Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Last week we obviously saw the government push through changes
to the Youth Justice Act, and while the changes may
have been embraced by victims of crime who've been wanting
to see consequence for youth offending, there's been some pushback
from some in the community. Now. On Friday, we spoke
about the forty five pediatricians who wrote to the Chief
Minister wanting to meet with her and discuss the concerns
(00:22):
that they have with these changes. The Children's Commissioners also
raised concerns about the changes. Now joining us on the
show is the Chief Minister Leofanocchiiro.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Good morning to you, Good morning Katie, into your listener.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
Good to have you on the show now, Chief Minister.
These pediatricians, they wrote to you last week with concerns
around the key that children are receiving in detention. Specifically,
they've called for a reinstatement of the ban on spit hoods,
also ensuring early neuro developmental assessment and appropriate access to
(00:56):
health and education in detention, and prioritizing therapeutic, community based
diversionary alternatives. Chief Minister, have you received that letter.
Speaker 3 (01:08):
Yes, Katie, so, I received that question in Parliament and
when I did follow that up, they had only written
to me three days before.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
So I think the summary of.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
All of this is, if you're going to behave political
you'll get a political response.
Speaker 2 (01:22):
You cannot write to.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
Me and three days later be demanding answers in parliament.
That's just unrealistic. And it says to me that these
forty five pediatricians are doing just that. They're not talking
to me about disease, they're not talking to me about
other chronic illness. They're talking to me about things like
spit guards, which is a clearly political topic. And so
my message to them was, please, families desperately need access
(01:46):
to pediatricians. Don't spend your time being activists trying to
persuade our government to change our mind on issues we
took to the election. Everyone's known that these issues have
been coming. I've been speaking to your listener since the
start of the year about our use justice reforms. You know,
three days before the legislation is set to pass Parliament,
all of a sudden you pop your head up. You know,
(02:07):
this is a really serious issue about law and order,
and we respect what pediatricians do, and that's treat sick
kids and that's exactly what they should spend their time doing. Well.
Speaker 1 (02:15):
I guess some would argue that, you know, ensuring the
early neurodevelopmental assessment and appropriate access to health and education
in detention, as well as prioritizing therapeutic community based diversionary alternatives.
Some would argue, you know, that is in their realm. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (02:32):
Absolutely, And every kid who gets into detention has to
go to school. It's usually the only time they've ever
gone to school, Katie, So I don't understand that argument
at all, because kids in detention must go to school.
In terms of healthcare, again, that's where we have access
to the kids to be able to try and meet
all of the needs which have usually been unmet by
their family or their circumstance.
Speaker 2 (02:53):
So detention is.
Speaker 3 (02:54):
Not a perfect place, nor should it be. But at
the end of the day, what our youth justice law
had nothing to do with whether there was health access
at the detention center or not. It mandated things like
not having to have detention as a last resort. It
gave our youth justice officers powers. For example, and this
is a real legitimate example, youth justice offices under labor
(03:16):
if there was a young person escaping custody, so climbing
the fence something like that. They didn't have powers to
be able to do anything, which is just ridiculous. So
now they do. So that's what our Use Justice Act
reforms did last week. Of course, young people in detention
have access to health care and to education. We only
wish that young people had access to health care and
education before they entered the justice system.
Speaker 1 (03:39):
So what do you make of the concerns that have
been raised? I mean, are you prepared to meet with
them now that you've actually received that letter.
Speaker 3 (03:46):
No, I won't be ktered. This is pointless me meeting
with forty or five pediatricians. I receive their letter. I
understand that their concerns. We don't share their views. Obviously,
this is a political issue. We've passed the law. If
they are concerned about what type of medical care is
happening in detention, they can direct their concerns to the
Health Minister. But you know, I've got to drive the
(04:08):
territory forward. They've got to be doing what they need
to do. This was all a stunt for parliament, and
Parliament's over now, so I suspect everyone will go.
Speaker 2 (04:16):
Back to doing what they do during the way.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
Some have been Some including the AMA the Australian Medical Association,
were critical of the way in which you answered that
question from the Greens Member for Nightcliff last week when
she'd raised it in Parliament. I mean you said they
wasted their time writing to you and that they should
look after six children. It sounds like you stand by
those comments so well.
Speaker 3 (04:37):
Absolutely, everyone has a role to play in life. If
you're a teacher, you teach. If you're a pediatrician, you
look after six children. If you're a politician, you make
the laws and listen to the community. You know.
Speaker 2 (04:46):
If you're a.
Speaker 3 (04:46):
Radio host like U Katie, you make sure your listeners
have access to the information and are a part of
the story and conversation. So we all have a role
to play. Now, of course there's overlap and as you know,
elected members we have to take in that fee. But
as I said, this was a letter written to me
on a parliamentary sitting week, a couple of days out
(05:07):
from being asked a question. It was politically charged, politically loaded,
and it got a political response.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
Do you think some people were messaging through last week saying, well,
if do we have forty five local pediatricians.
Speaker 2 (05:20):
I actually was wondering the same thing.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
I did lean over to the Minister for elve and said,
do we even have forty five? He said, we do
have quite a lot. So I've not gotten to the
bottom of that. But it actually blew me over. But
this same forty five had written to me on these
issues before.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
Katie, it's not new news and so you know it
is what it is.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
Do you think you're going to struggle to get an
appointment for your own child? Now?
Speaker 3 (05:44):
Noko pediatrician is wonderful as she's absolutely wonderful and we're very,
very lucky to have her.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
Well, look, I want to move along because the Domestic
Violence Prevention Minister Robin Carl made headlines last week with
her comments about the coroner when responding to the inquest
into the deaths of four Aboriginal women to domestic violence. Now.
