May 14, 2026 • 45 mins
Katie this week was joined by CLP Minister Robyn Cahill, Independent member Robyn Lambley, ALP's Chansey Peach and Matt Cunningham from Sky News.
This weeks topics:
Child Protection Act
New ICOC Body
Federal Budget
Fuel Prices
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
What a week it has been. There's plenty to cover
off on this morning, from federal budgets to changes to
the Child Protection Act and new people in charge of
the new IAC body. There is a lot to discuss
this morning and in the studio with us. Chancey Paike,
Good morning to you for the Labor Party.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Good morning Katie, and shout out to everyone tuned in.
Speaker 1 (00:20):
Well, I was going to say, what do you reckon
the temperatures like in Alice Springs this morning?
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Well, look, I think when we head back will be
putting on a jumper and drugging up.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
I reckon you might be. We have got Robin carl
Good morning to you, Robin, Minister for Families and Children
and various other portfolios.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
Good morning Katie, and good morning to everybody listening out there.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
And we've got Robin Lambley, Good morning to you, Robert.
Speaker 4 (00:42):
Morning Katie.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Sharing a microphone with Matt Cunningham this morning. So we'll.
Speaker 5 (00:49):
She doesn't have the same powers that she has in
Parliament usually I won't be able to shut me up.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
I'm much nicer.
Speaker 6 (00:56):
Chair.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
Well, we don't even have a chair for you there,
Robin to sit in. Well, look I tell you what
It has been a busy week in Parliament this week,
there is no doubt about that, well for the last
two weeks. But the Northern Territory government this week introduced
amendments to child protection legislation, moving to overhaul the child
(01:17):
protection system with proposed changes to the Care and Protection
of Children Act that would put child safety ahead of
all other considerations. That is what the government said when
introducing this legislation. Now, the reforms to amend the Aboriginal
child placement principle and introduce a new universal principle focused
(01:38):
on the best interests and safety of a child. Now
we also know that in addition to that, we've got
a review that is going to be taking place as
well with the New South Wales the former New South
Wales Police Commissioner Karen web and veteran Northern Territory Public
Servant Greg Shanahan overseeing that review. Now there is a
lot to unpack, so we might talk about the child
(02:01):
protection legislation first, Rob and Carlole go to you. Why
did you as the minister decide that it was necessary
to make these changes to the Act.
Speaker 4 (02:11):
Well, thanks, Katie.
Speaker 3 (02:12):
I think the most important thing to say is over
the last eighteen months, I've had the opportunity to talk
to many, many people who work on the ground in
child protection, people who touch the child protection system, families
who are really desperate around what's happening with some of
their kids and help that they might need, and it
was really obvious that that somewhere in the annals of
(02:35):
time there had been a loss of focus on how
do we.
Speaker 4 (02:40):
Keep families together safely?
Speaker 3 (02:41):
And reviewing the Act, we originally looked at just introducing
an amendment that said, please elevate best interests, and then
we looked at whether we could put family Responsibility Agreements
as a standalone piece of legislation, because that's where the
work starts. And then we decided that that would be
(03:01):
a little bit complicated for people to go from one
legislation to the other, so we decided to integrate everything
together so that front and center is we have to
do everything we possibly can to keep families together safely,
but there is the reality that at times that's not
going to be possible, and we need to make sure
(03:23):
that we proactively get involved and see if we can
rectify whatever's going wrong in a particular family situation as
soon as possible and where that's not possible and safety
is a concern for the child, that we need to
then be able to have these next steps, and we
wanted to make sure we put a framework around it
that's sent a very clear message to the Department that
(03:45):
all of the effort in those first couple of years
needed to be on making sure that we did everything
we could to keep a family together and that we
would then progress from there.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
I know we've got a situation where now more than
three hundred and thirty organizations from across the Northern Territory
and Australia say that they are united in condemning the
Northern Territory government's intention to amend the Care and Protection
of Children Act. We have got Teresa Rowe, who is
indeed the chair of the Aboriginal Peak Organization's Northern Territory
(04:18):
saying we strongly reject the Northern Territory Government's deliberate portrayal
of Aboriginal families, communities and culture as a risk to
children's safety. I mean, what do you say.
Speaker 3 (04:30):
To say is nowhere in any of the conversations have
I had it have we talked about Aboriginal children. What
we're talking about is every single child in the territory
who may be at risk deserves the best possible opportunity
to be safe and well cared for. And that's one
of the reasons why, for the very first time, we've
put a universal principle in there that applies to every
single child in the Northern Territory. It doesn't matter what
(04:53):
their background is, where they're from, what their situation is
in terms of their cultural or heritage background. Every single
child deserves to have consideration of those elements to ensure
that they are kept safe. And we recognize that there
is some elements that don't apply to all children that
are specific to our Aboriginal children, which is that really
(05:16):
important connection to kinship and culture and country, and we
wanted to make sure that that was reinforced, so that's
what we did. So I'm just really baffled that all
of these organizations are just picking a small section of
the Act and not looking at the Act as a whole,
which in its entirety is designed to make sure our
children are safe and hopefully they are safe with their families.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
I guess you know you said that there's no sort
of reference to Aboriginal children, but I guess the taking
away of the Aboriginal child placement principle, whether intentionally or unintentionally,
does bring that into the discussion or into the scope
of these changes.
Speaker 3 (05:57):
We haven't taken part of it. It's not taken away.
Cadid still there. So there's a universal principle that applies
to every child, including Aboriginal children. And then there's a
reinforcement of a principle specific.
Speaker 5 (06:08):
For abression, so that like the Aboriginal child plays. When
principle was once family first, another Aboriginal family second, sort
of non indigenous care, sort of option of last resort,
that middle part has been taken away, is that right?
