister for Central Australia, the local member for Stuart, is back in Australia, what is he doing? He should not be in parliament this week; he should be in Yuendumu trying to solve these problems, working with the people and calming it down.
A 16-year-old has been arrested for the riot. Riots are not cultural payback; drunken fights are not cultural payback. We need to be sensible in this debate. We have to allow these people to have cool heads; that is what they had when they went to Adelaide. The hospital was quieter; the police were quieter, everything quietened down in town. Now you have exploded it again. Police officers are putting their lives at risk. Children, men and women at Yuendumu have their lives at risk. The Chief Minister and the Minister for Central Australia should hang their heads in shame because they caused it and they have blood on their hands.
One last thing, I am quite surprised that parliament is only going to sit for 11 weeks next year, not 12 weeks. I believe it is a shame on Gerry Wood’s agreement.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Deputy Speaker, I have several issues to raise tonight, so I will go through them fairly quickly.
I have just come back from the presentation awards ceremony for the St John’s College graduation. It is 50 years this year since St John’s College starting operating in the Northern Territory and now I notice some of the ex-students’ kids are now going to St John’s College.
I do not intend to mention everyone by name, simply because I do not have time this evening; however, I seek leave from this House to have all the names listed in the program I am now about to table to be incorporated in the Parliamentary Record.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I seek leave to table the awards ceremony document to assist Hansard with their purposes.
Leave granted.
- General College Awards:
Stanley Tipiloura Award: Cecil Bourke
Wesley Lanhupuy Award: Mark Doolan
Betty Tomlin Memorial Award for Academic Excellence in SOSE: Sharah Lyons
Royal Australian Chemical Institute Award: Tanya Karaket-Guidetti
CSIRO Double Helix Science Award: Jorja Barnard
NT Treasury Business Studies Award: Amanda Shoko
Group Training NT Apprenticeship Award: Lachlan Hodgson
Pat Lefroy Memorial Medal for Religious Education: Nadia Lelli
Inger Hallenstein Memorial Award for Foreign Languages Studies: Esther Thomas
Sr Philippa Murphy OLSH Visual and Performing Arts Award: Annelise Lelli
Territory Representation Award: Brooke Peris
Awards for Sport:Leadership in Sport: Anthony Lyons; Brendan Thornton; Elisabetta Gagliardo
Excellence in Sport Award: Brooke Peris; Braydon Beck
Pierre de Coubertin Award: Jessica Brogan
Champion House Award: Burford – Captains: Elisabetta Gagliardo; Lachlan Gooch
Boarding Awards:
Boys Boarding:
Middle School Boarding Award: Cecil Bourke
Senior School Boarding Award: Donald McKenzie
International Boarding Award: Rimi Dolame
St John’s Residential Boarding Leadership Award: Jason Puruntatameri
Girls Boarding:
Middle School Boarding Award: Thyisandra Bedford
Senior School Boarding Award: Lavinia Ketchell
International Boarding Award: Novina Magai
Elle Majid Memorial Leadership in Boarding Award: Novina Magai
Academic Awards—Middle School:
Chief Minister’s Literacy Achievement Award:
Imaginative Writing: Matilda Lyons
Communication in school: Sebastian Wikaira-Fox
Improved Writing: Antoine Wasiu
Imaginative Writing: Myja Gleed
Communication in school: Michael Keys
Imaginative Writing: Lori Short
Improved Reading: Ernest Goodman
Imaginative Writing: Jordan Smith
Communication in school: Jorja Barnard
Communication in school: Nadia Lelli
Communication in school: Kenneth Dawson
Communication in school: Joshua BowlingBinbirrimba:
Certificate for Outstanding Effort: Lazarus Manbulloo; Cheyene McDonald; Julianna Carter
Certificate for Academic Achievement: Nicole Jimarin; Lassarina Ford
Highest Achiever in Binbirrimba: Nikkita Joshua
Year 7:
- Year 7 St John Award: Callum Flanagan
Certificate for Outstanding Effort: Michelle Matyorauta; Louise Collins; Callum Flanagan; Myja Gleed
Certificate for Academic Achievement: Allegra Randazzo; Molly Robbins; Sabrina Di Lembo
Dux Year 7: Matilda Lyons
Year 8:
Luke Hochman Medal for Year 8: Rachael Thomas
Certificate for Outstanding Effort: Jack Walsh; Madelyn Deigan; Courtney Turner; Hunter Waldron
Certificate for Academic Achievement: Michael Keys; Ernest Goodman; Paige Kruger
Dux Year 8: Jordan Smith
Year 9:
Don Burgett Memorial Medal for Year 9: Jorja Barnard
Certificate for Outstanding Effort: Francene Naru; Angela Rumaseb; David Henry-Whiting; Daniela Di Toro
Certificate for Academic Achievement: Jorja Barnard; Rebecca Egan; Ellen Symes; Kenneth Dawson