The Minister said that while she never expected a panaser
when it came to the coronial inquest into the deaths
of the women, she found the long anticipated report failed
(06:14):
so dismally to hit the mark. She described the recommendations
as uninspiring, with only a small proportion of the recommendations
made leading to the implementation of new and innovative a
new and innovative approach, or the continuation of what had
initially been a trial program. Now, the comments obviously follow
(06:36):
the concerns that were raised by you about the cost
of the inquest into the death of Kuman Jay Walker,
and now the confirmation by Sky News that ex Northern
Territory Police officer Zachary Rolf has lodged a complaint accusing
the coroner of bias after she delivered findings into the
death of kumen Ji Walker in front of the banner
(06:59):
of an activist group that called for the cleared police
officer to face traditional indigenous justice.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
Now, firstly, do you.
Speaker 1 (07:08):
Think it was appropriate the findings were delivered I'm talking
into the death of kumen Joi Walker. Do you think
it was appropriate that the findings were delivered in front
of a banner of an activist group that called for
that police officer, the former police officer, to face traditional
indigenous justice.
Speaker 2 (07:25):
Yeah, of course not.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
Now, you know, if you give the benefit of the doubt,
it was put up while she was speaking, So the
coroner was, you know, might not have been aware that
had happened. Certainly her staff would have been there and
would have seen it, as did the rest of the universe.
So look, there's valid questions to be raised. Obviously, mister
Rolf is avowling himself of that opportunity. And you know,
all positions come with a level of accountability, and the
(07:48):
coroner is no exception to that.
Speaker 1 (07:50):
I mean, should the coroner have delivered the findings on
neutral ground like in a courthouse, Well.
Speaker 3 (07:54):
I think people, you know, a lot of people would
would agree with that position, Katie, And I think it's just,
you know, is the way in which sometimes the coroner
chooses to do things certainly greats a lot of people
the wrong way, and I'm sure it has people who
love it as well. So it's one of those things.
But the accountability is what's really important.
Speaker 1 (08:13):
I mean, Minister Robin Carl said of the coroner last week.
Now I'm stepping to the next issue, which is obviously
into the depths of the four Indigenous women. But she
said last week in relation to the coronial into the
depths of the four women, that Coroner Armitage's approach has
been protracted, resulting in lengthy reports delivered in a manner
(08:34):
seemingly will seeming to lack the humanity that one might
expect from an officer of the court, more focused on
the reveal rather than the result. Do you think that
that's been the case across the.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
Board, Well, certainly in the Minister for Domestic and Family
Violence did not mince her words. And what we know
is twenty four of the thirty five recommendations from that
huge half a million dollar coronial well already things that
were happening, and as far as our government's concerned, that
they're not really delivering results. So it's very difficult when
you have recommendations and then you know governments are expected
(09:11):
to go through and look at which ones are the adult,
which ones they won't.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
But we have to measure the success.
Speaker 3 (09:15):
We can't just keep lumbering forward in the same way
that we have in the past. So, particularly when you
look at DV, Aboriginal women are thirty five to forty
percent more times likely to be hospitalized, which is just tragic,
It is just disgusting.
Speaker 2 (09:29):
These numbers are so high, So.
Speaker 3 (09:31):
We do need to do more and that's why we've
put in place at thirty six million a year ongoing and.
Speaker 2 (09:37):
Largely that coronial. The DV coronial has largely been implemented.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
I mean, was this an attempt by the government to
distract from the actual findings in that coronial inquest?
Speaker 3 (09:51):
No, Well, as I said, twenty four out of thirty
five had already been done, police had implemented their's. So
I think again it just comes down to, you know,
it's very you know, there's been a lot of hype
and I think what the Minister is trying to highlight
is like the outcome didn't match the hype.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
I guess, so obviously she's made those comments. You had
also questioned the amount of money that it's been spent
and the time in which it took for the coroner
to complete the coronial inquest into the death of Coleman
Joi Walker. I mean, do we have a situation here
where the government does not have confidence in the coroner?
Speaker 3 (10:28):
Well, I think it's just that we don't believe these
things should be dragged on as long as they are
being We don't believe they should be costing as much
as they are. So it's something we've got to take
a look at, and the Attorney General's leading that work.
And again it's just an accountability piece, you know, it's
a taxpayer funded role that needs to be done transparently,
(10:49):
and that's just some of the issues we're looking So, so
do you have confidence in the coroner? Look, she absolutely
she does that role. You know, do we see eye
to eye on how she does it? Not the time, Katie.
I think our government's made that very very clear. But
at the end of the day, you know, we need
to be looking at what's going to drive actual outcomes.
And I think this was just a real frustration point.
Speaker 1 (11:10):
And I guess you know, some may be watching from
the outside in and sort of thinking to themselves, well,
how is this going to continue on if we've got
a government that's maybe not not taking as seriously as
many believe they should findings or recommendations that are handed
down by the coroner, the current coroner.
Speaker 3 (11:31):
No, no, it's not that we're not it's more the process. So,
as I said, twenty four out of thirty five are
already happening, and then the rest we're working through. I
think there was only a couple that we didn't accept, Katie,
So they're all being done. I think the question is
the value of them. Now, it's fine to make one
hundred recommendations, but if they don't change, move the needle.
You know, if they don't shift the dial, then what's
(11:52):
the point. So, yes, we have to try new things
and that's what we're more focused on. And equally, you
know what we're also for us on his holding offenders accountable.
