Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Now joining us a little later than usual and on
(00:02):
another day live from Catherine. This morning it is the
Chief Minister Leofanocchiario. Good morning to your Chief Minister.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
Good morning Katie, to your listeners. And I can tell
you it is absolutely freezing. Katherine would not believe.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
I reckon it would be. Well. Chief. Look, we'll talk
more about your visit to Catherine in just a moment,
but I want to take your cross to an article
in the Australian newspaper today Now, the Chief Justice of
the Northern Territory says some extreme attacks on Aboriginal women
have been attributed to bullshit traditional violence, in which perpetrators
(00:35):
seek to justify their crime as the enforcement of their rights.
As he warns, domestic violence is likely worsened in the
top end now. The Chief Justice, Michael Grant, was speaking
to lawyers at a Darwin conference this month and referenced
an Indigenous commentator who noted that drunk Indigenous men abuse
their partners for illegitimate reasons before explaining away the attacks
(01:00):
as some sort of traditional right now. He also said
that Commonwealth legislation introduced in two thousand and six was
intended to protect Aboriginal women by ensuring traditional practices could
not be taken could not be taken into account when
sentencing domestic violence offenders. However, he said that if anything,
(01:21):
violence against Aboriginal women in the territory had increased since
those laws were introduced. Now he goes on to say
that he is now firmly of the view, after ten
years in his current role, that personal and specific deterrence
don't operate on Aboriginal offenders as they might do on
other offenders. That's what he told the Well, that's what
(01:44):
he said in a speech at the Pittington Society event
held on August eight. What do you make of the comments?
Speaker 2 (01:51):
Look, our Chief Justice is a born and bred Territory
kit and he's got an incredible amount of experience in
the legal field as well as being our top judge,
and so what he says carries a lot of weight.
And you know, we have a really significant challenge here
in the territory with domestic violence, and we have many
(02:13):
perpetrators who have no regard for the law, no regard
for their victims, and no regard for the consequences either, Katie,
and that presents a huge challenge for governments and NGOs
and everyone trying to work hard to make sure the
territory is a safe place when you have people who
are just absolutely, you know, almost immune in the sense
(02:37):
that they just do not care about the havoc that
they are perpetrating on our community.
Speaker 1 (02:43):
I mean, when you look at the fact that he
says the Commonwealth legislation introduced in two thousand and six
was intended to protect Aboriginal women by ensuring traditional practice
could practices could not be taken into account when sentencing
domestic violence offenders, I mean, does there need to be
a look at that legislation and potentially some change in
(03:04):
this space.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
Well, if the Chief Justice has said it, then I
would absolutely take that on his word that it does
need to have a look at. And this is a
challenging part for us as a territory government. Obviously, we're
doing our big Katie, We're working really hard to strengthen
the laws and tackle the root causes of crime. But
there is a role for the federal government to play,
and this is a really clear example of one of them.
(03:27):
Another is making sure that federal funding is going into
organizations and areas that are actually delivering a difference and
that there are KPIs on that funding, so it's something
we want to work closer with the federal government on
and clearly, reducing crime is our number one priority of
the government.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
Yeah, and look, I want to say that he goes
into a lot more depths as well, and I'll read
that out for our listeners throughout this morning, but we
will certainly take them through it. We don't have a
huge amount of time with you this morning, so I
won't take you any further through it because you want
to ask you a little bit more about the rollout
of this OC spray from September one. What's the process
at this stage for the rollout?
Speaker 2 (04:08):
Yeah, it's really exciting. So we will have tablets or
our iPads on the counters of the nine firearm stealers
who have signed up to distribute OC spray or sell
oc spray. People will have to attend. They have to
be over eighteen years of age, they'll have to show
photo identification to the shop and then they'll have to
(04:31):
complete a declaration on that iPad and not have any
relevant criminal history or court orders and things like that,
and the questionnaire will take the territory through that and
you'll only be able to buy it from those nine
declared firearm stealers at this point, and then you'll be
able to purchase them and walk out with it straight away.
You'll be given a flyer about how to use it,
(04:53):
and we have asked Neighborhood Watch is part of an
extension to their self defense pro that they already run
to be able to incorporate usage of OC spray in
that as well as people feel like they want to have,
you know, some extra skills around the use of OC spray.
So yeah, it's all get up. Stock is on its
(05:14):
way and we'll be ready to go from one September.
