Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
You are listening to Mix one oh four point nine's
three sixty Now. As I mentioned in the intro, Australians
are expecting the federal election to be called in the
coming days, which means we can expect politicians well in
Darwin making announcements. We know Labour's Attorney General was here
on the weekend announcing three point six million dollars over
four years to open a Darwin registry for the new
(00:21):
Administrative Review Tribunal aimed at improving access to justice for
residents of Darwin and the surrounding areas. We'll need a
bit more detail on that that I'm sure we'll be
able to ask for over the coming days. Meanwhile, we
know on elected Dutton coalition government's going to provide three
hundred and sixty eight thousand dollars from a revitalized Safer
Communities Fund to fast track crucial public lighting upgrades in Palmerston.
(00:45):
The Opposition leader Peter Dutton in town over the weekend
to make that announcement. Now joining me in the studio
is the Chief Minister leafanochiiro Good.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
Morning to you, Good morning kadience, your listeners.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
Great to have you in the studio now. Chief Minister,
the leader of the opposition, Peter Dutton in Palmeston of
course making the announcement about these security measures and also
attending the colp's fiftieth birthday was it.
Speaker 3 (01:07):
Yeah, absolutely, we had our very special birthday party on
Saturday night. So fifty years of delivering democracy to the
territory something we're very very proud of.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
Now. In terms of this announcement around lighting, three hundred
and sixty eight thousand dollars, I know at the moment
out in Palmerston there have been some issues when it
comes to crime and anti social behavior people public drinking
and generally not really behaving the way in which residents
want them to. How do you reckon this is going
to help?
Speaker 2 (01:35):
Yeah, it is.
Speaker 3 (01:36):
It's all really helpful, Katie. So three hundred and sixty
eight thousand dollars for lighting goes a long way, and
of course when you've got the right lighting and the
right places, it generally moves antisocial behavior on. So this
is both in some parks in Palmestan, some streets and
in the CBD. It's something Lisa Bayless, the CLP candidate,
has been fighting for and is now able to deliver
(01:58):
on should she win the election.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
I know that it was also noted and has been
reported over the course of the weekend that Shane Stone,
the President of the COLP, has announced that he's retiring
as the president and the former Member for Solomon, Natasha Griggs,
is going to step in.
Speaker 3 (02:15):
Yeah, we're really sad to see Shane go, but you know,
he stepped up when we needed him and we've delivered
a great result on returning seventeen members to government.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
And so you know, he leaves a really strong legacy.
Speaker 3 (02:27):
He leaves on an absolute high point and I'm looking
forward to working with Natasha Griggs and the team going forward.
But you know, we can't thank Shane enough. And you
know he's never far away, Katie. He is a hell
of a passionate territory and whilst he might be moving
back to Brisbane, I know he'll be keeping a very
very close eye on thing.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
In terms of Natasha Griggs stepping in, is that just
in the interim? What's the situation.
Speaker 3 (02:51):
Yeah, under our constitution, one of the vice presidents takes
on the role until the AGM, which is later in
the year, so then I think it's about September octo
But We'll have a normal AGM like any organization would,
and people can nominate and we go from there.
Speaker 1 (03:06):
Leah, when's your tip of when this federal election is
going to be called?
Speaker 2 (03:09):
I don't know. The sand seems to be shifting.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
Some people are saying May, some people are saying March,
so I really don't know. But we're obviously very important, Katie,
because we're getting a lot of federal attention from both sides,
and I'm welcoming that and making sure that everyone knows
exactly what we're fighting for. And I have to say,
you know, Lisa Bayless and Lisa Ceb, but the CLP
candidates are doing an outstanding job. And if we want
(03:34):
to get some really good results for the territory, having
a coalition government in Canberra is going to be extremely helpful.
Speaker 1 (03:41):
All right, let's move along. We know the Northern Territories.
IKAK last week released the long awaited findings from an
investigation into alleged labor issues of taxpayer funds in the
lead up to the twenty twenty election. Now, no adverse
findings against any individuals were made. We know that the
report looked into allegations concerning former labor chief Minister Michael
(04:02):
Gunner and his ministerial staff, who were referred to ikak
amid claims of improper conduct by ministerial staff leading up
to the twenty twenty Northern Territory election. Now, the investigation
confirmed what many of us, I think working in the
political sphere believed, and that was in the months leading
(04:22):
up to the twenty twenty election, offices within the Office
of the Chief Minister, and in particular that digital unit
had performed political campaign work within normal office hours and
while being paid from the public purse. Now, Chief Minister,
I've got to tell you the outcome of this report.
It's not really a surprise to me, but many knew
or believe that this was happening in the lead into
(04:44):
the twenty twenty election. And some listening this morning might
be going, well, isn't that big a deal. Well, it
is a big deal because it's actually it is taxpayers
money that is being used essentially to campaign. Now, I
don't care which side of politics it is. I just
think it's a stitch up.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Yeah, you just can't do it, Katie.
Speaker 3 (05:03):
And what the Operation Jupiter report too, did confirm. Whilst
there were no adverse findings, it did confirm that campaigning
was happening. So we've now you know that reports concluded
there were obviously two parts. We've updated the Ministerial staff
Code of Conduct and guidelines and all of those things
to strengthen it even further to make sure this doesn't
(05:23):
happen again. But what it basically confirms is that labor
had an unfair advantage going into the twenty twenty election,
and it doesn't meet community expectational standard. Now, I would
expect many people are disappointed by the report, both reports
and ultimately you know, the k has reviewed this matter now,
(05:43):
but it's very serious.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
I mean, do we have any idea how much money
was potentially wasted here or what kind of you know,
what kind of hours give us something tangible?