I think a big missing piece out of this DV debate,
which constantly frustrates me, Katie, is everyone talks about what's
the government doing and where's the money?
Speaker 2 (12:10):
Why isn't there more money?
Speaker 3 (12:11):
Everyone talks about, obviously the victims, which is absolutely fair.
No one ever talks about the perpetrator. No one ever
talks about the personal responsibility and accountability and consequences for
the perpetrator.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
And I think that's a.
Speaker 3 (12:25):
Big missing piece that our government is wanting to bring
back into the narrative. At the end of the day,
if people did not commit this violence, we would not
have the situation we're in.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
So do you feel as though you that you know
that you're going to that the government's going to be
able to to continue to sort of take on recommendations
from the current the coroner. The current coroner, I guess
what I'm asking is is her position tenable? Oh?
Speaker 3 (12:51):
Yeah, of course, I mean she's a judge, so she
has that job for you know, forever basically, So there's
no problem with that. It's more just we're not going
to sugarcoat things for people just because the coroner says,
and doesn't mean we're going to leap up and say, oh,
one hundred percent, we're going to do one hundred percent
of that. We're going to look at each of them,
work out are we even able to implement them in
(13:12):
the first place, is it practical, is it cost effective?
Can we have we already tried this before and it
didn't work, you know. So that's all of the massinations
behind the scenes of what you go through. So the
process is incredibly important and it can yield really, really
good outcomes. I think what the Minister was saying the
other day in Parliament is it for what we were
expecting at Fell Flat.
Speaker 1 (13:33):
So is the government crossing a line here by the
commentary around coronial findings.
Speaker 3 (13:40):
No, because it's entirely the purview of the government. I
mean any government, and this is you know, right around
the country could just say no, we're not accepting any
the end, you know, it is entirely a matter for government.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
So the coroner is independent.
Speaker 3 (13:52):
They do their work and investigations, and again the recommendations
are entirely in the purview of the coroner and then
it is highly in the purview of the government to
decide what they do with them.
Speaker 1 (14:02):
I mean, is the government at this point in time
sort of you know, are you guys sort of putting
your putting your heel down, I suppose and saying to
you know, to those in some of these positions that
you know that the views of the community are not
in line with what they may feel the views are.
Speaker 3 (14:23):
And sometimes that is the case, and we've certainly seen
that across you know, judicial outcomes as well. So our
job is to make the laws, Katie, it's to represent
everyday territorians and set up the territory to achieve their aspirations.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
For the future. And to do that, we've really narrow
down on three key things.
Speaker 3 (14:40):
May people safe, have a strong economy so there's jobs
and opportunities now and for the future. And have a
great lifestyle so that people love living here again, right,
that's our entire focus.
Speaker 2 (14:50):
And reducing crime.
Speaker 3 (14:52):
You know, the coroner has a big role to play
in that and we need the coroner playing that role.
But at the end of the day, we've got to
make the decisions around what we think it's going to achieve.
And sometimes that puts us at loggerheads with the pediatricians
or with whoever else it might be who wants to
have their five cents. But at the end of the day,
what we're hearing on the ground, and Katie, I have
to say, wherever I am, whether I'm just doing the
(15:13):
shopping with the kids, are out at functions, people tap
me on the shoulders. Just every day, people say keep going,
just keep going, Please don't stop, Please, don't listen to
the naysayers.
Speaker 2 (15:22):
We've been elected to do a job. We are doing
that job.
Speaker 3 (15:24):
You know what, Katie, if we weren't doing the job
we got elected to do, people would have a crack
at us about that.
Speaker 2 (15:29):
We can't win.
Speaker 3 (15:30):
All we can do is do what we believe is
right for the future, stand by our election commitments, and
make decisions every day in the best interests of territorians.
Speaker 1 (15:38):
Okay. Over the weekend, the government release figures which you
say demonstrate the introduction of Decland's Law is having an
impact and holding repeat offenders to account. Now, justice out
comes since Declan's Law began in January, we'll one of
those over three three hundred people have been refused bail
up to well, that is up forty four percent compared
(16:00):
to the same period last year under labor. I mean,
what do you think some of these numbers demonstrate.
Speaker 2 (16:07):
It's really exciting.
Speaker 3 (16:08):
Now that we've been in government eleven months, we've starting
to get some actual data that we can use and
really measure. And so when we're looking to January to May,
not only are we starting to see some great numbers,
you know, for example with house break ins down thirty
one percent, robberies down twenty nine percent, and commercial break
ins down sixteen but we can actually track Declan's Law now.
(16:28):
And I just want to thank Samara Lavity for working
with us to make this a reality and put victims first.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
So it is it is now.
Speaker 3 (16:35):
Very very clear to us that since January when so
we passed Declans law in October, but it came into
effect in January, people might remember, and since then we
have had an increase of people not getting baw So
it's a hard one to say, but this is we've
had forty four percent increase of people not getting based.
So it's three three hundred people more did not get bail,
(16:58):
which means we've delivered on that commitment to people who
thought there was just that revolving door that everyone was
getting bad, they were going on to repeat offend, and
so you know, I think there's strong correlations there between
our bail laws and then with those crime stats going down.
So again just indicative early days, but really great to
be able to analyze some of this stuff in conjunction
(17:21):
with what we're feeling on the ground, because we've always
said how people feel is what's most important, and we
stand by that, but you do need data to sort
of be able to see where it's going, and it's
crime's going. You know, it's heading in the right direction.