Speaker 1 (05:17):
I mean, is there going to be any concern or
do you have any concern around it getting in the
wrong hands or somebody maybe who you know, who uses
it in self defense ending up in trouble.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
So the self defense laws in the Northern Territory already
exist and they haven't been changed. So the police commissioner
spoke about this with me yesterday. If someone is going
to engage in self defense, so I they are going
to spray someone with OC spray, they have to be
ready to you know, explain that use of force and
be able to justify it just like they would anything else.
(05:50):
So right, I think there's you know, I think some
people are getting a bit fixnated on the spray component.
If I just really simplify things right now, you can
go to neighborhood Watch and they teach you how to
have hand to hand self defense. Now that means you
are in physical contact with someone wanting to cause harm
to you. OC spray allows you to have a separation
(06:12):
and a two or three meter different can mean the
difference between you getting away or you being seriously injured.
And so it's not it's actually a safer mechanism than
having to get in a hand to hand combat with someone.
And I think that's just really important put into illustrated.
If someone has formed the intention to hurt you, they
(06:32):
will and what OC spray does is buys you time
to get away.
Speaker 1 (06:35):
All right Now, in terms of the government's release of
a reducing crime strategy, we know that a three year
strategy has been released aimed at reducing crime. What does
this strategy look like and also what benchmarks are going
to use to sort of determine if it's working.
Speaker 2 (06:52):
Yeah, so we've pulled together our strategy. Obviously it's been
something we've been working madly on over the last eleven months.
And so when our strategy is really put into words,
our plan and so it has five key areas of focus.
So it's about obviously having a safer community, that's the
number one objective. We want to reduce reoffending. We want
to hold parents and families accountable, and we want to
(07:15):
address the root causes of crime and reform the system.
So when we talk about courts and corrections and all
of those things. So there's five key areas of focus
and they're all very straightforward in terms of people would
imagine that's what you need to do if we're going
to reduce crime holistically, and we will measure those obviously
through the data and through our delivery of programs we
(07:37):
want to see particularly that repeat offending, and that looks
like delivering more programs in prison, which we've actually been
able to do when you compare the number of programs
we've been able to deliver compared to the time underlay,
but we've already been more successful at that. So it
remains a big focus holding parents and families to account.
So the number of family responsibility agreements and agements with
(08:00):
our school attendance officers, addressing the root causes of crime,
you know, getting to those underlying issues around housing, alcohol,
those types of causal factors, and our system reforms. We've
got a big piece of court reform coming up, so
there's lots of ways peak in which the community will
be able to judge and measure our success. And we
(08:20):
want and welcome that because we want territories to be
a part of this. But we're really excited and it
just gives everyday territories the opportunity to say, right, what
is it the disc government is trying to do. They
can clearly say safer community, reduce reoffending, hold parents and
families accountable, address the root causes and reform the system.
Speaker 1 (08:40):
Chief Minister. A couple of quick listener questions. Judis, good morning, Katie.
Can you please ask Lea, does the pepper spray have
a used by day? Oh?
Speaker 2 (08:48):
I don't know. I guess it would depend on the distributius.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
Yeah, we'll try and find out. We'll see if we
can catch up with the retailer. Hey, Dave im Palmo's
saying good morning Katie. From what I'm hearing is each
can of spray is going to set you back between
forty and fifty dollars. He reckons that's a small price
to pay for a deterrent. Is it that expensive? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (09:10):
My understanding is in Western Australia it's about fifty dollars.
It depends on the size, and there's two sizes. And
in speaking with Trent for example, from Rodern Rifle yesterday,
he was saying it's probably going to be within that
forty to sixty dollars market gain depending on the size.
So I just want to emphasize no, one, it's not compulsory.
(09:30):
I think there's this big misunderstanding as well that we're
somehow pausing people to go and purchase this stuff. It's
just another option, another tool in your toolkit for self
defense and self protection. So now it's won't be forced.
You can go and buy yourself if.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
You want to own personal decision. Now you're in Catherine
at the moment, there's been some terrible crime in Catherine recently,
particularly the targeting of the cuff of the coffee club.
Have you been in to see Nicky and her team
and I mean, how are they going? Like they've literally
had a tax on staff.