Speaker 3 (05:55):
No, that wasn't part of the report, so I don't
have any more detail really than any other territory and
has Katie. I've read the report obviously, so not a
lot of detail, no finding some clear recommendations and we
moved on those straight away just in the absolute abundance
of doubt. So we've tightened all of that up. These
rules apply of course to the opposition staff as well.
Speaker 2 (06:20):
But it's very disappointing.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
I think it closes a very long drawn out saga
and I think people are left wondering, well, you know what's.
Speaker 1 (06:27):
Well, a lot of people are left wondering what exactly
is the purpose of the IKAK as well, because we've
got a situation where there's been a number of different
reports obviously conducted. And I'm not criticizing the IKAK, but
you know, even in this situation where there's no adverse
findings against any individuals, but we've now had two reports
into what was going on before that twenty twenty election,
(06:51):
some people are questioning right now whether the IKAK is
worth the funding.
Speaker 3 (06:56):
And it's you know, people have a right to ask
that question. Of course, we're paying for two i caacs
as well at the moment continuing that's been ongoing since
oh gosh, I can't remember, it's about May last year,
I think, Katie. So you know, it is a big
use of taxpayers funds.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
It needs to be working properly.
Speaker 3 (07:15):
We want a strong eye CAAC in the territory and
obviously there's been a lot of drama around it. But
even this report of course was done externally because of
the conflict issue raised by the acting ICACK. So there's
been many different parties involved over the years, but what
we need to do is really make sure we've got
a fit for purpose IICACS going forward that meets expectations.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
So are you going to continue to fund the icc.
Speaker 3 (07:41):
Yeah, absolutely, Katie, there's no question about that. There will
be an i CAAQ in the territory. We're just really
looking forward to give certainty. You know, we've put in
place a new acting ICAC to give those stuff and
all of the ongoing investigation certainty. But we really want
to see all of this come to an end so
we can move forward.
Speaker 1 (07:59):
All right, let's move along. Because the Correctional Services Legislative
Amendment Bill passed through Parliament last week. It is aimed
at delivering workforce reforms in an effort to support correction stuff,
and it is workforce pressures. So the problem you've got
here is that correctional stuff do not seem to want
these changes to go ahead. Nonetheless, the legislative changes have
(08:20):
been passed. How soon are we going to potentially see
a surge workforce from interstate or these changes really become operational.
Speaker 3 (08:28):
Yeah, we're certainly hoping for next week, Katie, and just
for a bit of background, and I think there's been
unfortunate gameplay happening here. But you know, the Minister met
with the unions in November last year and they've point
blank said to him we need twenty or thirty more staff.
We've now moved to find a solution to that. Now
there are thirty one in the training college right now,
(08:49):
but we need more ongoing. So we've found a solution
to get our police and corrections officers out of operating
taxi services for prisoners to fill that gap with people
coming from interstate. So it's very meaningful. What we're doing
is very meaningful in terms of freeing up police to
be on the front line and freeing up our hard
working corrections offices to be on the front line. So
(09:11):
I don't think Territorians want to see cops shuttling people
from Parmesan watchhouse to court, all corrections officers. And that's
the gap we're plugging because there is a workforce shortage
and we need these people behind bars, which means we
need more prison off.
Speaker 1 (09:24):
So did you say we are expecting a surge workforce
from next week.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
I'm certainly hoping, so, Katie, we solch this on urgency
because we want it done urgently, so stuff from interstate Yeah, yeah, exactly,
so the minister will be better place to answer those questions.
But certainly we are pushing as hard and fast as
we can to give that reprieve to our corrections officers
who are doing one hundred and sixty thousand hours in
overtime every year.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
We've got to drop those numbers for their.
Speaker 3 (09:51):
Own health and well being and safety, and we need
the support so that our police can be back on
the frontline.
Speaker 1 (09:56):
All right, Well, we are going to be catching up
with the Corrections Commissioner after you, in fact, so we'll
get some of that that you know, those questions answered
in terms of the operational stuff. I mean, are you
concerned that, according to the union, the workforce is losing
confidence in leadership.
Speaker 2 (10:12):
No, I don't think so at all.
Speaker 3 (10:13):
And certainly when we go around and talk to prison officers,
they are really putting their shoulder to the will. They
understand the situation because they're the ones who've been underfunded
and under resource for so long under labor, so they
get that things are at a crisis point. They're doing
everything they can and ultimately our prison officers don't want
these people back on the street. They live in our
community as well, their kids live here, their wives and
(10:35):
families are here. So you know, five hundred more people
in prison since the election is needed because these people
are a risk to our community safety. So everyone's chipping in.
It's not perfect cative, but we are working over time
on that Corrections master Plan to get as many beds
as possible. But more beds we put on means we
need more prison officers, so we've got to do that
(10:56):
work commensurate.
Speaker 1 (10:58):
Chief Minister concerns Raiseler this week that you've walked back
on an election commitment to pay bonuses to long serving
police officers. So during the election campaign you'd issued a
press release stated on the August fifteen last year, it
stated a ten thousand dollars bonus is going to be
given to those who've dedicated ten years service, fifteen thousand
(11:19):
for those who've served fifteen years, and twenty thousand for
those who celebrate twenty, twenty five and thirty year milestones,
and for all five year increments. After that, Steve Edgington
joined us on the show on Friday and said that
this would be happening police will get their bonuses. Can
you commit to that?
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (11:39):
Absolutely, So there's just been a bit of confusion around
this issue. So when we announced the retention bonus last year,
it was off the back of the Non Territory Police
Association wanting a retention bonus. Now they didn't have a
version of the bonus they wanted, so in consultation with them,
that's the promise we made to territorians and to police.