Speaker 3 (06:25):
So what we've done is wrap it all up and
say every effort first instance, parents, family, and then the
most appropriate person because quite frankly, the feedback I got,
including from Aboriginal people, was just focusing for five ten
years trying to find any Aboriginal person which could then
(06:45):
look after a child, which is what the previous clause said.
Meant that for those Aboriginal children, they were in limbo
whether it was family or not, irrespective it was any
Aboriginal person.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
I think, Katie, I think first and foremost the care
and Protection Act as it stands, has one core principle
and that is the safety of territory children and that
is and should always be the core function and principle.
Speaker 7 (07:10):
I think what we're seeing.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
Here is, you know, we have a new government in
the territory, or reasonably new government in the colp who
this is what they're proposing to put forward. We don't
agree with that. We think that the watering down or
the removal of that political that particular aspect is of concern.
We think that there are three functions of the Act
as it currently stands, Section ten, Section fifteen and Section
(07:35):
twenty of the Act that works simultaneously together to look
at the best interests, the risk and the safety of
a child. They have to be done before you can
even consider placement with a family. And also, you know,
the child placement principle is incredibly important. It's been built
off years of expertise, of experience, of evidence, and we've
(07:57):
asked the government to make it clear to us where
is the evidence that shows that child placement principle has
been put ahead of the safety of a child, Because
if that has happened, Katie, that's a failure of a
government not of the principle itself.
Speaker 5 (08:12):
I went, I went this week. I made the mistake
Katie yesterday of going back and reading the coronial report
into the death of Deborah Melville in two thousand and seven,
and the coronial was done in twenty ten. It's the honestly,
Stephen King couldn't write a horror story worse than what happened.
Speaker 4 (08:29):
To that girl?
Speaker 1 (08:30):
Can you remind our list?
Speaker 5 (08:31):
So, Deborah Melville was a girl who was removed from
the care of her parents in any result, and she
was placed with an aunt who already had seven children
in her care. And the aunt had actually expressed that
she didn't want these other five children. But the decision
was made to put those five children with the aunt
or the great aunt, because the child protection workers, whether
(08:52):
they were specifically following the act or not, where of
the view it was more important to put them with
an aboriginal family member than with someone else. Deborah Melville
died the most terrific death. She had an infection in
her leg that when untreated for three weeks. She spent
much of those three weeks on the couch at a
(09:14):
home in Woodruff, where she was unable to even go
to the toilet, She was soiling herself on the couch.
She was not being assisted in any way by the
people who were there to care for her. Now, there
were massive failings by the child protection department that didn't
step in and do their job, and many of those
issues exist today and hopelessly overwhelmed child protection department. She
(09:36):
ended up being put outside in the backyard and she
died in the dirt of that home. Her last words
were talking about seeing fairies and pixies because she was hallucinated.
There were several recommendations made by the coroner at the time,
and one of the things that he found was that
basically the child Protection department was taking a relativist approach
(09:59):
to Ki didn't care, and they weren't applying the same
standards to Aboriginal kids that they were applying to non
Aboriginal kids. So they weren't intervening and saying, hey, it's
not okay to have twelve people sleeping on the floor
of a house without a mattress, and they were saying,
but you know. And there was one point where there
was a child protection worker who was basically told by Karu,
(10:23):
who was a group advocating for Aboriginal children at the time,
that she was applying sort of a white woman's world
to an Aboriginal situation, and so then as a consequence,
she wasn't honest in the report that she gave anyway.
I rambling, But the key thing from this is that
the coroner made one specific recommendation in relation to Section
(10:43):
twelve of the Child Protection Act, and that was that
we can't apply this relevus approach, that we need to
treat all children the same, and that a sub section
needed to be written into the Act of that effect.
And this was in twenty ten, and that was never done.
Speaker 1 (11:01):
So there was never the subsection.
Speaker 5 (11:03):
It was never it was never inserted. Section twelve was
never changed to that effect. And what I want to say,
and so I think that is something that really does
need to address. And when we talk about evidence, and
there's a lot of people saying, well, the evidence says this,
and the evidence says that, I think primary evidence is
always better than, you know, an academics report. And I
don't think there's any bit of primary evidence that is
(11:23):
better than what the coroner, Greg Cavanaugh, a man we
deeply miss, I think, wrote in that report back in
twenty ten, and I think everyone who wants to express
an opinion on this, I just encourage them to go
and read that report because it highlights all of the
issues that we're dealing with today, and many of them
were not addressed back then.
Speaker 4 (11:43):
I mean, I just need to clarify.
Speaker 3 (11:45):
Safety is not mentioned at all in the current legislation.
Speaker 4 (11:49):
Able that is not rubbish robin safeguarding. It's not the
same as.
Speaker 3 (11:56):
Safety safeguarding underpinning principles, which is currently Section ten does
not mention safety. So what we've done is we've elevated
Section ten, brought it up higher into the Act, and
every other clause relating to placement of children Universal Placement Principle,
(12:16):
as well as the Aboriginal Children Placement Clause section says
subject to Section eight. So that is the overriding principle, Katie.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
The whole Act as itself is about the safety and
protection of children. And I think, you know, I can
hear Matt's points and I completely agree, but the child
placement principle doesn't mandate that you have to put an
Aboriginal child with an Aboriginal family.
Speaker 7 (12:41):
It's not mandated.
Speaker 1 (12:42):
Wonder though it be mandated. What I wonder, and it
may like it might not be mandated, and I don't know.
I'm not an expert in this space. But what I
wonder is if what's happened over the years is that
within the Child Protection Agency, if people have reached the
point where, you know, where there are bit worried that
if they do remove an Aboriginal child from an unsafe environment,
(13:05):
that you know, they're either going to end up reprimanded,
that they are going to be called racist, that there
is going to be ramifications to it in one way
or another. And I don't know, I don't know whether
that is.