Speaker 2 (10:03):
Yeah, it's been it's been a really, really tough time
for Nicki and the team. So I went and visited
Nicki after those staff assaults and then again yesterday, and
they're doing really well. They're just such a resilient team
and amazing local business. You know, the restaurant, the cafe
was full to the brim, and you know, you know,
(10:24):
Nicky is a very very strong woman and it's not easy,
and I just commend her for it. And this is,
this is why we're doing what we're doing, Katie, because
we don't want the heartbreak and the stress and the
concern to be borne by the community like it has
for so long. We share that pain with our fellow
territory and around this and we share their desire to
live in a safer community. So you know, we wake
(10:45):
up every day to make a difference, and that's what
we're working hard to do. And unfortunately, we still have
people making the choice to do the wrong thing, making
the choice to hurt other people, destroy other people's property,
and then that's unacceptable. And when they do, our police
so right there to give them a welcome straight into
the back of a paddyway.
Speaker 1 (11:03):
Yeah, we've all had enough of it, all had enough
of senseless crime, I do. I want to move to
another topic, one which quite a few people are concerned about,
but certainly nt COGSO now we know. On the first
of July, obviously, the government announced a number of changes
to electricity pricing, which saw that three percent increase in power,
water and sewerage tariffs. But NT schools were taken off
(11:24):
the subsidy list and moved to cost reflective pricing. They're
no longer going to receive the Community service obligation subsidy
for electricity now. Ruth Myram's nt COGSO president, joined us
on the show yesterday and said that it means massive
power price increases for some of the schools. I mean,
she said to us yesterday on the show, like one
(11:45):
school in particular and Tenant Creek, their power price has
gone up a few thousand dollars within a month. Chief Minister,
is this was it a mistake or was there a
bit of an oversight here in this space?
Speaker 2 (11:58):
No, no, so what we've done and I can completely
appreciate the concern. I want to say from the outset,
schools would not be worse off. So that's a really
important clarification. And so I'll explain that. So what we've
done is looked at user size. I suppose it's a
bit like we had a super user conversation a few
weeks ago around home, and so what we did is
(12:19):
looked at high level users of businesses and sort of
change the model. And schools have fallen into that. But
what we've done is underwritten it to say that schools
won't be worse off. And what it is is, effectively,
it's just the movement how money moves. What we're trying
to do is be more transparent about the cost. So
currently there is a community service obligation, which is just
(12:43):
another word for government subsidizing the cost of power, and
we do that for everyday territories. We do it for
big users too, and so moving to a model where
big users are paying more of their usage rather than
that subsidized see which is coming out of everyday taxpayers
tax instead of going into roads and police, it's going
to subsidize everyone's power. What we've done is just lowered
(13:07):
the threshold for that, and schools have now fallen over
that line. But what we've done is made sure that
the department will be paying that difference.
Speaker 1 (13:16):
Isn't that still going to mean that it's coming out
of budget, So like ultimately that's still going to affect
the resourcing for our kids.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
No, it will so because it's not coming from school budgets.
It's not coming from money that goes to school. This
is operational funding.
Speaker 1 (13:33):
It's allowed to the Education department supposed to find this
additional money.
Speaker 2 (13:38):
From so they have that money budget into their operational funding.
And so it's just a more transparent way to see
and understand. And it also then gives the Department of
Education I sort of better understanding of power usage, a
better understanding of demand, and so it's it's just a change,
(14:01):
but for schools and the education system, it won't make
any difference.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
So can you guarantee that we're not going to see
a situation here where we all know that we're getting
additional funding from the federal government. You know that was
announced last year, I believe it was earlier this year.
Can you guarantee that money that is intended for schools
is not now going to be going to paying power.
Speaker 2 (14:25):
Yep, Because schools have their proper funding under that new
SRS standard and the model, and so schools are funded
appropriately as pursuant to that model, and we've signed up
to that agreement. This is just the movement of money
to pay the bills, just like you think about all
the bills that we would have as a Department of education.
You know, you know Mitchell Center. We've got tons of
(14:48):
public servants sitting in the Miteal Center who are part
of the Education Department. We've paid the rent, we pay
all sorts of things. So it just goes into that
bucket as opposed to a school.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
Per Yeah, but ultimately we're still talking about a bucket
of you know, if we looked at the education department
as a household budget, there's a bucket of money there
that is then being delivered to different areas, to different schools.
If that bucket of money is being minimized because of
power bills, then surely it means that it's going to
have an impact in some way those on those schools
(15:18):
and the delivery of services.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Yeah, and so that's our commitment that it won't because
it's not coming out of that frontline school funding. It's
coming kind of operational funding.