Now going forward we rescidves and feedback from the NTPA
(12:01):
and others that it maybe didn't hit the mark. So
what we've been doing is just looking at further improvements
or enhancements. But I absolutely, categorically can say we will
deliver what we promised, which was twelve months this year.
So anyone achieving those milestones from one January will be
paid from one July. So we'll make sure anyone hitting
a milestone in that press as identified and promised back
(12:25):
in August last year, will receive their bonuses.
Speaker 2 (12:28):
But we want this to be ongoing. So what is
on the table is how this.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
Looks after that twelve month What does a retention bonus
into the.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
Future look like. Okay, because the association has raised concerns
that the retention bonus is only for the next twelve months,
not five years like they were promised. They say they were.
Speaker 3 (12:46):
Promised No, so that's not correct either. We only ever
promised twelve months. I then said last week in Parliament
that we want this to be five years. So that's
going above and beyond the promise.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
So you want it to be longer than twelve months, yes, So.
Speaker 3 (12:59):
What we're doing is exactly what was promised, which was
twelve months. I wanted to go for longer, and that's
what's on the table for discussion after this next year
and we analyze how it worked, what can police retention
look like. So that's what we're at the table with
the NTPA on and that's what we'll continue to discuss
going forward. But absolute certainty, the commitment made in August
(13:21):
stands and that rolls out from one July backdated to
one January.
Speaker 1 (13:26):
But you're saying you want it to go for five years, yes, Well,
committed to it going for five years.
Speaker 3 (13:31):
Yes, but perhaps in a different form, so that I
think that's where the confusion lies.
Speaker 1 (13:35):
So I think that's going to be waddle upset people
to to be blunt about it because I know that
according you know, from what I've heard from the association,
a lot of members they say, voted for you thinking
that they'd be getting a twenty thousand dollar bonus within
the next five years.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
No, it's not.
Speaker 3 (13:51):
So this is where the confusion is. We never committed
to five years. It was a one year police retention bonus.
And everyone that we promised who would get the retention
bonus will get the retention bonus. That is lock solid,
absolutely no problems. What I have said in the last
week is that what will this look like going forward?
Because Katie, for example, sixty one percent of constables leave
(14:14):
before the ten year mark. So that's a huge number
of police. So do I need to pull more resource
or more energy or look more closely at what people
at that level need to keep them in the job
for longer. Now, it's very important distinction. This is not
a service payment, a payment for service. This is a
retention bonus. It's about keeping people in the police longer.
(14:37):
So it's to make sure that we're giving police who
might be thinking of leaving that extra reason to stay
on top of all of the new powers we're giving them,
on top of you know, everything else we're doing to
try and support our frontline.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
Look, I get what you're saying, but I think to myself,
imagine being a police officer who's done nineteen years, who's
going to miss out potentially.
Speaker 3 (14:59):
Well, it was only ever a twelve month commitment, and
ultimately the NTPA aren't happy with this. We don't want
to keep this going for five years because it's not
it's not something the NTPA is supportive of to run
that for five years either. So we're standing true to
our commitment so that twelve months is locked in. You
will receive your retention bonus if you meet those milestones
(15:20):
in twenty twenty five. I'm keen to keep this conversation
going about what where does this need to be, what
does it need to look like? And so hopefully in
the next couple of months we can then give certainty
going forward about what retention.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
Looks like well and how much is it going to get?
Speaker 2 (15:36):
Yeah, that's right, So the three million is a ferry
committed to that yet.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
So in terms of moving forward, I mean, does it
come out of like surely it's not going to come
out of the Northern Territory Police operational budget.
Speaker 3 (15:48):
No, So so we've put the three million dollars aside
for that going forward, we're happy to continue that three million.
Now the NTPA has some other ideas about what might
work better. Does that three million end up going to that,
does it end up going in as part of EBA
negotiations for example. So there's a lot going on this year,
(16:08):
and it's just about making sure that if we're going
to spend money retaining police that ongoing, we have a
system that works. But certainty will be delivered this year
as promised, and there was never a promise for five years.
That is something I said last week saying I'd like it.
I'd like something to keep going into the future.
Speaker 1 (16:29):
But it's not going to be for five years.
Speaker 2 (16:31):
No, No, into the future.
Speaker 3 (16:32):
It will be for there will be some form of
retention for five years. It might not look like the
one for this year.
Speaker 1 (16:38):
All right, So further discussions by the sounds of things
with the Police Association.
Speaker 3 (16:42):
For four years for everything after this year is for discussion.
This year is locked in, So if we're talking about
five no one has to think about this year. That's
all locked in. We'll be delivered as promised after this year.
I'm saying right, for the next four years. What is
that going to look like?
Speaker 1 (16:59):
And what do you say to those police officers that
are potentially listening this morning that are going, well, hang
on a sick I thought this was for the next
five years. I am really annoyed by this.
Speaker 3 (17:07):
No, they shouldn't because it's only come up last week
and then being confused by the media commentary around it.
So it's just been an unfortunate week where there's been
misinformation going around. So the only way police could be
confused is in the last couple of days because of
the commentary around it.
Speaker 2 (17:25):
But that was never the case.
Speaker 3 (17:26):
I can assure you and anyone can go back and
look at the original commitment. It was for twelve months.
The first time five years came up was last week.
Speaker 1 (17:35):
All right, well, no doubt we're going to talk further
about this, and it is.