Speaker 1 (17:33):
And look, I know a lot of people will feel
you know, they'll hear that three than three hundred people
being refused bail and think, you know, this is a
good thing. It means that people aren't on the streets
committing crimes. I know there'll be others in the community
who go, oh, that's terrible. That means that we've got
three thousand, three hundred people that are behind bars, and
you know, we're seeing the highest incarceration rates that we've
(17:56):
ever seen in the Northern Territory. I mean, what do
you say to those people who really feel that your
government's on the wrong track at the moment, despite that
push from the community where people want to see these changes.
Speaker 3 (18:09):
So what it means is that where police would have
used to have to or courts would have had to
bail someone and then they would be free until their
court date, what it means is they were reminded, so
would usually be a matter of days more than it
would weeks. So it's not that we've added three thousand,
three hundred people into the system in one go. It's
that if you were arrested on Saturday, you might have
(18:29):
stayed in a watchhouse until Monday or Tuesday for your
time in court. Then a judge would decide what whether
you were reminded in custody until your court date or
whether you were bout at that point. So it's not
like a long term sentence. I'll just explain it that way.
But at the end of the day, we had such
high repeat offending on bail. I mean, just about every
story you covered, Katie was excellent, so and so did this,
(18:52):
while I'm bout, so and so did that, while I'm
bad what's happening daily every day and you think that's
just what you found out about Katie. You imagined at
least would have seen it every dozens of times a day.
So we've really reduced that, which is significant. It means
less victims because we're having less crimes, we're having less
people repeat offending. And I just want to say to
(19:12):
the people, you know, to answer your question more succinctly,
For the people who don't like this approach, can I
just say, despite the pressure we've put on the correction system,
we have still driven down the number of days someone's
on remand by seven percent, which is huge considering the
increase in pressure. And we have more people completing programs
(19:34):
like the Rage program while incarcerated, so we've delivered more
more therapeutic you know, courses in prison and driven down
the time people have to wait to get to their
court date.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
Whilst adding this increase, Why do you.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
Think then that you've got some groups that are screaming
at you guys at the moment saying that you know
that people aren't able to you know, to be involved
in diversion programs, so that people aren't able to complete
those programs. I mean We've spoken to the Corrections Commissioner
about this before, and we know that some of those
programs are certainly being delivered. But you know, what do
(20:11):
you say to those people who are really, I guess
against the government's agenda at this point.
Speaker 2 (20:17):
Well, that's all it is, Katie.
Speaker 3 (20:19):
There are people who don't support the COLP, There are
people who are aligned with labor. There are people who
are against the way we are conducting our business, and
they will be no matter what we say or do.
So what am I supposed to do, Katie? Am I
meant to be true to our beliefs and to what
we were elected to do and deliver on our commitment
Or am I meant to pandau to the activists?
Speaker 2 (20:38):
Well, that's not an option to me.
Speaker 3 (20:39):
So they will continue to throw stones, and they'll continue
to write me letters, and you know, the Greens in
Parliament will continue to ask me these left field questions
and so on and so on. But at the end
of the day, when I can see in the data
that things are getting better, and when people on the
street are telling me things are getting better, that's what
I need to know and that's what we're acting on.
Speaker 1 (21:00):
Okay, I've got a listener question. I won't go into
too much detail, but Mick Fairfield have been in contact
with us last week calling to ask where is the
support for victims of crime. He says that no one
in the Northern Territory or federal governments prepared to meet
with him, will provide any further assistance to his family.
The court case over the death of his wife has
(21:20):
been going for three and a half years and was
again adjourned last week. Surely something can be done to assist.
Speaker 2 (21:28):
This is just the most tragic, tragic situation.
Speaker 3 (21:31):
Katie and I have met with Mick and so have
my colleagues a number of times, and you know, the
continued Adjoermans just prolonged the pain for this family. But
it is a court process and you know that unfortunately
has to run its course. One step we have taken
with victims of crime since coming to government recognizing that
(21:51):
it was inadequate is increase the Victims of crime levy.
So that's the levee that people who break the law
pay when they go to court, and we increase said
I think by about forty percent, Katie, So that will
see more money go into the victims of crime. Bucket,
which means more money to victims, but a horrific situation.
Speaker 1 (22:09):
But you, Kenny, you will continue to meet with him.
Speaker 2 (22:12):
Oh, absolutely, absolutely, all right.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
I want to ask you one of the things that
really fired our listeners up last week is the question
that was asked in Parliament by the Independent Member for Johnston,
Justin Davis, around the flyover on Territory Day. Can we
just have confirmation that the flyovers not going to be canceled?
Speaker 3 (22:31):
No way, absolutely, no way will it be canceled. It's
incredible and I actually I was so gobsmacked by their
stupidity of the question, Katie, but I felt for the
people that she was trying to represent. There will be
people in the Northern Territory who are from war torn countries,
but what was she be doing as a community is
saying to them, you're here, now, you're safe. And when
(22:53):
you hear jets flying in the sky in the Northern Territory,
that is freedom.
Speaker 2 (22:58):
That is the very freedom that I have.
Speaker 3 (22:59):
For fathers and sisters fought for us for. That is
why we have democracy, that is why we are the
lucky country, and that is why we get to live
the life we live. So we should be embracing migrants
to this country who might have had a fearful pause
to say no, no, you're here now, and that is
the pure sound of freedom for Australians.
Speaker 1 (23:18):
Chief Minister Leah Finocchiaro, we better leave it there. Thanks
so much for your time this morning.