Speaker 1 (15:29):
So is there going to be an increase in the
education budget.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
I don't know that there needs to be that's certainly
not the advice that we've received, and we've just delivered it.
I think it was a one point six billion dollar
education budget record budget, so we've got adequate funding there,
and again it depends on the school, will depend on
the increase. I know Tenant Creek is one of the
ones with a more significant increase, but others are much
(15:55):
more minimal.
Speaker 1 (15:56):
So I guess I'm just trying to wrap my head
around because I know a lot of people listening this
morning will be wondering the same thing. So Tenant Creek,
for example, like you said, you know, we spoke yesterday
about this, it's it's an additional few thousand dollars for
one month alone, So let's say across the year it's
twenty thousand dollars extra, And other schools are in a
(16:16):
similar situation. It's still money that the Education Department's going
to have to find from somewhere. Have they got surplus
there that they're able to use on power bills or
is it going to mean a reduction when you talk
about the education departments, you know, funding that should be
going to schools for things like teachers' aids programs for
(16:39):
our kids.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
Yeah, so I just want to really clearly separate that.
So the Education Department has an enormous budget one point
six billion dollars. There is most of that goes to
school So that's what pays teaches, it's what pays teachers, aids,
all of those different types of things within a school
setting for our kids to access education and deliver that education.
(17:02):
Then there is all of the funding for I guess
the back of house. We have a number of public
servants who work in the department who are agency based,
so they're not front basing in schools. Then we have
obviously funding for infrastructure, we have funding for a range
of other things, and so this will not be impacting
any of that money that would or should go to schools.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
So you tim to guarantee that for any of those
schools that are listening this morning.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
Yep, that's right. And principals know this, Katie. They've had
two separate briefings on it, so principals are well and
truly aware and really there will be no impact on
the ground for schools.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
All right, Well, this doesn't sound like it's an issue
that's going to go away in a hurry. I reckon,
We're still going to have schools contact us that are concerns,
so I really hope it doesn't have an impact on
those schools, but Chief Minister, we better leave it there.
We have definitely run out of time. Thank you very
much for joining us on the show this morning.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
Thank you to take care everyone.
Speaker 1 (18:01):
Thank you
Now joining us a little later than usual and on
(00:02):
another day live from Catherine. This morning it is the
Chief Minister Leofanocchiario. Good morning to your Chief Minister.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
Good morning Katie, to your listeners. And I can tell
you it is absolutely freezing. Katherine would not believe.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
I reckon it would be. Well. Chief. Look, we'll talk
more about your visit to Catherine in just a moment,
but I want to take your cross to an article
in the Australian newspaper today Now, the Chief Justice of
the Northern Territory says some extreme attacks on Aboriginal women
have been attributed to bullshit traditional violence, in which perpetrators
(00:35):
seek to justify their crime as the enforcement of their rights.
As he warns, domestic violence is likely worsened in the
top end now. The Chief Justice, Michael Grant, was speaking
to lawyers at a Darwin conference this month and referenced
an Indigenous commentator who noted that drunk Indigenous men abuse
their partners for illegitimate reasons before explaining away the attacks
(01:00):
as some sort of traditional right now. He also said
that Commonwealth legislation introduced in two thousand and six was
intended to protect Aboriginal women by ensuring traditional practices could
not be taken could not be taken into account when
sentencing domestic violence offenders. However, he said that if anything,
(01:21):
violence against Aboriginal women in the territory had increased since
those laws were introduced. Now he goes on to say
that he is now firmly of the view, after ten
years in his current role, that personal and specific deterrence
don't operate on Aboriginal offenders as they might do on
other offenders. That's what he told the Well, that's what
(01:44):
he said in a speech at the Pittington Society event
held on August eight. What do you make of the comments?
Speaker 2 (01:51):
Look, our Chief Justice is a born and bred Territory
kit and he's got an incredible amount of experience in
the legal field as well as being our top judge,
and so what he says carries a lot of weight.
And you know, we have a really significant challenge here
in the territory with domestic violence, and we have many
(02:13):
perpetrators who have no regard for the law, no regard
for their victims, and no regard for the consequences either, Katie,
and that presents a huge challenge for governments and NGOs
and everyone trying to work hard to make sure the
territory is a safe place when you have people who
are just absolutely, you know, almost immune in the sense
(02:37):
that they just do not care about the havoc that
they are perpetrating on our community.