Speaker 3 (13:16):
I can assure you that every policy that relates to
how you assess, how you place, what you consider, every
single policy that currently exists, preferences the the you must
look at this principle, the placement guidance for Aboriginal children first.
So it's like you have to whatever it takes, whatever
(13:39):
it takes well, as Katie just said, over time, interpretations
have made and quite frankly, when you're in government, if
you realized and recognized that that had been misunderstood and misinterpreted,
which is clearly what's happened, which is why we're making
it absolutely clear that safety is the paramount principle for
every single.
Speaker 4 (14:00):
Child, then why didn't you fix it?
Speaker 3 (14:02):
Because I can tell you I've gone back over documents
from the last ten years and that had been the
absolute thing we want to talk about.
Speaker 4 (14:10):
The real issue unification.
Speaker 2 (14:12):
Governments just to live at a budget with not an
additional sent for an extra caseworker frontline child protection worker
to address the disgusting number of case loads that we
are talking to child protection workers, he say they have
over two hundred caseloads.
Speaker 6 (14:27):
The government has wanted to talk about changed. That has
never changed. I was the shadow Minister for Child Protection
in twenty ten when the whole Deborah Melville case came
to light, so I've had a bit of history and
I was a former Minister for Child Protection for five minutes.
But look, I don't think people have a problem with
(14:48):
placing Aboriginal children with Aboriginal families. I think that's a
no brainer. But I think there have been problems with
it being interpreted too literally and all at the expense
of common sense. There have been problems with it.
Speaker 4 (15:07):
Chancey.
Speaker 6 (15:07):
You know that with certain children it has been impossible
almost to find Aboriginal family to place children with and
that has caused disruption to those children. I heard the
minister in her speech on Tuesday. I think it was
side a couple of cases like that, these kids bouncing
(15:27):
around from family to family indefinitely because they haven't been
the Department hasn't been able to find a stable family,
and I think a line has to be drawn there,
and I think that's what the government is intending to.
Speaker 7 (15:41):
Do, you know.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
I just think all we're asking for is de identified
real examples of where the placement by the Department has
been put above the safety of a child.
Speaker 7 (15:51):
And Katie, I.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
Think we all you know, I'm standing here with all
of the Robins and the mat today. This is going
to go to an inquiry. I think it's going to
allow people to have their opportunity, whether they are a
care whether they're an Aboriginal family, whether they're an organization
or a peak body, to put forward their lived dicis.
Speaker 4 (16:09):
Just on that, Katie.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
I know that one of the real concerns that it's
been expressed to me by some of Chances Labor Party
colleagues are certainly organizations who depend on federal government funding
families and carers. Their concern about if we put forward information,
is that going to come back onto us. I just
want to assure anybody who is thinking about that, what
(16:33):
they need to do is, if they wish to put
a submission, make it very very clear at the beginning
of the submission that they do not want their details published.
That will be respected. All of the evidence that they
provide will be considered in deliberations, but their submissions won't
be published publicly.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
All right, We're going to take a really quick break.
When we come back, I do want to talk a
little bit more about the review which is set to
get underway, and indeed, the discussion around the two people
who are set to oversee that review stick around plenty
happening right here on Mix one oh four point nine,
three point sixty. It is the week that was Now
if you've just joined us, see in the studio this morning.
(17:11):
We have got Matt Cunningham, We've got Robin Lamley, Robin
Karl and Chancey Paig. Now there has been discussion already
about the changes to the Child Protection Act, but I
want to sort of talk a little bit more about
this review that was also announced earlier in the week. Well, Minister,
you'd given us some further detail about who's going to
oversee that review. So, former New South Wales Police Commissioner
(17:35):
Karen Webb and veteran Northern Territory Public servant Greg Shanahan
are going to lead that review into the territory's child
protection system. Well, following on from the alleged murder of
Kumanjai little Baby. The investigation is beginning, as I understand it,
next week and it's going to examine the Department of
Children and Families handling of the case along with the
(17:56):
broader child protection process. Now there's been already this week
about the fact that people maybe feel it needs to
be broader, and also criticism about the two people who
have been put in charge of that review. Criticism about
the fact that Karen web obviously is a former New
South Wales Police commissioner, and that Greg Shanahan. I don't
(18:19):
know a huge amount about Greg's background, but I believe
that he was with corrections and I know just as sorry.
So I know that there was some discussion on ABC
National this morning sort of saying, why have you got
two people overseeing that you know nobody that actually works
in the child protection space.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
Well, I think one of the things that I absolutely
indicated when we first just announced that our review was
needed was that we needed people who were totally independent,
but we also needed people who had some knowledge and background.
So I sought advice from the Office of the Department
of Chief Ministers about how the best way was to
(18:57):
go about this. A number of names were pulled together.
Wasn't involved in that decision making process, and the decision
was made that Karen Webb as somebody who has had
extensive experience in child protection and also had done a
national review of domestic violence for the New South Wales
Police which included coming to the territory and looking at
(19:20):
what was occurring and what the systems were in place
for domestic violence. The decision was made that she would
be a really good independent choice to do that, but
with someone who had knowledge in the area, so not
a totally blank slate. And then that Greg as somebody
who is well known in the territory, well respected, has
a justice department background, would be able to balance for
(19:44):
the territory perspective and also importantly to have both a
man and a woman involved in the team, so there
was no impediment to talking to anyone around what we might.
Speaker 6 (19:55):
Need complete objectivity. I think you've got to be at
arm's length for these thens. So I think what we
suffer from in the Northern Territory is that we're too
close to the problem. As I said on Radio with
you yesterday, Katie, there's no separation and for something like
this you need to be completely objective.