Speaker 2 (23:22):
Thank you. Take everyone,
Last week we obviously saw the government push through changes
to the Youth Justice Act, and while the changes may
have been embraced by victims of crime who've been wanting
to see consequence for youth offending, there's been some pushback
from some in the community. Now. On Friday, we spoke
about the forty five pediatricians who wrote to the Chief
Minister wanting to meet with her and discuss the concerns
(00:22):
that they have with these changes. The Children's Commissioners also
raised concerns about the changes. Now joining us on the
show is the Chief Minister Leofanocchiiro.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Good morning to you, Good morning Katie, into your listener.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
Good to have you on the show now, Chief Minister.
These pediatricians, they wrote to you last week with concerns
around the key that children are receiving in detention. Specifically,
they've called for a reinstatement of the ban on spit hoods,
also ensuring early neuro developmental assessment and appropriate access to
(00:56):
health and education in detention, and prioritizing therapeutic, community based
diversionary alternatives. Chief Minister, have you received that letter.
Speaker 3 (01:08):
Yes, Katie, so, I received that question in Parliament and
when I did follow that up, they had only written
to me three days before.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
So I think the summary of.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
All of this is, if you're going to behave political
you'll get a political response.
Speaker 2 (01:22):
You cannot write to.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
Me and three days later be demanding answers in parliament.
That's just unrealistic. And it says to me that these
forty five pediatricians are doing just that. They're not talking
to me about disease, they're not talking to me about
other chronic illness. They're talking to me about things like
spit guards, which is a clearly political topic. And so
my message to them was, please, families desperately need access
(01:46):
to pediatricians. Don't spend your time being activists trying to
persuade our government to change our mind on issues we
took to the election. Everyone's known that these issues have
been coming. I've been speaking to your listener since the
start of the year about our use justice reforms. You know,
three days before the legislation is set to pass Parliament,
all of a sudden you pop your head up. You know,
(02:07):
this is a really serious issue about law and order,
and we respect what pediatricians do, and that's treat sick
kids and that's exactly what they should spend their time doing. Well.
Speaker 1 (02:15):
I guess some would argue that, you know, ensuring the
early neurodevelopmental assessment and appropriate access to health and education
in detention, as well as prioritizing therapeutic community based diversionary alternatives.
Some would argue, you know, that is in their realm. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (02:32):
Absolutely, And every kid who gets into detention has to
go to school. It's usually the only time they've ever
gone to school, Katie, So I don't understand that argument
at all, because kids in detention must go to school.
In terms of healthcare, again, that's where we have access
to the kids to be able to try and meet
all of the needs which have usually been unmet by
their family or their circumstance.
Speaker 2 (02:53):
So detention is.
Speaker 3 (02:54):
Not a perfect place, nor should it be. But at
the end of the day, what our youth justice law
had nothing to do with whether there was health access
at the detention center or not. It mandated things like
not having to have detention as a last resort. It
gave our youth justice officers powers. For example, and this
is a real legitimate example, youth justice offices under labor
(03:16):
if there was a young person escaping custody, so climbing
the fence something like that. They didn't have powers to
be able to do anything, which is just ridiculous. So
now they do. So that's what our Use Justice Act
reforms did last week. Of course, young people in detention
have access to health care and to education. We only
wish that young people had access to health care and
education before they entered the justice system.
Speaker 1 (03:39):
So what do you make of the concerns that have
been raised? I mean, are you prepared to meet with
them now that you've actually received that letter.
Speaker 3 (03:46):
No, I won't be ktered. This is pointless me meeting
with forty or five pediatricians. I receive their letter. I
understand that their concerns. We don't share their views. Obviously,
this is a political issue. We've passed the law. If
they are concerned about what type of medical care is
happening in detention, they can direct their concerns to the
Health Minister. But you know, I've got to drive the
(04:08):
territory forward. They've got to be doing what they need
to do. This was all a stunt for parliament, and
Parliament's over now, so I suspect everyone will go.
Speaker 2 (04:16):
Back to doing what they do during the way.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
Some have been Some including the AMA the Australian Medical Association,
were critical of the way in which you answered that
question from the Greens Member for Nightcliff last week when
she'd raised it in Parliament. I mean you said they
wasted their time writing to you and that they should
look after six children. It sounds like you stand by
those comments so well.
Speaker 3 (04:37):
Absolutely, everyone has a role to play in life. If
you're a teacher, you teach. If you're a pediatrician, you
look after six children. If you're a politician, you make
the laws and listen to the community. You know.
Speaker 2 (04:46):
If you're a.
Speaker 3 (04:46):
Radio host like U Katie, you make sure your listeners
have access to the information and are a part of
the story and conversation. So we all have a role
to play. Now, of course there's overlap and as you know,
elected members we have to take in that fee. But
as I said, this was a letter written to me
on a parliamentary sitting week, a couple of days out
(05:07):
from being asked a question. It was politically charged, politically loaded,
and it got a political response.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
Do you think some people were messaging through last week saying, well,
if do we have forty five local pediatricians.
Speaker 2 (05:20):
I actually was wondering the same thing.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
I did lean over to the Minister for elve and said,
do we even have forty five? He said, we do
have quite a lot. So I've not gotten to the
bottom of that. But it actually blew me over. But
this same forty five had written to me on these
issues before.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
Katie, it's not new news and so you know it
is what it is.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
Do you think you're going to struggle to get an
appointment for your own child? Now?
Speaker 3 (05:44):
Noko pediatrician is wonderful as she's absolutely wonderful and we're very,
very lucky to have her.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
Well, look, I want to move along because the Domestic
Violence Prevention Minister Robin Carl made headlines last week with
her comments about the coroner when responding to the inquest
into the deaths of four Aboriginal women to domestic violence. Now.