Speaker 3 (17:39):
It is all on the table, right, So anyone concerned,
I mean, don't forget even with this version we've got
for twelve months, there are people very unhappy about that
as well, Katie. So it's definitely not going to be
a crowd pleaser for everyone because no matter where you
draw the line on the milestone or the amounts people
will miss out.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
And to play devil's advocate here, I mean, where do
you draw the line in terms of the government spent.
Because you guys were out last week saying, you know
that you've got to remove the debt ceiling because we
are in an astronomical level of debt. Then the public
servants obviously also negotiating or getting the three percent wage increase,
which I you know, I totally agree with, the cost
(18:16):
of being is insane at the moment, and that had
already been agreed to. But others listening who maybe work
in the private sector might be going, well, hang on
a second, this is a lot of money that's flown
out the door.
Speaker 3 (18:27):
Yeah, and that's why we have to spend it targeted
on retention. And that's why it's not a service a
payment for service. It's a payment to keep people in
the job for longer. So we're wanting to give people
extra reasons to do another three years, to do another
four years.
Speaker 2 (18:42):
And so.
Speaker 3 (18:44):
It's exactly the same as our home build scheme or
anything else. There are criteria around it, and some people
fall in and some people fall out. Now that's it
is absolutely unfortunate that this week there has been misinformation,
and you know, I apologize for causing part of that confusion,
but I just want everyone to understand we will deliver
on our promise. That certainty is absolutely locked in. What
(19:06):
I'm talking about is going forward, what can the next
four years look like? And that just might mean we
put more money into the EBA so that every single
police officer gets paid more. That might end up being
the outcome. Katie. I'm very open to working with the
NTPA on it, but locked in twelve months. If you
are going to get it, you're gonna get it.
Speaker 1 (19:23):
All right. Well, I'm sure there'll be for the discussions
about this. Hey, we've got a few listener questions coming through.
I've got one here, Hi, Katie, can you ask the
Chief Minister about the solar tariff increase not being between
sunrise to sundown ie peak period as promised? And who
made the decision between three pm to nine pm where
solar is not made when there's no sunlight. Thank you,
(19:46):
Scotty from Palm Oh.
Speaker 3 (19:47):
Yeah, great question, Scottie. So that's actually the peak period
is determined by Power and Water Corporation. So I'm not
sure where people thought six to six I'm not sure
where that came from. The advice from Power and Water
is the three till nine. But you know, on this uptake,
we've had three times the number of people applying for
(20:07):
this rebate then under Labour's previous scheme. So we've taken
it from five to twelve thousand. We've taken it per
per person, we've taken it from three million dollars to
six million dollars and the take up has been huge.
From one December we've had two hundred people applying and
I think it's about ninety percent of people whove applied
have been successful. So it's it's going great. It's going great.
Speaker 1 (20:28):
You're the Chief Minister. Though surely if you don't like
that peak period you can change it.
Speaker 3 (20:33):
I suppose I could, Katie, But at the end of
the day, you've got to make the right decisions that
make the most sense, and certainly you know it does
make the most sense to keep it to that period.
And you know, we're really proud again. This is a
commitment we took, we've delivered and people are lapping it
up all right.
Speaker 1 (20:51):
Hulk's message, she wants to know why can't the eye
Kak then take matters to the courts to bring consequences
to those who've done the wrong thing, Ie Gunner and
he's chronic.
Speaker 3 (21:02):
Yeah, so the i CAAC can and I think this
again is why people feel so disappointed. The IKAC has
obviously very very broad powers. Then they've got powers to
be able to refer criminal matters to the DPP to
face the courts or whatever other sanctions might be required.
And in both Operation Jupiter reports, both different people who
did those reports found no action.
Speaker 1 (21:24):
So all right, Airman Darwin wants to know, can you
please us, the Chief Minister, when you envisage the prices
at the bottle shops to return to prices prior to
Labour's floor price debarcle.
Speaker 3 (21:35):
Yeah, we've been really clear we want retailers to pass
on the cause. Now in Alice Springs, that industry group
down there has said they're going to do their own
floor price, and that's a matter for that community, but
ultimately we expect retailers to pass on the price the
industry has to their credit come out and said, you know,
a lot of water has gone under the bridge since
(21:55):
twenty eighteen, so a lot of the cost of alcohol
with the taxing preess has gone up, which means the
profit that would the bottlows we're getting is gone. But
there will be some products where they can pass the
savings on and we expect them to do it.
Speaker 1 (22:08):
Chief Finess. A really quick one from Jill Indo Alowa.
Many of us are in shock and disgusted. She sees
that the cancelation of funding to the Environment Center and
its Central Area equivalent. What's the justification for this, given
that these organizations work to keep our environments safe, and
you have done it, and they've done great work for
many years. It is just another move by your government
(22:30):
to silence opposition to environmentally damaging projects.
Speaker 3 (22:34):
Well, it was an election commitment that we made very clear,
probably about a year ago, Katie saying that we would
defund the Environmental Defender's Office, and of course we've wrapped
in the Arid's Land Center with that. It represents about
it two hundred thousand dollars savings to territories that we
are going to put into frontline conservation. So actually things
like planting trees, removing weeds. We do not want to
(22:57):
see public money going into you know, law fare and
activism that's stopping projects happening in the territory that doesn't
protect our environment. What we want to see is projects
getting up through proper approvals processes and money being spent
properly protecting our environment, not spent on lawyer's fees.
Speaker 2 (23:15):
Standing in court all day.
Speaker 1 (23:16):
Chief Minister, we are going to have to leave it there.
Really appreciate your time as always, Thanks so much for
joining us.
Speaker 2 (23:21):
Good to speak with you.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
Take care, Thank you.