Speaker 2 (20:13):
I'm not disagreeing about having outside of the jurisdiction do
the work. I think we have asked Minister Carl a
few questions about the scope of whether it's just surrounding
the heartbreaking and tragic events that led to the passing
of kumun Jay little baby, or the trial protection system itself. Look,
I think from our perspective, we are concerned that there
(20:35):
wasn't a person who had the tertiary experience and qualifications
from a child protection space, whether.
Speaker 7 (20:42):
That's a social social worker or.
Speaker 2 (20:45):
Someone who's been an experienced practitioner from an outside jurisdiction,
or particularly predominantly someone who's got that experience of First
Nations children in care. Given that, you know, I think
it's ninety percent of children in the art of home
care system at the moment in our First Nations. But
look that investigation is taking its course now. I think
it's starting next week, Robin, that's correct. So we'll let
(21:07):
that do its thing, and we'll certainly look forward to
the recommendations when they are done, and we'll look at
what they ask.
Speaker 5 (21:14):
I mean to chance this point, I'm a bit surprised
that the Children's Commissioner hasn't announced her own own initiative
investigation into these issues, which she has the power to do.
In fact, if you look at the changes to the
Child Protection Act over the last fifteen years, and I
was talking before about that recommendation from Greek Cavett Kavin
are not being implemented. But one thing that has been
implemented is the establishment of the Office of the Children's Commissioner,
(21:38):
and so she certainly has the power to do that,
but for her own reasons, she's decided she wasn't going
to do that. And then I saw earlier this week
she came out and said there should be a board
of inquiry, which we've actually had before, and that she
should head that up. But she has the power to
do that, Katie. I just I think, you know, more
is more in this situation. And on top of Karen
(21:59):
Webbinak Shanahan's investigation. The Children's Commissioners should do our own,
as Colin Gwin did back in twenty eighteen, and I
produced a pretty damning report and how a bath.
Speaker 2 (22:09):
You know, I think we need to see what the
recommendations are from this inquiry.
Speaker 7 (22:14):
As we said, we would have liked some additional scope
in there.
Speaker 2 (22:16):
But I think one of the biggest issues that comes down,
and both parties are guilty of this.
Speaker 7 (22:20):
I'm not going to try and say that one is
all the other.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
We had the Little Children a sacred you know, Rex
Wild and Pat Anderson, we had the Bath Report. We've
had the Royal Commission into the Protection and Attention of Children.
We've had the Children's Commissioner's reports when Colin.
Speaker 4 (22:34):
Gwynn was and before that.
Speaker 3 (22:36):
You may may or may not be across this one
because it was a long time ago.
Speaker 4 (22:39):
That's how long I've been here.
Speaker 3 (22:40):
But in the late nineties there were the learning lessons.
Speaker 7 (22:42):
Learning lessons, yeah, of course, so it's.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
Been a long time that we've had lots of reports
about it.
Speaker 2 (22:47):
It does come back to the fundamental issue that we
are suffering and I suffered at where we were in a government.
Speaker 7 (22:52):
Robin will be suffering it.
Speaker 2 (22:53):
Being in there now, it's sitting around the table and
lobbying for additional money into particular areas that need to
be priorities of government. Lots of the issues we're seeing
in child protection are a result of resourcing in the territory,
whether that's in housing, health, education or the tertiary end.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
Actually, I'm glad you made that point because one of
the stories that surprised me over last weekend I think
it was reported in The Australian on the weekend was
the level of money that's going into Tongue and Jeer Council. Now,
obviously I think it was twenty seven million dollars, but
twenty four million dollars of that is going into staff. Now, sorry,
what was it? Okay? Sorry, Matt, we got you off.
Speaker 4 (23:33):
My out of forty out of forty.
Speaker 1 (23:35):
Seven million, I do apologize. And look, I know that
there's been a lot of discussion about the state of
remote or town camp housing, I should say, following on
from the tragedy that we saw. But when you consider
those numbers, I got to tell you, I was scratching
my head thinking how are we in a situation where
that level of money is going into staffing and it's
(23:58):
no disrespect to any of the staff a tongue in Gier,
because I'm sure that they work bloody hard. But then
I also noted in that report there was a lady
that was quoted that was saying, you know, she'd had
a broken shower head. I think it was for I
can't even remember the period of time, and that it
hadn't been fixed. And you think to yourself, when there's
that amount of money going in, why are some of
(24:18):
those things money?
Speaker 7 (24:19):
One of these We've got to be careful.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
Tongue in Dura are not responsible entirely for the repairs
and maintenance of homes on town camps.
Speaker 7 (24:27):
There is a relationship.
Speaker 2 (24:28):
There's a relationship in place with the Department of Housing
and with Community Central Australia Affordable Housing. There's a combination.
And I'm not saying one person is guilty of it
and one persons not, but it's more complex. I think
it requires them to talk about it, not us.
Speaker 3 (24:47):
Well, I can tell you that we're we're talking about
about eleven hundred homes in the Allie Springs town camps.
Speaker 7 (24:52):
That's wrong. There's not eleven hundred homes.
Speaker 3 (24:54):
On eleven hundred people, so my apologies it's about eighteen hundred. Well,
however many houses there are. I can tell you that,
Tang and gee if we do, because that has been
the discussion. So from the Northern Territory government's point of view,
they get one point eight six million dollars for tenancy
management services around. That covers tennency management, repairs and maintenance.
Speaker 4 (25:18):
And assistance with construction.
Speaker 3 (25:20):
So that's nearly two million dollars and you've got people
coming forward to the Australian and good on them for
coming forward saying I can't even get a new lock
on my door, or I can't get.
Speaker 4 (25:30):
My fridge fixed or my washing machine fixed.