The Minister said that while she never expected a panaser
when it came to the coronial inquest into the deaths
of the women, she found the long anticipated report failed
(06:14):
so dismally to hit the mark. She described the recommendations
as uninspiring, with only a small proportion of the recommendations
made leading to the implementation of new and innovative a
new and innovative approach, or the continuation of what had
initially been a trial program. Now, the comments obviously follow
(06:36):
the concerns that were raised by you about the cost
of the inquest into the death of Kuman Jay Walker,
and now the confirmation by Sky News that ex Northern
Territory Police officer Zachary Rolf has lodged a complaint accusing
the coroner of bias after she delivered findings into the
death of kumen Ji Walker in front of the banner
(06:59):
of an activist group that called for the cleared police
officer to face traditional indigenous justice.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
Now, firstly, do you.
Speaker 1 (07:08):
Think it was appropriate the findings were delivered I'm talking
into the death of kumen Joi Walker. Do you think
it was appropriate that the findings were delivered in front
of a banner of an activist group that called for
that police officer, the former police officer, to face traditional
indigenous justice.
Speaker 2 (07:25):
Yeah, of course not.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
Now, you know, if you give the benefit of the doubt,
it was put up while she was speaking, So the
coroner was, you know, might not have been aware that
had happened. Certainly her staff would have been there and
would have seen it, as did the rest of the universe.
So look, there's valid questions to be raised. Obviously, mister
Rolf is avowling himself of that opportunity. And you know,
all positions come with a level of accountability, and the
(07:48):
coroner is no exception to that.
Speaker 1 (07:50):
I mean, should the coroner have delivered the findings on
neutral ground like in a courthouse, Well.
Speaker 3 (07:54):
I think people, you know, a lot of people would
would agree with that position, Katie, And I think it's just,
you know, is the way in which sometimes the coroner
chooses to do things certainly greats a lot of people
the wrong way, and I'm sure it has people who
love it as well. So it's one of those things.
But the accountability is what's really important.
Speaker 1 (08:13):
I mean, Minister Robin Carl said of the coroner last week.
Now I'm stepping to the next issue, which is obviously
into the depths of the four Indigenous women. But she
said last week in relation to the coronial into the
depths of the four women, that Coroner Armitage's approach has
been protracted, resulting in lengthy reports delivered in a manner
(08:34):
seemingly will seeming to lack the humanity that one might
expect from an officer of the court, more focused on
the reveal rather than the result. Do you think that
that's been the case across the.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
Board, Well, certainly in the Minister for Domestic and Family
Violence did not mince her words. And what we know
is twenty four of the thirty five recommendations from that
huge half a million dollar coronial well already things that
were happening, and as far as our government's concerned, that
they're not really delivering results. So it's very difficult when
you have recommendations and then you know governments are expected
(09:11):
to go through and look at which ones are the adult,
which ones they won't.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
But we have to measure the success.
Speaker 3 (09:15):
We can't just keep lumbering forward in the same way
that we have in the past. So, particularly when you
look at DV, Aboriginal women are thirty five to forty
percent more times likely to be hospitalized, which is just tragic,
It is just disgusting.
Speaker 2 (09:29):
These numbers are so high, So.
Speaker 3 (09:31):
We do need to do more and that's why we've
put in place at thirty six million a year ongoing and.
Speaker 2 (09:37):
Largely that coronial. The DV coronial has largely been implemented.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
I mean, was this an attempt by the government to
distract from the actual findings in that coronial inquest?
Speaker 3 (09:51):
No, Well, as I said, twenty four out of thirty
five had already been done, police had implemented their's. So
I think again it just comes down to, you know,
it's very you know, there's been a lot of hype
and I think what the Minister is trying to highlight
is like the outcome didn't match the hype.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
I guess, so obviously she's made those comments. You had
also questioned the amount of money that it's been spent
and the time in which it took for the coroner
to complete the coronial inquest into the death of Coleman
Joi Walker. I mean, do we have a situation here
where the government does not have confidence in the coroner?
Speaker 3 (10:28):
Well, I think it's just that we don't believe these
things should be dragged on as long as they are
being We don't believe they should be costing as much
as they are. So it's something we've got to take
a look at, and the Attorney General's leading that work.
And again it's just an accountability piece, you know, it's
a taxpayer funded role that needs to be done transparently,
(10:49):
and that's just some of the issues we're looking So, so
do you have confidence in the coroner? Look, she absolutely
she does that role. You know, do we see eye
to eye on how she does it? Not the time, Katie.
I think our government's made that very very clear. But
at the end of the day, you know, we need
to be looking at what's going to drive actual outcomes.
And I think this was just a real frustration point.
Speaker 1 (11:10):
And I guess you know, some may be watching from
the outside in and sort of thinking to themselves, well,
how is this going to continue on if we've got
a government that's maybe not not taking as seriously as
many believe they should findings or recommendations that are handed
down by the coroner, the current coroner.
Speaker 3 (11:31):
No, no, it's not that we're not it's more the process. So,
as I said, twenty four out of thirty five are
already happening, and then the rest we're working through. I
think there was only a couple that we didn't accept, Katie,
So they're all being done. I think the question is
the value of them. Now, it's fine to make one
hundred recommendations, but if they don't change, move the needle.
You know, if they don't shift the dial, then what's
(11:52):
the point. So, yes, we have to try new things
and that's what we're more focused on. And equally, you
know what we're also for us on his holding offenders accountable.