You are listening to Mix one oh four point nine's
three sixty Now. As I mentioned in the intro, Australians
are expecting the federal election to be called in the
coming days, which means we can expect politicians well in
Darwin making announcements. We know Labour's Attorney General was here
on the weekend announcing three point six million dollars over
four years to open a Darwin registry for the new
(00:21):
Administrative Review Tribunal aimed at improving access to justice for
residents of Darwin and the surrounding areas. We'll need a
bit more detail on that that I'm sure we'll be
able to ask for over the coming days. Meanwhile, we
know on elected Dutton coalition government's going to provide three
hundred and sixty eight thousand dollars from a revitalized Safer
Communities Fund to fast track crucial public lighting upgrades in Palmerston.
(00:45):
The Opposition leader Peter Dutton in town over the weekend
to make that announcement. Now joining me in the studio
is the Chief Minister leafanochiiro Good.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
Morning to you, Good morning kadience, your listeners.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
Great to have you in the studio now. Chief Minister,
the leader of the opposition, Peter Dutton in Palmeston of
course making the announcement about these security measures and also
attending the colp's fiftieth birthday was it.
Speaker 3 (01:07):
Yeah, absolutely, we had our very special birthday party on
Saturday night. So fifty years of delivering democracy to the
territory something we're very very proud of.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
Now. In terms of this announcement around lighting, three hundred
and sixty eight thousand dollars, I know at the moment
out in Palmerston there have been some issues when it
comes to crime and anti social behavior people public drinking
and generally not really behaving the way in which residents
want them to. How do you reckon this is going
to help?
Speaker 2 (01:35):
Yeah, it is.
Speaker 3 (01:36):
It's all really helpful, Katie. So three hundred and sixty
eight thousand dollars for lighting goes a long way, and
of course when you've got the right lighting and the
right places, it generally moves antisocial behavior on. So this
is both in some parks in Palmestan, some streets and
in the CBD. It's something Lisa Bayless, the CLP candidate,
has been fighting for and is now able to deliver
(01:58):
on should she win the election.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
I know that it was also noted and has been
reported over the course of the weekend that Shane Stone,
the President of the COLP, has announced that he's retiring
as the president and the former Member for Solomon, Natasha Griggs,
is going to step in.
Speaker 3 (02:15):
Yeah, we're really sad to see Shane go, but you know,
he stepped up when we needed him and we've delivered
a great result on returning seventeen members to government.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
And so you know, he leaves a really strong legacy.
Speaker 3 (02:27):
He leaves on an absolute high point and I'm looking
forward to working with Natasha Griggs and the team going forward.
But you know, we can't thank Shane enough. And you
know he's never far away, Katie. He is a hell
of a passionate territory and whilst he might be moving
back to Brisbane, I know he'll be keeping a very
very close eye on thing.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
In terms of Natasha Griggs stepping in, is that just
in the interim? What's the situation.
Speaker 3 (02:51):
Yeah, under our constitution, one of the vice presidents takes
on the role until the AGM, which is later in
the year, so then I think it's about September octo
But We'll have a normal AGM like any organization would,
and people can nominate and we go from there.
Speaker 1 (03:06):
Leah, when's your tip of when this federal election is
going to be called?
Speaker 2 (03:09):
I don't know. The sand seems to be shifting.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
Some people are saying May, some people are saying March,
so I really don't know. But we're obviously very important, Katie,
because we're getting a lot of federal attention from both sides,
and I'm welcoming that and making sure that everyone knows
exactly what we're fighting for. And I have to say,
you know, Lisa Bayless and Lisa Ceb, but the CLP
candidates are doing an outstanding job. And if we want
(03:34):
to get some really good results for the territory, having
a coalition government in Canberra is going to be extremely helpful.
Speaker 1 (03:41):
All right, let's move along. We know the Northern Territories.
IKAK last week released the long awaited findings from an
investigation into alleged labor issues of taxpayer funds in the
lead up to the twenty twenty election. Now, no adverse
findings against any individuals were made. We know that the
report looked into allegations concerning former labor chief Minister Michael
(04:02):
Gunner and his ministerial staff, who were referred to ikak
amid claims of improper conduct by ministerial staff leading up
to the twenty twenty Northern Territory election. Now, the investigation
confirmed what many of us, I think working in the
political sphere believed, and that was in the months leading
(04:22):
up to the twenty twenty election, offices within the Office
of the Chief Minister, and in particular that digital unit
had performed political campaign work within normal office hours and
while being paid from the public purse. Now, Chief Minister,
I've got to tell you the outcome of this report.
It's not really a surprise to me, but many knew
or believe that this was happening in the lead into
(04:44):
the twenty twenty election. And some listening this morning might
be going, well, isn't that big a deal. Well, it
is a big deal because it's actually it is taxpayers
money that is being used essentially to campaign. Now, I
don't care which side of politics it is. I just
think it's a stitch up.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Yeah, you just can't do it, Katie.
Speaker 3 (05:03):
And what the Operation Jupiter report too, did confirm. Whilst
there were no adverse findings, it did confirm that campaigning
was happening. So we've now you know that reports concluded
there were obviously two parts. We've updated the Ministerial staff
Code of Conduct and guidelines and all of those things
to strengthen it even further to make sure this doesn't
(05:23):
happen again. But what it basically confirms is that labor
had an unfair advantage going into the twenty twenty election,
and it doesn't meet community expectational standard. Now, I would
expect many people are disappointed by the report, both reports
and ultimately you know, the k has reviewed this matter now,
(05:43):
but it's very serious.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
I mean, do we have any idea how much money
was potentially wasted here or what kind of you know,
what kind of hours give us something tangible?