Speaker 1 (02:43):
I mean, when you look at the fact that he
says the Commonwealth legislation introduced in two thousand and six
was intended to protect Aboriginal women by ensuring traditional practice
could practices could not be taken into account when sentencing
domestic violence offenders, I mean, does there need to be
a look at that legislation and potentially some change in
(03:04):
this space.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
Well, if the Chief Justice has said it, then I
would absolutely take that on his word that it does
need to have a look at. And this is a
challenging part for us as a territory government. Obviously, we're
doing our big Katie, We're working really hard to strengthen
the laws and tackle the root causes of crime. But
there is a role for the federal government to play,
and this is a really clear example of one of them.
(03:27):
Another is making sure that federal funding is going into
organizations and areas that are actually delivering a difference and
that there are KPIs on that funding, so it's something
we want to work closer with the federal government on
and clearly, reducing crime is our number one priority of
the government.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
Yeah, and look, I want to say that he goes
into a lot more depths as well, and I'll read
that out for our listeners throughout this morning, but we
will certainly take them through it. We don't have a
huge amount of time with you this morning, so I
won't take you any further through it because you want
to ask you a little bit more about the rollout
of this OC spray from September one. What's the process
at this stage for the rollout?
Speaker 2 (04:08):
Yeah, it's really exciting. So we will have tablets or
our iPads on the counters of the nine firearm stealers
who have signed up to distribute OC spray or sell
oc spray. People will have to attend. They have to
be over eighteen years of age, they'll have to show
photo identification to the shop and then they'll have to
(04:31):
complete a declaration on that iPad and not have any
relevant criminal history or court orders and things like that,
and the questionnaire will take the territory through that and
you'll only be able to buy it from those nine
declared firearm stealers at this point, and then you'll be
able to purchase them and walk out with it straight away.
You'll be given a flyer about how to use it,
(04:53):
and we have asked Neighborhood Watch is part of an
extension to their self defense pro that they already run
to be able to incorporate usage of OC spray in
that as well as people feel like they want to have,
you know, some extra skills around the use of OC spray.
So yeah, it's all get up. Stock is on its
(05:14):
way and we'll be ready to go from one September.
Speaker 1 (05:17):
I mean, is there going to be any concern or
do you have any concern around it getting in the
wrong hands or somebody maybe who you know, who uses
it in self defense ending up in trouble.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
So the self defense laws in the Northern Territory already
exist and they haven't been changed. So the police commissioner
spoke about this with me yesterday. If someone is going
to engage in self defense, so I they are going
to spray someone with OC spray, they have to be
ready to you know, explain that use of force and
be able to justify it just like they would anything else.
(05:50):
So right, I think there's you know, I think some
people are getting a bit fixnated on the spray component.
If I just really simplify things right now, you can
go to neighborhood Watch and they teach you how to
have hand to hand self defense. Now that means you
are in physical contact with someone wanting to cause harm
to you. OC spray allows you to have a separation
(06:12):
and a two or three meter different can mean the
difference between you getting away or you being seriously injured.
And so it's not it's actually a safer mechanism than
having to get in a hand to hand combat with someone.
And I think that's just really important put into illustrated.
If someone has formed the intention to hurt you, they
(06:32):
will and what OC spray does is buys you time
to get away.
Speaker 1 (06:35):
All right Now, in terms of the government's release of
a reducing crime strategy, we know that a three year
strategy has been released aimed at reducing crime. What does
this strategy look like and also what benchmarks are going
to use to sort of determine if it's working.
Speaker 2 (06:52):
Yeah, so we've pulled together our strategy. Obviously it's been
something we've been working madly on over the last eleven months.
And so when our strategy is really put into words,
our plan and so it has five key areas of focus.
So it's about obviously having a safer community, that's the
number one objective. We want to reduce reoffending. We want
to hold parents and families accountable, and we want to
(07:15):
address the root causes of crime and reform the system.
So when we talk about courts and corrections and all
of those things. So there's five key areas of focus
and they're all very straightforward in terms of people would
imagine that's what you need to do if we're going
to reduce crime holistically, and we will measure those obviously
through the data and through our delivery of programs we
(07:37):
want to see particularly that repeat offending, and that looks
like delivering more programs in prison, which we've actually been
able to do when you compare the number of programs
we've been able to deliver compared to the time underlay,
but we've already been more successful at that. So it
remains a big focus holding parents and families to account.