I think a big missing piece out of this DV debate,
which constantly frustrates me, Katie, is everyone talks about what's
the government doing and where's the money?
Speaker 2 (12:10):
Why isn't there more money?
Speaker 3 (12:11):
Everyone talks about, obviously the victims, which is absolutely fair.
No one ever talks about the perpetrator. No one ever
talks about the personal responsibility and accountability and consequences for
the perpetrator.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
And I think that's a.
Speaker 3 (12:25):
Big missing piece that our government is wanting to bring
back into the narrative. At the end of the day,
if people did not commit this violence, we would not
have the situation we're in.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
So do you feel as though you that you know
that you're going to that the government's going to be
able to to continue to sort of take on recommendations
from the current the coroner. The current coroner, I guess
what I'm asking is is her position tenable? Oh?
Speaker 3 (12:51):
Yeah, of course, I mean she's a judge, so she
has that job for you know, forever basically, So there's
no problem with that. It's more just we're not going
to sugarcoat things for people just because the coroner says,
and doesn't mean we're going to leap up and say, oh,
one hundred percent, we're going to do one hundred percent
of that. We're going to look at each of them,
work out are we even able to implement them in
(13:12):
the first place, is it practical, is it cost effective?
Can we have we already tried this before and it
didn't work, you know. So that's all of the massinations
behind the scenes of what you go through. So the
process is incredibly important and it can yield really, really
good outcomes. I think what the Minister was saying the
other day in Parliament is it for what we were
expecting at Fell Flat.
Speaker 1 (13:33):
So is the government crossing a line here by the
commentary around coronial findings.
Speaker 3 (13:40):
No, because it's entirely the purview of the government. I
mean any government, and this is you know, right around
the country could just say no, we're not accepting any
the end, you know, it is entirely a matter for government.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
So the coroner is independent.
Speaker 3 (13:52):
They do their work and investigations, and again the recommendations
are entirely in the purview of the coroner and then
it is highly in the purview of the government to
decide what they do with them.
Speaker 1 (14:02):
I mean, is the government at this point in time
sort of you know, are you guys sort of putting
your putting your heel down, I suppose and saying to
you know, to those in some of these positions that
you know that the views of the community are not
in line with what they may feel the views are.
Speaker 3 (14:23):
And sometimes that is the case, and we've certainly seen
that across you know, judicial outcomes as well. So our
job is to make the laws, Katie, it's to represent
everyday territorians and set up the territory to achieve their aspirations.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
For the future. And to do that, we've really narrow
down on three key things.
Speaker 3 (14:40):
May people safe, have a strong economy so there's jobs
and opportunities now and for the future. And have a
great lifestyle so that people love living here again, right,
that's our entire focus.
Speaker 2 (14:50):
And reducing crime.
Speaker 3 (14:52):
You know, the coroner has a big role to play
in that and we need the coroner playing that role.
But at the end of the day, we've got to
make the decisions around what we think it's going to achieve.
And sometimes that puts us at loggerheads with the pediatricians
or with whoever else it might be who wants to
have their five cents. But at the end of the day,
what we're hearing on the ground, and Katie, I have
to say, wherever I am, whether I'm just doing the
(15:13):
shopping with the kids, are out at functions, people tap
me on the shoulders. Just every day, people say keep going,
just keep going, Please don't stop, Please, don't listen to
the naysayers.
Speaker 2 (15:22):
We've been elected to do a job. We are doing
that job.
Speaker 3 (15:24):
You know what, Katie, if we weren't doing the job
we got elected to do, people would have a crack
at us about that.
Speaker 2 (15:29):
We can't win.
Speaker 3 (15:30):
All we can do is do what we believe is
right for the future, stand by our election commitments, and
make decisions every day in the best interests of territorians.
Speaker 1 (15:38):
Okay. Over the weekend, the government release figures which you
say demonstrate the introduction of Decland's Law is having an
impact and holding repeat offenders to account. Now, justice out
comes since Declan's Law began in January, we'll one of
those over three three hundred people have been refused bail
up to well, that is up forty four percent compared
(16:00):
to the same period last year under labor. I mean,
what do you think some of these numbers demonstrate.
Speaker 2 (16:07):
It's really exciting.
Speaker 3 (16:08):
Now that we've been in government eleven months, we've starting
to get some actual data that we can use and
really measure. And so when we're looking to January to May,
not only are we starting to see some great numbers,
you know, for example with house break ins down thirty
one percent, robberies down twenty nine percent, and commercial break
ins down sixteen but we can actually track Declan's Law now.
(16:28):
And I just want to thank Samara Lavity for working
with us to make this a reality and put victims first.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
So it is it is now.
Speaker 3 (16:35):
Very very clear to us that since January when so
we passed Declans law in October, but it came into
effect in January, people might remember, and since then we
have had an increase of people not getting baw So
it's a hard one to say, but this is we've
had forty four percent increase of people not getting based.
So it's three three hundred people more did not get bail,
(16:58):
which means we've delivered on that commitment to people who
thought there was just that revolving door that everyone was
getting bad, they were going on to repeat offend, and
so you know, I think there's strong correlations there between
our bail laws and then with those crime stats going down.
So again just indicative early days, but really great to
be able to analyze some of this stuff in conjunction
(17:21):
with what we're feeling on the ground, because we've always
said how people feel is what's most important, and we
stand by that, but you do need data to sort
of be able to see where it's going, and it's
crime's going. You know, it's heading in the right direction.