Speaker 3 (05:55):
No, that wasn't part of the report, so I don't
have any more detail really than any other territory and
has Katie. I've read the report obviously, so not a
lot of detail, no finding some clear recommendations and we
moved on those straight away just in the absolute abundance
of doubt. So we've tightened all of that up. These
rules apply of course to the opposition staff as well.
Speaker 2 (06:20):
But it's very disappointing.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
I think it closes a very long drawn out saga
and I think people are left wondering, well, you know what's.
Speaker 1 (06:27):
Well, a lot of people are left wondering what exactly
is the purpose of the IKAK as well, because we've
got a situation where there's been a number of different
reports obviously conducted. And I'm not criticizing the IKAK, but
you know, even in this situation where there's no adverse
findings against any individuals, but we've now had two reports
into what was going on before that twenty twenty election,
(06:51):
some people are questioning right now whether the IKAK is
worth the funding.
Speaker 3 (06:56):
And it's you know, people have a right to ask
that question. Of course, we're paying for two i caacs
as well at the moment continuing that's been ongoing since
oh gosh, I can't remember, it's about May last year,
I think, Katie. So you know, it is a big
use of taxpayers funds.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
It needs to be working properly.
Speaker 3 (07:15):
We want a strong eye CAAC in the territory and
obviously there's been a lot of drama around it. But
even this report of course was done externally because of
the conflict issue raised by the acting ICACK. So there's
been many different parties involved over the years, but what
we need to do is really make sure we've got
a fit for purpose IICACS going forward that meets expectations.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
So are you going to continue to fund the icc.
Speaker 3 (07:41):
Yeah, absolutely, Katie, there's no question about that. There will
be an i CAAQ in the territory. We're just really
looking forward to give certainty. You know, we've put in
place a new acting ICAC to give those stuff and
all of the ongoing investigation certainty. But we really want
to see all of this come to an end so
we can move forward.
Speaker 1 (07:59):
All right, let's move along. Because the Correctional Services Legislative
Amendment Bill passed through Parliament last week. It is aimed
at delivering workforce reforms in an effort to support correction stuff,
and it is workforce pressures. So the problem you've got
here is that correctional stuff do not seem to want
these changes to go ahead. Nonetheless, the legislative changes have
(08:20):
been passed. How soon are we going to potentially see
a surge workforce from interstate or these changes really become operational.
Speaker 3 (08:28):
Yeah, we're certainly hoping for next week, Katie, and just
for a bit of background, and I think there's been
unfortunate gameplay happening here. But you know, the Minister met
with the unions in November last year and they've point
blank said to him we need twenty or thirty more staff.
We've now moved to find a solution to that. Now
there are thirty one in the training college right now,
(08:49):
but we need more ongoing. So we've found a solution
to get our police and corrections officers out of operating
taxi services for prisoners to fill that gap with people
coming from interstate. So it's very meaningful. What we're doing
is very meaningful in terms of freeing up police to
be on the front line and freeing up our hard
working corrections offices to be on the front line. So
(09:11):
I don't think Territorians want to see cops shuttling people
from Parmesan watchhouse to court, all corrections officers. And that's
the gap we're plugging because there is a workforce shortage
and we need these people behind bars, which means we
need more prison off.
Speaker 1 (09:24):
So did you say we are expecting a surge workforce
from next week.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
I'm certainly hoping, so, Katie, we solch this on urgency
because we want it done urgently, so stuff from interstate Yeah, yeah, exactly,
so the minister will be better place to answer those questions.
But certainly we are pushing as hard and fast as
we can to give that reprieve to our corrections officers
who are doing one hundred and sixty thousand hours in
overtime every year.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
We've got to drop those numbers for their.
Speaker 3 (09:51):
Own health and well being and safety, and we need
the support so that our police can be back on
the frontline.
Speaker 1 (09:56):
All right, Well, we are going to be catching up
with the Corrections Commissioner after you, in fact, so we'll
get some of that that you know, those questions answered
in terms of the operational stuff. I mean, are you
concerned that, according to the union, the workforce is losing
confidence in leadership.
Speaker 2 (10:12):
No, I don't think so at all.
Speaker 3 (10:13):
And certainly when we go around and talk to prison officers,
they are really putting their shoulder to the will. They
understand the situation because they're the ones who've been underfunded
and under resource for so long under labor, so they
get that things are at a crisis point. They're doing
everything they can and ultimately our prison officers don't want
these people back on the street. They live in our
community as well, their kids live here, their wives and
(10:35):
families are here. So you know, five hundred more people
in prison since the election is needed because these people
are a risk to our community safety. So everyone's chipping in.
It's not perfect cative, but we are working over time
on that Corrections master Plan to get as many beds
as possible. But more beds we put on means we
need more prison officers, so we've got to do that
(10:56):
work commensurate.
Speaker 1 (10:58):
Chief Minister concerns Raiseler this week that you've walked back
on an election commitment to pay bonuses to long serving
police officers. So during the election campaign you'd issued a
press release stated on the August fifteen last year, it
stated a ten thousand dollars bonus is going to be
given to those who've dedicated ten years service, fifteen thousand
(11:19):
for those who've served fifteen years, and twenty thousand for
those who celebrate twenty, twenty five and thirty year milestones,
and for all five year increments. After that, Steve Edgington
joined us on the show on Friday and said that
this would be happening police will get their bonuses. Can
you commit to that?
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (11:39):
Absolutely, So there's just been a bit of confusion around
this issue. So when we announced the retention bonus last year,
it was off the back of the Non Territory Police
Association wanting a retention bonus. Now they didn't have a
version of the bonus they wanted, so in consultation with them,
that's the promise we made to territorians and to police.