So the number of family responsibility agreements and agements with
(08:00):
our school attendance officers, addressing the root causes of crime,
you know, getting to those underlying issues around housing, alcohol,
those types of causal factors, and our system reforms. We've
got a big piece of court reform coming up, so
there's lots of ways peak in which the community will
be able to judge and measure our success. And we
(08:20):
want and welcome that because we want territories to be
a part of this. But we're really excited and it
just gives everyday territories the opportunity to say, right, what
is it the disc government is trying to do. They
can clearly say safer community, reduce reoffending, hold parents and
families accountable, address the root causes and reform the system.
Speaker 1 (08:40):
Chief Minister. A couple of quick listener questions. Judis, good morning, Katie.
Can you please ask Lea, does the pepper spray have
a used by day? Oh?
Speaker 2 (08:48):
I don't know. I guess it would depend on the distributius.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
Yeah, we'll try and find out. We'll see if we
can catch up with the retailer. Hey, Dave im Palmo's
saying good morning Katie. From what I'm hearing is each
can of spray is going to set you back between
forty and fifty dollars. He reckons that's a small price
to pay for a deterrent. Is it that expensive? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (09:10):
My understanding is in Western Australia it's about fifty dollars.
It depends on the size, and there's two sizes. And
in speaking with Trent for example, from Rodern Rifle yesterday,
he was saying it's probably going to be within that
forty to sixty dollars market gain depending on the size.
So I just want to emphasize no, one, it's not compulsory.
(09:30):
I think there's this big misunderstanding as well that we're
somehow pausing people to go and purchase this stuff. It's
just another option, another tool in your toolkit for self
defense and self protection. So now it's won't be forced.
You can go and buy yourself if.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
You want to own personal decision. Now you're in Catherine
at the moment, there's been some terrible crime in Catherine recently,
particularly the targeting of the cuff of the coffee club.
Have you been in to see Nicky and her team
and I mean, how are they going? Like they've literally
had a tax on staff.
Speaker 2 (10:03):
Yeah, it's been it's been a really, really tough time
for Nicki and the team. So I went and visited
Nicki after those staff assaults and then again yesterday, and
they're doing really well. They're just such a resilient team
and amazing local business. You know, the restaurant, the cafe
was full to the brim, and you know, you know,
(10:24):
Nicky is a very very strong woman and it's not easy,
and I just commend her for it. And this is,
this is why we're doing what we're doing, Katie, because
we don't want the heartbreak and the stress and the
concern to be borne by the community like it has
for so long. We share that pain with our fellow
territory and around this and we share their desire to
live in a safer community. So you know, we wake
(10:45):
up every day to make a difference, and that's what
we're working hard to do. And unfortunately, we still have
people making the choice to do the wrong thing, making
the choice to hurt other people, destroy other people's property,
and then that's unacceptable. And when they do, our police
so right there to give them a welcome straight into
the back of a paddyway.
Speaker 1 (11:03):
Yeah, we've all had enough of it, all had enough
of senseless crime, I do. I want to move to
another topic, one which quite a few people are concerned about,
but certainly nt COGSO now we know. On the first
of July, obviously, the government announced a number of changes
to electricity pricing, which saw that three percent increase in power,
water and sewerage tariffs. But NT schools were taken off
(11:24):
the subsidy list and moved to cost reflective pricing. They're
no longer going to receive the Community service obligation subsidy
for electricity now. Ruth Myram's nt COGSO president, joined us
on the show yesterday and said that it means massive
power price increases for some of the schools. I mean,
she said to us yesterday on the show, like one
(11:45):
school in particular and Tenant Creek, their power price has
gone up a few thousand dollars within a month. Chief Minister,
is this was it a mistake or was there a
bit of an oversight here in this space?
Speaker 2 (11:58):
No, no, so what we've done and I can completely
appreciate the concern. I want to say from the outset,
schools would not be worse off. So that's a really
important clarification. And so I'll explain that. So what we've
done is looked at user size. I suppose it's a
bit like we had a super user conversation a few
weeks ago around home, and so what we did is
(12:19):
looked at high level users of businesses and sort of
change the model. And schools have fallen into that. But
what we've done is underwritten it to say that schools
won't be worse off. And what it is is, effectively,
it's just the movement how money moves. What we're trying
to do is be more transparent about the cost. So
currently there is a community service obligation, which is just
(12:43):
another word for government subsidizing the cost of power, and
we do that for everyday territories. We do it for
big users too, and so moving to a model where
big users are paying more of their usage rather than
that subsidized see which is coming out of everyday taxpayers
tax instead of going into roads and police, it's going
to subsidize everyone's power. What we've done is just lowered
(13:07):
the threshold for that, and schools have now fallen over
that line. But what we've done is made sure that
the department will be paying that difference.