NTBOS Academic Excellence Award, Dux Year 9: Nadia Lelli
Academic Awards—Senior School:
Intensive English Unit:
Certificate for Outstanding Effort: Jomianus Jolemal; Priscilla Noya
Certificate for Academic Achievement: Araminus Omaleng; Willando Pais
Top Achiever Intensive English: Angela Rumaseb
Year 10:St John Award Year 10: James Hill
Certificate for Outstanding Effort: Hoerlina Pahabol; Viola Siso; Steele Bolton
Certificate for Academic Achievement: Abbey Taylor; Timothy Lawson; Runyararo Mubaira
Dux Year 10: Jenny Guidetti
Year 11
St John Award Year 11: Jeniffer Korwa
Year 11 Work Ready: Alton Fernandez;
Certificate for Outstanding Effort: Alvin Sutanto; Kurt Beck; Sandy Souisa
Certificate for Academic Achievement: Josie Wright; Rosie Treloar; Jeniffer Korwa
Eileen Robinson Shield for Dux Year 11: Bonnie BattonYear 11/12 Access:Certificate for Outstanding Effort: Nelsina Portaminni; Garry Manbulloo; Charlie Manbulloo
Access Highest Achiever: Jay Ragurrk (England)
Certificate for Academic Achievement: James WunungmurraAcademic Awards for Year 12:
Certificate for Outstanding Effort: Rhiannon Barnard; Simon Kotouki; Stela Arim
Year 12 Work Ready: Kenrick Hogan
Certificate of Academic Achievement, Individual Subjects:
(for the top achiever with an A grade in each Stage 2 subject):
Business Studies: Amanda Shoko
Contemporary issues and Science: Amanda Shoko
Art Practical: Annelise Lelli
Chemistry: Bernadette De Zylva
Mathematical Studies: Bernadette De Zylva
Biology: Bonnie Batton
Physical Education: Brendan Thornton
English Studies: Erin O’Connor
Sport and Recreation: James McKenzie
Communication Products: James Seymon
Religions in Australia: Luksika Uttateerapong
Food and Hospitality Studies: Luksika Uttateerapong
Maths Methods: Luksika Uttateerapong
Nutrition Studies: Luksika Uttateerapong
Indonesian: Maria Kafiar
English Communications: Rhiannon Barnard
Vocational Studies: Shae Bellenger
Women in Sport: Shae Bellenger
Modern History: Sharah Lyons
School-based RE: Stela Arim
Special Awards:
ADF Long Tan Leadership and Teamwork Award Year 10: Lian Carter
ADF Long Tan Leadership and Teamwork Award Year 11: Kurt Beck
ADF Long Tan Leadership and Teamwork Award Year 12: Stephen Waterhouse
Award for Reconciliation: Anthony Lyons
The Australia Day Student Citizen Award: Henry Boeck
Hugh Eckel Award: James Seymon
Catholic Diocese of Darwin Development Fund Scholarship: Bonnie Batton
Caltex Best All Rounder: Brendan Thornton
Lyn Powierza Award: Stela Arim
Sr Anne Corbett OLSH Award: Nathan Thomas
Northern Territory Catholic Principal’s Association Scholarship: Lian Carter
Principal’s Trophy for Academic Excellence and College Involvement: Brendan Thornton
NT Board of Studies Award for Academic Excellence of a student from Indigenous or TI descent: Brooke Peris
Dux of St John’s College 2010, Northern Territory Board of Studies Academic Excellence Award: Bernadette De Zylva
Jules Chevalier Award: Elisabetta Gagliardo
I also rise tonight to deal with an issue that has come to my attention in relation to the Victims of Crime NT. I am going to quote from a note I was handed by Mike Campbell from the Victims of Crime. I believe this situation is shocking and needs to be addressed. The document I have from the Victims of Crime NT reads as follows:
- Victims of Crimes NT is a non-government, not–for-profit, charitable organisation. We are the only agency in the Northern Territory that provides free support information referral services to victims of personal and property crime in the Northern Territory. Victims of violent crime are often seriously traumatised and require substantial psychological and emotional support. This agency covers the whole of the Territory. Our hours of operation are 24 hours a day, 365 days per year.
- We can afford just two full-time paid staff. We rely on our 12 dedicated trained volunteers. Since 2001, the number of victims of violent crime that we have assisted has tripled. In 2004, the number of overall reported violent crimes in the Northern Territory has nearly doubled. Over that period, our funding level has not changed.
- We know that this is not sustainable. We also know, with the current level of funding that we receive, hundreds of victims of violent crime across the Northern Territory are not receiving the support that they desperately need.
On this document are three graphs. One deals with the numbers of assault victims, and families of homicide victims assisted by Crime NT in the Northern Territory: 2000-01 a little over 100, by 2008-09 over 300. The second graph reported assaults in the Northern Territory: in 2004 the number is 3500, by 2009 is it 6500. The last graph shows no change between 2005 and 2009, shows 150 000 - and that is dollars dedicated to Victims of Crime NT.