Speaker 3 (25:33):
So that's a lot of money that's specifically allocated for
that work.
Speaker 4 (25:39):
Katie.
Speaker 6 (25:40):
Going back to about twenty fourteen fifteen, Tongguanjira Council was
stripped of their contracts to maintain the housing and manage
the housing in on all those town camps because of this,
because they they were not performing. The town camps were
an absolute mess. And the fundal event was that under
(26:02):
that was under the Giles CLP government, they were stripped
of all their contracts and they were reduced to basically
nothing now under labor those contracts returned to Tongue in Jira,
and here we are again, history repeating itself. Years later,
we're talking about the state of the town camps.
Speaker 4 (26:18):
Nothing has changed.
Speaker 6 (26:19):
I acknowledge that managing these town camps is extremely difficult,
but nothing changes.
Speaker 7 (26:25):
Katie and Katie.
Speaker 2 (26:26):
Let's just I just think it's important to be clear
here that the government can't walk away from having some
ownership and responsibility. The lease arrangements for town camps are
a tripartheid. They sit with the Commonwealth, the territory government
and Tongue in Dura and the Remote Housing program. And
the Minister for Remote Housing can and has the ability
to tell us how many new houses their CLP government
(26:48):
are going to build on town camps because they've not
built one since they've come to government.
Speaker 6 (26:52):
The chance we have built sixty four during a four
year period of whatever it was.
Speaker 7 (26:56):
You Act sixty four or more than that, it's.
Speaker 6 (27:00):
Those people chancy. But you know it's time to sort
of sit back and say, Okay, well, maybe those town
camps have been resourced fairly adequately in recent years, and
that the money goes out Bush or somewhere else.
Speaker 3 (27:11):
If you look at the houses and the condition that
we saw in the report that was done in the Australian,
clearly they haven't been maintained and supported. But what I
will say is that Minister Edgington, as the Responsible Minister,
has indicated he will do a full audit and he's
calling on the Federal government to do the same about
the funding that they provide because and you'll know, Senator
(27:32):
just Enterprises similarly asked for an order to be done
so we can make sure the money is being spent
where it should and we're getting outcomes not outputs.
Speaker 1 (27:39):
Well, look on that note, and speaking of money, we
might take a quick break because I'm keen to talk
about the federal budget and I know that there was
a bit to discuss from that, so let's take a
very quick break. Well, you are listening to the week
that was in the studio this morning. We've got Chancey Paig,
We've got Robin Carl, Robin Lamley and Matt Cunningham. Now,
the Federal budget was handed down on Tuesday night and
(28:00):
will it announce they announced this tax break for more
than thirteen million working Australians. Excuse me, handling their response
to the cost of living crisis. So a two hundred
and fifty dollars a year tax benefit comes into effect
from twenty seven to twenty eight. So don't know how
far that two hundred and fifty mic go off. You've
got a diesel car and you're trying to fill it up.
(28:21):
But the Treasurer, Jim Tarmas, said that the offset was
targeted at workers and represented the most meaningful permanent increase
to the tax effective tax free threshold in more than
a decade. Now, we also saw that some of the
tax perks that have been used by property investors for
decades to maximize profits and offset their losses is going
(28:43):
to be restricted from now on in what's been described
as what they've described as one of the most significant
changes to the tax system in years.
Speaker 4 (28:50):
So we're talking.
Speaker 1 (28:50):
Capital gains, tax negative gearing now big, you know, they're
big headline items. What I always look for though in
the federal budget is what's in it for the Northern
Territory and trying to see if there is much in
it for the Northern Territory. And one area that a
lot of families in the territory were keeping an eye
up for was ten million dollars that we've been hoping
(29:11):
to receive from maternity services at Royal Darwin Hospital. Now,
to any bond that's been following along for a little while,
you'll know that after the private ward at the private
hospital closed, it did mean that there was obviously an
increase in numbers at the maternity ward at Royal Darwin Hospital. Now,
unfortunately that money was not in the budget. We interviewed
(29:34):
Luke Gosling yesterday. He said no, no, it's coming, we
are going to get it, but he didn't give a
date when.
Speaker 6 (29:40):
Now.
Speaker 1 (29:40):
I got to tell you though, I was quite annoyed
about the whole thing because I saw that then in
Bloody Saint George they got thirteen million dollars for a
rugby league excellence facility. I know they're coming last in
the NRL at the moment.
Speaker 5 (29:52):
And there's one hundred million for a Papua New Guinea
rugby league team as well. I mean, we just get
so shay nothing.
Speaker 4 (30:00):
Territories definitely not the territory. It's definitely not a priority.
Speaker 5 (30:03):
We're literally the land of the vergotten it and we're
partly to blame ourselves, you know, we get most of
our funding from the federal government. We get it. We
get all this GST funding, which you know it isn't
tied to anything, and we probably waste in a lot
of areas where we probably shouldn't. But you know, we
need an injection of billions and billions and billions of
dollars from the federal government. Look at the state of
(30:24):
our roads. I mean, I drove out to Kakadu the
weekend before last, and I drove back from Catherine a
couple of weeks ago as well. A national highway right
and it can't go a kilometer without coming across potholes
that caused you to, you know, have to seriously slow
down and swerve, and someone's going to die as a
consequence of them at some point, the real tragedies.
Speaker 3 (30:47):
We have been lowing pretty hard for the additional money
so we can get a service in play while Hellscope
sorts itself out.
Speaker 4 (30:55):
Everyone knows what my views on that is.
Speaker 3 (30:57):
But the other component of this is we've clearly articulated
to the federal government where we have a shortfall in
the pressure that's on the public hospital system with it's
been a long standing issue, but we've really quantified it
and gone to them and said, you know, we're spending
around two hundred million dollars a year into the acute
care system providing age care bed services, which is a
(31:20):
really bad fit for those people who are stuck in
that acute care system. We really need some assistance with that.