Speaker 1 (13:16):
Isn't that still going to mean that it's coming out
of budget, So like ultimately that's still going to affect
the resourcing for our kids.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
No, it will so because it's not coming from school budgets.
It's not coming from money that goes to school. This
is operational funding.
Speaker 1 (13:33):
It's allowed to the Education department supposed to find this
additional money.
Speaker 2 (13:38):
From so they have that money budget into their operational funding.
And so it's just a more transparent way to see
and understand. And it also then gives the Department of
Education I sort of better understanding of power usage, a
better understanding of demand, and so it's it's just a change,
(14:01):
but for schools and the education system, it won't make
any difference.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
So can you guarantee that we're not going to see
a situation here where we all know that we're getting
additional funding from the federal government. You know that was
announced last year, I believe it was earlier this year.
Can you guarantee that money that is intended for schools
is not now going to be going to paying power.
Speaker 2 (14:25):
Yep, Because schools have their proper funding under that new
SRS standard and the model, and so schools are funded
appropriately as pursuant to that model, and we've signed up
to that agreement. This is just the movement of money
to pay the bills, just like you think about all
the bills that we would have as a Department of education.
You know, you know Mitchell Center. We've got tons of
(14:48):
public servants sitting in the Miteal Center who are part
of the Education Department. We've paid the rent, we pay
all sorts of things. So it just goes into that
bucket as opposed to a school.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
Per Yeah, but ultimately we're still talking about a bucket
of you know, if we looked at the education department
as a household budget, there's a bucket of money there
that is then being delivered to different areas, to different schools.
If that bucket of money is being minimized because of
power bills, then surely it means that it's going to
have an impact in some way those on those schools
(15:18):
and the delivery of services.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Yeah, and so that's our commitment that it won't because
it's not coming out of that frontline school funding. It's
coming kind of operational funding.
Speaker 1 (15:29):
So is there going to be an increase in the
education budget.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
I don't know that there needs to be that's certainly
not the advice that we've received, and we've just delivered it.
I think it was a one point six billion dollar
education budget record budget, so we've got adequate funding there,
and again it depends on the school, will depend on
the increase. I know Tenant Creek is one of the
ones with a more significant increase, but others are much
(15:55):
more minimal.
Speaker 1 (15:56):
So I guess I'm just trying to wrap my head
around because I know a lot of people listening this
morning will be wondering the same thing. So Tenant Creek,
for example, like you said, you know, we spoke yesterday
about this, it's it's an additional few thousand dollars for
one month alone, So let's say across the year it's
twenty thousand dollars extra, And other schools are in a
(16:16):
similar situation. It's still money that the Education Department's going
to have to find from somewhere. Have they got surplus
there that they're able to use on power bills or
is it going to mean a reduction when you talk
about the education departments, you know, funding that should be
going to schools for things like teachers' aids programs for
(16:39):
our kids.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
Yeah, so I just want to really clearly separate that.
So the Education Department has an enormous budget one point
six billion dollars. There is most of that goes to
school So that's what pays teaches, it's what pays teachers, aids,
all of those different types of things within a school
setting for our kids to access education and deliver that education.
(17:02):
Then there is all of the funding for I guess
the back of house. We have a number of public
servants who work in the department who are agency based,
so they're not front basing in schools. Then we have
obviously funding for infrastructure, we have funding for a range
of other things, and so this will not be impacting
any of that money that would or should go to schools.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
So you tim to guarantee that for any of those
schools that are listening this morning.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
Yep, that's right. And principals know this, Katie. They've had
two separate briefings on it, so principals are well and
truly aware and really there will be no impact on
the ground for schools.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
All right, Well, this doesn't sound like it's an issue
that's going to go away in a hurry. I reckon,
We're still going to have schools contact us that are concerns,
so I really hope it doesn't have an impact on
those schools, but Chief Minister, we better leave it there.
We have definitely run out of time. Thank you very
much for joining us on the show this morning.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
Thank you to take care everyone.
Speaker 1 (18:01):
Thank you
Popular Podcasts
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com