This is an organisation whose workload, because of the mismanagement of this government in relation to issues of violent crime in our community, has doubled and tripled, depending on the case involved. The fact that this government has not increased any funding to this very important organisation that has worked for many years to support victims of crime only goes to demonstrate, in my mind’s eye, exactly where this government’s priorities are in relation to victims of crimes. We know, with the world view of this government, the offenders are the victims and society is the real criminal.
I do not subscribe to that world view. I am not going to suggest that Victims of Crime subscribe to that world view, but they do have to suffer the consequences of having to deal with vastly increased demands on pretty much a shoestring budget. I argue that their request for a further $60 000 per year is entirely reasonable.
I do not often find myself doing this, but I will anyhow. I congratulate the minister for Housing, Hon Dr Chris Burns, who took the time to come out last Friday night at 8.30 pm to Tomaris Court, a set of public housing units in my electorate which I have oft had cause to lament and complain about. To the minister’s credit, he agreed to come out. I suppose it is not a sad thing but, clearly, the department became aware of the minister’s visit because, at 4 pm on Friday afternoon I did a doorknock around Tomaris Court and discovered the lawns had been mowed; the graffiti on the walls had all been sprayed over; the faeces had been hosed out of the laundry blocks; where people wipe their backsides on the corner of the walls had all been cleaned up, or largely cleaned up; the piles of rubbish that were in those laundry blocks had been cleaned up; all the empty liquor containers had been cleaned up from around the back, and all sorts of things had been done. I spoke to a few residents at 4 pm that afternoon and they informed me that they had seen a substantial amount of activity in the Tomaris Court area in the days immediately prior to the ministerial visit.
It is a shame the department would seek to deceive their minister in that fashion, assuming, of course, the minister had not told them and they had managed to get that information from his diary. Or it is a shame the minister decided to have these blocks cleaned up. However, I do not believe the minister did; I believe it was something the department took upon themselves.
What I find surprising is, after standing in this place for over a year complaining about the condition of Tomaris Court again and again and having not much happens, only to discover when the minister turns up everything I had been complaining about happens. I congratulate the minister for taking that time out on a Friday evening. I thank him for doing so because it shows he is dedicated to his cause. I have discussed his proposed policies with him in a very preliminary fashion, and I said to him I would indicate some support if he started going down the path he is intending to go down. So, on this occasion, I thank the minister.
It is a shame we need a ministerial visit to get anything done, but the presentation of those apartments last Friday night passed muster. Curiously, we still found several things which need to be addressed. I know the minister has taken those matters in hand, and I look forward to seeing some results in those areas. All in all, I remain grateful to the minister for his efforts, and acknowledge so publicly.
I will close tonight with my usual complaint about drunks in my electorate. They continue to be a problem. The government talks about a new alcohol policy. They have been talking about a new alcohol policy for six months.
The problem I have is I still get complaints in my office from various people around my electorate complaining about drunks. Drunks at Mindil Beach, drunks at Bicentennial Park, drunks in the Mall, not in the Raintree Park at the moment because that is a construction site, but there are still drunks all over our streets. I will continue to harp on about these drunks because the government has promised to fix this problem. It promised to deal with this issue and, whilst I do not agree with its process of making society answerable for the actions of a few, I still expect the government to keep its promise.
I urge the government of the Northern Territory to direct police to patrol Bicentennial Park and get rid of the drunks, particularly on the walkway to Doctors Gully. I also urge the government to patrol the railway corridor behind Gardens Hill Crescent, as well as some of the older buildings in Gardens Hill Crescent which have become camping grounds for drunks. These people are often offensive; they often behave in a disgusting manner and frankly I, like so many of my colleagues on this side of the House, am utterly and fully sick of them.
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will not speak for too long. I wish to provide a report to this Chamber on my visit last week to Canberra and Sydney. I departed Darwin on Monday, 15 November, on the direct flight to Canberra. I stayed in Canberra until Thursday morning, the 18th, when I departed for Sydney. I spent Thursday and Friday in Sydney, and departed Sydney on the Saturday morning.
Whilst I was in Canberra I spoke to various ministers, shadow ministers, members of the House of Representatives, Senators, and Independents in both those Chambers. The topics discussed were oil, gas and mining of various natures, and possible developments within my electorate, in the harbour.
The other topic which got some media attention was that of the RAAF Base houses, also in my electorate, the suburb of Eaton. It received media attention, I believe, because I went with our good friend, the member for Nelson, and that spurred some interest from the media. Those meetings were, I would not say fruitful, but they were enlightening and it seems there may be some light at the end of the tunnel - cross the fingers - if what we saw and heard is to be believed.
On the Thursday I went to Sydney and had a range of meetings there, particularly in relation to gas developments and opportunities which may exist in my electorate. I also spoke to people in the private equities management industries.
All in all, the trip was fruitful and worthwhile.
Motion agreed to, the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016