And the other thing that's an anomaly is that for
emergency retrievals in the top end are not supported by
the federal government. Everywhere else in the country, emergency retrievals
for people for flights is covered by the Fed. So
we said, look, at least give us the same funding
(31:42):
for the same services as you do for everyone else.
Speaker 4 (31:45):
And we didn't even see that.
Speaker 1 (31:46):
Well, look, I guess what it made me also think, though,
is how are we ever going to go getting a
new tertiary hospital or Robin and Chancey. I'm sure that
you guys would like a new one in Alice Springs.
You know, I don't want to get contentity.
Speaker 4 (31:57):
Look, Katie.
Speaker 6 (32:00):
Robinson, leaning, look, did we get Chancey from the federal government.
Speaker 2 (32:06):
When we when we look at the federal budget, I mean,
we've had the territory budget handed down and they're talking
about being responsible and not throwing money everywhere, and I
think we've seen that in the federal budget.
Speaker 3 (32:16):
I think they're going to grow there. They're deficit by fourteen.
Speaker 2 (32:21):
Member for Solomon has said that ten million dollars is coming,
So we'll keep an eye on that and see when
it comes and where it comes.
Speaker 7 (32:28):
But Katie, I think you know when we talk.
Speaker 2 (32:30):
About air retrieval services, that's been a long standing issue
in the territory. It was under the previous Labor government
in the territory, it was under the previous CLP government,
under the previous Morrison government. It is an issue and
we do need to kind of have those conversations. I mean,
seventy three percent of the territory's actual budget is Commonwealth funding,
(32:50):
and we do get a better deal out of the
Commonwealth on roads. Every other state is usually fifty to fifty.
We get eighty from the Commonwealth, twenty from the terrors.
Speaker 5 (33:00):
Behind though, aren't we And if you go back to
where what we inherited itself government, we inherit the government
greatest deficit of all time. It's never been made back
up again.
Speaker 2 (33:09):
I think every government has had an issue here in
the territory around infrastructure because when they handed over the
keys and said, happy days. Hang on, we're not going
to tell you that we haven't actually given you an
appropriate budget line to address all this infrastructure. And you know,
I mean, as I said this week, Bill's done the
best he can do with the circumstances that he's got.
But let's be clear, delivering services for two hundred and
(33:31):
thirty thousand people.
Speaker 4 (33:33):
And sixty four thousand come on, catch up.
Speaker 7 (33:34):
Sorry I'm talking.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
I'm outside of Darwin at the main but you know,
like you know, for that population across one point three
million square kilometers, it's it's cost and.
Speaker 3 (33:42):
Particularly when you look at the fact that the Northern
Territory has the answer to so many of the energy
crisis challenges that are facing Australia and critical for us
to be able to deliver on that is to make
sure that our infrastructure supports it. The most important thing
is our rail and our roads. So we've got an
national highway that's in an absolutely appalling state. It's a
(34:03):
national highway that means the federal government should be pitching
in much more than they are.
Speaker 1 (34:09):
What did you make of Angus Taylor. They're making his
budget reply speech and saying that well permanent residents who
are not Australian citizens that they're obviously not going to
be able to be eligible then for you know, for
Center Link payments and that kind of thing.
Speaker 5 (34:24):
I understand the politics of it, but from a Northern
Territory perspective, I think where I think the federal coalitions
on pretty shaky ground, and you know, there's a real
anti immigrant line that's coming through at the moment, and
the coalition is playing this game because they're worried about
getting smashed by one nation, right, they just got absolutely
(34:46):
walloped by them in the pharaoh by election. But the
Northern Territory without immigrants is a place, is no place
at all. We rely on them so heavily, you.
Speaker 4 (34:56):
Know, to get the Northern Territory, the whole country right.
Speaker 3 (35:00):
When people are down in Victoria, can't get their Uber delivered,
can't get their taxi service, can't get because most of
the people you know who come and do those services
are well international students.
Speaker 2 (35:11):
They generate enormous amounts of absolutely education.
Speaker 1 (35:16):
Where I did not know that non citizens actually had
access to seventeen different welfare programs.
Speaker 6 (35:25):
But look, I think we all acknowledge that we need
immigrants coming to the Northern Territory and beyond. But if
there's no houses for them to live in, isn't that insane?
Isn't that the definition of insanity. We can't house the
people we've got here. The federal government are reducing their
immigration intake, apparently down to just over two hundred thousand
(35:48):
a year people. But I think we have to be
practical about this. We need the professional services and the
tradees for the services that these people provide. But where
do they live on them? And the federal government budget
has been housing. You know, Let's take away the money
(36:09):
from the rich people who are doing well in life,
tax them to the hill, take away the benefits of
capital gains tax and negative gearing. Let's disseminate the money
from the rich to the poor. You know, great Marxist philosophy,
they're great socialist principles. Let's give it all back to
the poor the people who employ those people, by the way,
(36:32):
business people. You know, the poor people are employed by
the captains of business. But let's put that to the side.
It's their whole premise is about creating more housing. It
just mystifies me how one transpires to the other and
comes up with a great housing policy. But Anglist Taylor's
(36:53):
budget response was underwhelming. I think, you know, for a
man who sort of days of probably number, but what
he's saying is true, you have to stem the flow
of immigrants until we catch up with housing.
Speaker 3 (37:07):
I think we just need to clarify though, that those
couple of hundred thousand that they're talking about, a significant
majority of those people already live here, already work here,
already pay taxes, already have housed.
Speaker 1 (37:18):
So that's where I think they've got to clarify it.