Speaker 1 (17:33):
And look, I know a lot of people will feel
you know, they'll hear that three than three hundred people
being refused bail and think, you know, this is a
good thing. It means that people aren't on the streets
committing crimes. I know there'll be others in the community
who go, oh, that's terrible. That means that we've got
three thousand, three hundred people that are behind bars, and
you know, we're seeing the highest incarceration rates that we've
(17:56):
ever seen in the Northern Territory. I mean, what do
you say to those people who really feel that your
government's on the wrong track at the moment, despite that
push from the community where people want to see these changes.
Speaker 3 (18:09):
So what it means is that where police would have
used to have to or courts would have had to
bail someone and then they would be free until their
court date, what it means is they were reminded, so
would usually be a matter of days more than it
would weeks. So it's not that we've added three thousand,
three hundred people into the system in one go. It's
that if you were arrested on Saturday, you might have
(18:29):
stayed in a watchhouse until Monday or Tuesday for your
time in court. Then a judge would decide what whether
you were reminded in custody until your court date or
whether you were bout at that point. So it's not
like a long term sentence. I'll just explain it that way.
But at the end of the day, we had such
high repeat offending on bail. I mean, just about every
story you covered, Katie was excellent, so and so did this,
(18:52):
while I'm bout, so and so did that, while I'm
bad what's happening daily every day and you think that's
just what you found out about Katie. You imagined at
least would have seen it every dozens of times a day.
So we've really reduced that, which is significant. It means
less victims because we're having less crimes, we're having less
people repeat offending. And I just want to say to
(19:12):
the people, you know, to answer your question more succinctly,
For the people who don't like this approach, can I
just say, despite the pressure we've put on the correction system,
we have still driven down the number of days someone's
on remand by seven percent, which is huge considering the
increase in pressure. And we have more people completing programs
(19:34):
like the Rage program while incarcerated, so we've delivered more
more therapeutic you know, courses in prison and driven down
the time people have to wait to get to their
court date.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
Whilst adding this increase, Why do you.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
Think then that you've got some groups that are screaming
at you guys at the moment saying that you know
that people aren't able to you know, to be involved
in diversion programs, so that people aren't able to complete
those programs. I mean We've spoken to the Corrections Commissioner
about this before, and we know that some of those
programs are certainly being delivered. But you know, what do
(20:11):
you say to those people who are really, I guess
against the government's agenda at this point.
Speaker 2 (20:17):
Well, that's all it is, Katie.
Speaker 3 (20:19):
There are people who don't support the COLP, There are
people who are aligned with labor. There are people who
are against the way we are conducting our business, and
they will be no matter what we say or do.
So what am I supposed to do, Katie? Am I
meant to be true to our beliefs and to what
we were elected to do and deliver on our commitment
Or am I meant to pandau to the activists?
Speaker 2 (20:38):
Well, that's not an option to me.
Speaker 3 (20:39):
So they will continue to throw stones, and they'll continue
to write me letters, and you know, the Greens in
Parliament will continue to ask me these left field questions
and so on and so on. But at the end
of the day, when I can see in the data
that things are getting better, and when people on the
street are telling me things are getting better, that's what
I need to know and that's what we're acting on.
Speaker 1 (21:00):
Okay, I've got a listener question. I won't go into
too much detail, but Mick Fairfield have been in contact
with us last week calling to ask where is the
support for victims of crime. He says that no one
in the Northern Territory or federal governments prepared to meet
with him, will provide any further assistance to his family.
The court case over the death of his wife has
(21:20):
been going for three and a half years and was
again adjourned last week. Surely something can be done to assist.
Speaker 2 (21:28):
This is just the most tragic, tragic situation.
Speaker 3 (21:31):
Katie and I have met with Mick and so have
my colleagues a number of times, and you know, the
continued Adjoermans just prolonged the pain for this family. But
it is a court process and you know that unfortunately
has to run its course. One step we have taken
with victims of crime since coming to government recognizing that
(21:51):
it was inadequate is increase the Victims of crime levy.
So that's the levee that people who break the law
pay when they go to court, and we increase said
I think by about forty percent, Katie, So that will
see more money go into the victims of crime. Bucket,
which means more money to victims, but a horrific situation.
Speaker 1 (22:09):
But you, Kenny, you will continue to meet with him.
Speaker 2 (22:12):
Oh, absolutely, absolutely, all right.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
I want to ask you one of the things that
really fired our listeners up last week is the question
that was asked in Parliament by the Independent Member for Johnston,
Justin Davis, around the flyover on Territory Day. Can we
just have confirmation that the flyovers not going to be canceled?
Speaker 3 (22:31):
No way, absolutely, no way will it be canceled. It's
incredible and I actually I was so gobsmacked by their
stupidity of the question, Katie, but I felt for the
people that she was trying to represent. There will be
people in the Northern Territory who are from war torn countries,
but what was she be doing as a community is
saying to them, you're here, now, you're safe. And when
(22:53):
you hear jets flying in the sky in the Northern Territory,
that is freedom.
Speaker 2 (22:58):
That is the very freedom that I have.
Speaker 3 (22:59):
For fathers and sisters fought for us for. That is
why we have democracy, that is why we are the
lucky country, and that is why we get to live
the life we live. So we should be embracing migrants
to this country who might have had a fearful pause
to say no, no, you're here now, and that is
the pure sound of freedom for Australians.
Speaker 1 (23:18):
Chief Minister Leah Finocchiaro, we better leave it there. Thanks
so much for your time this morning.
Speaker 2 (23:22):
Thank you. Take everyone,
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.