Now going forward we rescidves and feedback from the NTPA
(12:01):
and others that it maybe didn't hit the mark. So
what we've been doing is just looking at further improvements
or enhancements. But I absolutely, categorically can say we will
deliver what we promised, which was twelve months this year.
So anyone achieving those milestones from one January will be
paid from one July. So we'll make sure anyone hitting
a milestone in that press as identified and promised back
(12:25):
in August last year, will receive their bonuses.
Speaker 2 (12:28):
But we want this to be ongoing. So what is
on the table is how this.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
Looks after that twelve month What does a retention bonus
into the.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
Future look like. Okay, because the association has raised concerns
that the retention bonus is only for the next twelve months,
not five years like they were promised. They say they were.
Speaker 3 (12:46):
Promised No, so that's not correct either. We only ever
promised twelve months. I then said last week in Parliament
that we want this to be five years. So that's
going above and beyond the promise.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
So you want it to be longer than twelve months, yes, So.
Speaker 3 (12:59):
What we're doing is exactly what was promised, which was
twelve months. I wanted to go for longer, and that's
what's on the table for discussion after this next year
and we analyze how it worked, what can police retention
look like. So that's what we're at the table with
the NTPA on and that's what we'll continue to discuss
going forward. But absolute certainty, the commitment made in August
(13:21):
stands and that rolls out from one July backdated to
one January.
Speaker 1 (13:26):
But you're saying you want it to go for five years, yes, Well,
committed to it going for five years.
Speaker 3 (13:31):
Yes, but perhaps in a different form, so that I
think that's where the confusion lies.
Speaker 1 (13:35):
So I think that's going to be waddle upset people
to to be blunt about it because I know that
according you know, from what I've heard from the association,
a lot of members they say, voted for you thinking
that they'd be getting a twenty thousand dollar bonus within
the next five years.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
No, it's not.
Speaker 3 (13:51):
So this is where the confusion is. We never committed
to five years. It was a one year police retention bonus.
And everyone that we promised who would get the retention
bonus will get the retention bonus. That is lock solid,
absolutely no problems. What I have said in the last
week is that what will this look like going forward?
Because Katie, for example, sixty one percent of constables leave
(14:14):
before the ten year mark. So that's a huge number
of police. So do I need to pull more resource
or more energy or look more closely at what people
at that level need to keep them in the job
for longer. Now, it's very important distinction. This is not
a service payment, a payment for service. This is a
retention bonus. It's about keeping people in the police longer.
(14:37):
So it's to make sure that we're giving police who
might be thinking of leaving that extra reason to stay
on top of all of the new powers we're giving them,
on top of you know, everything else we're doing to
try and support our frontline.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
Look, I get what you're saying, but I think to myself,
imagine being a police officer who's done nineteen years, who's
going to miss out potentially.
Speaker 3 (14:59):
Well, it was only ever a twelve month commitment, and
ultimately the NTPA aren't happy with this. We don't want
to keep this going for five years because it's not
it's not something the NTPA is supportive of to run
that for five years either. So we're standing true to
our commitment so that twelve months is locked in. You
will receive your retention bonus if you meet those milestones
(15:20):
in twenty twenty five. I'm keen to keep this conversation
going about what where does this need to be, what
does it need to look like? And so hopefully in
the next couple of months we can then give certainty
going forward about what retention.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
Looks like well and how much is it going to get?
Speaker 2 (15:36):
Yeah, that's right, So the three million is a ferry
committed to that yet.
Speaker 1 (15:40):
So in terms of moving forward, I mean, does it
come out of like surely it's not going to come
out of the Northern Territory Police operational budget.
Speaker 3 (15:48):
No, So so we've put the three million dollars aside
for that going forward, we're happy to continue that three million.
Now the NTPA has some other ideas about what might
work better. Does that three million end up going to that,
does it end up going in as part of EBA
negotiations for example. So there's a lot going on this year,
(16:08):
and it's just about making sure that if we're going
to spend money retaining police that ongoing, we have a
system that works. But certainty will be delivered this year
as promised, and there was never a promise for five years.
That is something I said last week saying I'd like it.
I'd like something to keep going into the future.
Speaker 1 (16:29):
But it's not going to be for five years.
Speaker 2 (16:31):
No, No, into the future.
Speaker 3 (16:32):
It will be for there will be some form of
retention for five years. It might not look like the
one for this year.
Speaker 1 (16:38):
All right, So further discussions by the sounds of things
with the Police Association.
Speaker 3 (16:42):
For four years for everything after this year is for discussion.
This year is locked in, So if we're talking about
five no one has to think about this year. That's
all locked in. We'll be delivered as promised after this year.
I'm saying right, for the next four years. What is
that going to look like?
Speaker 1 (16:59):
And what do you say to those police officers that
are potentially listening this morning that are going, well, hang
on a sick I thought this was for the next
five years. I am really annoyed by this.
Speaker 3 (17:07):
No, they shouldn't because it's only come up last week
and then being confused by the media commentary around it.
So it's just been an unfortunate week where there's been
misinformation going around. So the only way police could be
confused is in the last couple of days because of
the commentary around it.
Speaker 2 (17:25):
But that was never the case.
Speaker 3 (17:26):
I can assure you and anyone can go back and
look at the original commitment. It was for twelve months.
The first time five years came up was last week.
Speaker 1 (17:35):
All right, well, no doubt we're going to talk further
about this, and it is.