Because the way that he was, you know, the way
that he was sort of providing that budget response was
making it sound as it's people that are not working,
people that are not part of the workforce, and that
they're then on welfare and moving to Australia for that,
And you go, well, hang on, if we're talking skilled workers,
et cetera, that are filling jobs, I think it's a
very different point.
Speaker 2 (37:38):
And I'm agreeing with Robin Carl. Oh my god, no,
I know it's terrifying. But you know, like the people
that we're talking about when we talk about immigration, they're
not free loaders. They're people who run so much of
the territory, they help our economy.
Speaker 1 (37:51):
I think this is the thing though I reckon in
the Northern Territory it might be a pretty different situation
to what it may be in other parts of Australia.
You know, in terms of.
Speaker 2 (37:59):
Our speech is a response to the growing popularity of
one nation and trying to curve that. I think in
the long run that'll cause him much more pain than
it will.
Speaker 3 (38:11):
And just on the housing side of things, there's this
presumption that's been made by the treasure of Federal Treasurer
that people who buy investment homes are wealthy people, you know,
hoarding houses and manipulating the system. A lot of those
people are just mum and dad investors who want to
have a second property that they might eventually give to
(38:32):
their kids.
Speaker 4 (38:32):
But you know, it helps them in the short term.
Speaker 3 (38:34):
And I was talking to mortgage broker just recently who
said these changes will pretty well annihilate the opportunity for
young people to get into the market, which is just ironic.
Speaker 6 (38:45):
And so it takes away those steps for them all though,
there's one message we've got from Albaniasi and Jim Chalmers
is don't save your money, don't work hard, don't invest,
don't plan for your future. In fact, you know when
you get older, when you get to sixty five, you
know the government it's not going to back you. They're
going to take away the Medicare incentive or the private
medical incentive. Look, I found this budget, this federal budget,
(39:10):
completely offensive and even the look looking at Jim Chalmers
on the TV this morning turns my stomach. If this
is the way, if this is the direction of Australia,
if this is where we're going, then we are in
for Robert.
Speaker 1 (39:26):
Do you feel that what's happened is that you know,
the reality is for the government, whether you're talking Labor, Libs,
you know whoever, that you know that we've got the
younger generations sort of coming up. They're trying to win
the votes of the younger generation.
Speaker 6 (39:40):
Targeting these vulnerable young people who don't know what life's about,
they don't know about economics and fiscal management. Labor are
targeting these young people very cleverly, I have to say,
and they are assuming that those people will just be
on board on the labor train forever. And they might
well be, but this is not how you run a
democratic Western society.
Speaker 3 (40:02):
And the young people who are still living at home
when they're thirty.
Speaker 7 (40:05):
I think, Katie pray for ever.
Speaker 2 (40:07):
I think the proof will be in the in the
in the outcomes. I mean, if this is the government,
this is their agenda, this is what they're putting forward. Well,
we'll get to measure it in the number of people
that enter the housing market over the next few weeks.
Speaker 7 (40:19):
This will be the.
Speaker 1 (40:19):
Good thing is it's actually I would think a you know,
a part of the budget that we can actually measure
with KPI.
Speaker 7 (40:25):
It's like it can actually be the people.
Speaker 1 (40:29):
That's exactly right. How many are actually able.
Speaker 2 (40:31):
To get into the housing market that haven't. I just
before we flip to another issue, I think while we're
talking about health and funding, we should be advocating to
the Commonwealth Government to give us the beer of our
barracks to build a new Darwin hospital on because it's
right next to the and Robin I want to build.
Speaker 6 (40:47):
I'm saying, you're Fromala Screens, we need a hospital. Is
it possible to.
Speaker 2 (40:58):
Why do you just put on the right across the territory.
We need new hospitals. Darwin needs a.
Speaker 6 (41:05):
New Niky, this new hospital's government.
Speaker 2 (41:07):
Needs a new Hospital Catherine is on aund But you
know that an opportunity has come up for a strategic
parcel of land in between Darwin and Palmeston. It's right
next to the airport for air retrieval services. If we
can even at least get that land quarantined by the
Commonwealth that want to offload it, that is a future
proofing site for a new hospital at some point when
one is built. It can be done with a member
(41:30):
for Ara lew And to advocate for a new site
for an Alice Springs hospital.
Speaker 7 (41:34):
Whichause to itself.
Speaker 6 (41:35):
A new hospital was built in Palmerston in twenty eighteen.
We actually probably don't need a new hospital here in
Darwin as much as we do in Katherine Tenet Creek
and Alistair Catherine.
Speaker 2 (41:45):
Absolutely. I mean it's flooded. We've seen people being treated
out of a shed. We know that work needs to
happen there. But I think you know, when strategic pieces
of land come up, we should be looking at acquiring them.
Speaker 1 (41:56):
Well, look, we're going to have to take a quick break.
You are listening to Mix one now for nines three sixty.
It is the week that was well, it's been a
very busy morning in here and before we wrap up,
if you have just joined us, we have missed an
hour of power. Matt Cunningham, Robin Lambley, Robin carl and
Chancey Paike in the studio. But this new IKAK body,
or the new Integrity Commission is what it's being called now.
(42:19):
We had the announcement earlier this week that the former
NTI ombudsman Peter Scheyer is going to be the inaugural
Integrity and Ethics Commissioner, alongside Bruce McClintock and indeed Rhys
Kershaw as the CEO. I mean, what do you make
of it, Matt? Do you think it's going to make
things more effective? I know you've had strong opinions of
the Iyekak over the years, as have I.
Speaker 5 (42:41):
My only thought, Katie is that the first thing that
they should look into is the old IKAK.
Speaker 4 (42:49):
I do you, Matt, do you reckon they'll do that?