Speaker 3 (17:39):
It is all on the table, right, So anyone concerned,
I mean, don't forget even with this version we've got
for twelve months, there are people very unhappy about that
as well, Katie. So it's definitely not going to be
a crowd pleaser for everyone because no matter where you
draw the line on the milestone or the amounts people
will miss out.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
And to play devil's advocate here, I mean, where do
you draw the line in terms of the government spent.
Because you guys were out last week saying, you know
that you've got to remove the debt ceiling because we
are in an astronomical level of debt. Then the public
servants obviously also negotiating or getting the three percent wage increase,
which I you know, I totally agree with, the cost
(18:16):
of being is insane at the moment, and that had
already been agreed to. But others listening who maybe work
in the private sector might be going, well, hang on
a second, this is a lot of money that's flown
out the door.
Speaker 3 (18:27):
Yeah, and that's why we have to spend it targeted
on retention. And that's why it's not a service a
payment for service. It's a payment to keep people in
the job for longer. So we're wanting to give people
extra reasons to do another three years, to do another
four years.
Speaker 2 (18:42):
And so.
Speaker 3 (18:44):
It's exactly the same as our home build scheme or
anything else. There are criteria around it, and some people
fall in and some people fall out. Now that's it
is absolutely unfortunate that this week there has been misinformation,
and you know, I apologize for causing part of that confusion,
but I just want everyone to understand we will deliver
on our promise. That certainty is absolutely locked in. What
(19:06):
I'm talking about is going forward, what can the next
four years look like? And that just might mean we
put more money into the EBA so that every single
police officer gets paid more. That might end up being
the outcome. Katie. I'm very open to working with the
NTPA on it, but locked in twelve months. If you
are going to get it, you're gonna get it.
Speaker 1 (19:23):
All right. Well, I'm sure there'll be for the discussions
about this. Hey, we've got a few listener questions coming through.
I've got one here, Hi, Katie, can you ask the
Chief Minister about the solar tariff increase not being between
sunrise to sundown ie peak period as promised? And who
made the decision between three pm to nine pm where
solar is not made when there's no sunlight. Thank you,
(19:46):
Scotty from Palm Oh.
Speaker 3 (19:47):
Yeah, great question, Scottie. So that's actually the peak period
is determined by Power and Water Corporation. So I'm not
sure where people thought six to six I'm not sure
where that came from. The advice from Power and Water
is the three till nine. But you know, on this uptake,
we've had three times the number of people applying for
(20:07):
this rebate then under Labour's previous scheme. So we've taken
it from five to twelve thousand. We've taken it per
per person, we've taken it from three million dollars to
six million dollars and the take up has been huge.
From one December we've had two hundred people applying and
I think it's about ninety percent of people whove applied
have been successful. So it's it's going great. It's going great.
Speaker 1 (20:28):
You're the Chief Minister. Though surely if you don't like
that peak period you can change it.
Speaker 3 (20:33):
I suppose I could, Katie, But at the end of
the day, you've got to make the right decisions that
make the most sense, and certainly you know it does
make the most sense to keep it to that period.
And you know, we're really proud again. This is a
commitment we took, we've delivered and people are lapping it
up all right.
Speaker 1 (20:51):
Hulk's message, she wants to know why can't the eye
Kak then take matters to the courts to bring consequences
to those who've done the wrong thing, Ie Gunner and
he's chronic.
Speaker 3 (21:02):
Yeah, so the i CAAC can and I think this
again is why people feel so disappointed. The IKAC has
obviously very very broad powers. Then they've got powers to
be able to refer criminal matters to the DPP to
face the courts or whatever other sanctions might be required.
And in both Operation Jupiter reports, both different people who
did those reports found no action.
Speaker 1 (21:24):
So all right, Airman Darwin wants to know, can you
please us, the Chief Minister, when you envisage the prices
at the bottle shops to return to prices prior to
Labour's floor price debarcle.
Speaker 3 (21:35):
Yeah, we've been really clear we want retailers to pass
on the cause. Now in Alice Springs, that industry group
down there has said they're going to do their own
floor price, and that's a matter for that community, but
ultimately we expect retailers to pass on the price the
industry has to their credit come out and said, you know,
a lot of water has gone under the bridge since
(21:55):
twenty eighteen, so a lot of the cost of alcohol
with the taxing preess has gone up, which means the
profit that would the bottlows we're getting is gone. But
there will be some products where they can pass the
savings on and we expect them to do it.
Speaker 1 (22:08):
Chief Finess. A really quick one from Jill Indo Alowa.
Many of us are in shock and disgusted. She sees
that the cancelation of funding to the Environment Center and
its Central Area equivalent. What's the justification for this, given
that these organizations work to keep our environments safe, and
you have done it, and they've done great work for
many years. It is just another move by your government
(22:30):
to silence opposition to environmentally damaging projects.
Speaker 3 (22:34):
Well, it was an election commitment that we made very clear,
probably about a year ago, Katie saying that we would
defund the Environmental Defender's Office, and of course we've wrapped
in the Arid's Land Center with that. It represents about
it two hundred thousand dollars savings to territories that we
are going to put into frontline conservation. So actually things
like planting trees, removing weeds. We do not want to
(22:57):
see public money going into you know, law fare and
activism that's stopping projects happening in the territory that doesn't
protect our environment. What we want to see is projects
getting up through proper approvals processes and money being spent
properly protecting our environment, not spent on lawyer's fees.
Speaker 2 (23:15):
Standing in court all day.
Speaker 1 (23:16):
Chief Minister, we are going to have to leave it there.
Really appreciate your time as always, Thanks so much for
joining us.
Speaker 2 (23:21):
Good to speak with you.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
Take care, Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.