Speaker 5 (42:52):
Unlikely?
Speaker 2 (42:54):
It's going to be a challenge, k I think you know,
when we're looking at it, we'll get to see the
d detail, the budget, the resourcing. But I think Robin
Lamley's mentioned this before. Any kind of integrity or corruption
body that's in the territory always runs the risk of
having to declare conflicts because the territory is so small
(43:15):
that you know someone or someone knows someone, or someone
knows something about something.
Speaker 3 (43:18):
So but it's something we're used to managing, I think.
And the important thing here is that the commissioner, though
Peter Schuyer can focus on his job, we've got Reese
kurse or he'll be running the office, which is the
first time we've kind of.
Speaker 4 (43:31):
Separated that out.
Speaker 3 (43:31):
So it's it's I think it's a really great reform
and we're really looking forward to seeing.
Speaker 1 (43:37):
I mean, will it be difficult for Reese as the
former Northern Territory Police Commissioner if indeed there are ever
issues raised about.
Speaker 3 (43:44):
Police, Well, he's but he's just running the office like
he's in charge of the administ making sure everybody's doing
their administrative functions, running the services, supporting the commissioners. So
he's he's not the commissioner making the decisions. He's that's
up to that's Peter and supported by Bruce McClintock.
Speaker 7 (44:02):
Look, it's a new body.
Speaker 2 (44:03):
I think we all need to watch it unfold over
the next twelve months. It's got a budget appropriation, we'll
see how it handles matters that are referred to it
and what kind of reports in the level of detail
that it produces.
Speaker 1 (44:17):
Well, that's all We've had to do something different. Yeah,
that's all we've got time for this morning. We are
going to have to wrap up. Matt Cunningham from Sky News.
Thank you as always, Thanks Katie. Robin Lamley, the Speaker
of the Northern Territory and also the member for Aura
lun thank you for your time.
Speaker 6 (44:30):
Thank you, Katie.
Speaker 1 (44:31):
Robin carl the Minister for Children and Families and various
other portfolios, thank you for your time.
Speaker 4 (44:36):
Thanks Katie.
Speaker 3 (44:37):
Just a really quick shout out to the territory String
Stingers women's team who won the semi final last night
in the Malaysian Hockey League. Very exciting progressing to the final,
great territory.
Speaker 1 (44:47):
Moment, fantastic stuff. And the member for Galgia I can
never pronounce it quite right, Roger Chancy Paig.
Speaker 2 (44:54):
Thanks Katie. Just to shout out to all of our
correction stuff today. It's Corrections Day, so just acknowledging all
their amazing work and its international Families Day, so shout
out to all our families across the territory.
Speaker 1 (45:04):
Wonderful stuff. Thank you all so much for your time
this morning,
What a week it has been. There's plenty to cover
off on this morning, from federal budgets to changes to
the Child Protection Act and new people in charge of
the new IAC body. There is a lot to discuss
this morning and in the studio with us. Chancey Paike,
Good morning to you for the Labor Party.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Good morning Katie, and shout out to everyone tuned in.
Speaker 1 (00:20):
Well, I was going to say, what do you reckon
the temperatures like in Alice Springs this morning?
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Well, look, I think when we head back will be
putting on a jumper and drugging up.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
I reckon you might be. We have got Robin carl
Good morning to you, Robin, Minister for Families and Children
and various other portfolios.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
Good morning Katie, and good morning to everybody listening out there.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
And we've got Robin Lambley, Good morning to you, Robert.
Speaker 4 (00:42):
Morning Katie.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Sharing a microphone with Matt Cunningham this morning. So we'll.
Speaker 5 (00:49):
She doesn't have the same powers that she has in
Parliament usually I won't be able to shut me up.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
I'm much nicer.
Speaker 6 (00:56):
Chair.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
Well, we don't even have a chair for you there,
Robin to sit in. Well, look I tell you what
It has been a busy week in Parliament this week,
there is no doubt about that, well for the last
two weeks. But the Northern Territory government this week introduced
amendments to child protection legislation, moving to overhaul the child
(01:17):
protection system with proposed changes to the Care and Protection
of Children Act that would put child safety ahead of
all other considerations. That is what the government said when
introducing this legislation. Now, the reforms to amend the Aboriginal
child placement principle and introduce a new universal principle focused
(01:38):
on the best interests and safety of a child. Now
we also know that in addition to that, we've got
a review that is going to be taking place as
well with the New South Wales the former New South
Wales Police Commissioner Karen web and veteran Northern Territory Public
Servant Greg Shanahan overseeing that review. Now there is a
lot to unpack, so we might talk about the child
(02:01):
protection legislation first, Rob and Carlole go to you. Why
did you as the minister decide that it was necessary
to make these changes to the Act.
Speaker 4 (02:11):
Well, thanks, Katie.
Speaker 3 (02:12):
I think the most important thing to say is over
the last eighteen months, I've had the opportunity to talk
to many, many people who work on the ground in
child protection, people who touch the child protection system, families
who are really desperate around what's happening with some of
their kids and help that they might need, and it
was really obvious that that somewhere in the annals of
(02:35):
time there had been a loss of focus on how
do we.
Speaker 4 (02:40):
Keep families together safely?
Speaker 3 (02:41):
And reviewing the Act, we originally looked at just introducing
an amendment that said, please elevate best interests, and then
we looked at whether we could put family Responsibility Agreements
as a standalone piece of legislation, because that's where the
work starts. And then we decided that that would be
(03:01):
a little bit complicated for people to go from one
legislation to the other, so we decided to integrate everything
together so that front and center is we have to
do everything we possibly can to keep families together safely,
but there is the reality that at times that's not
going to be possible, and we need to make sure
(03:23):
that we proactively get involved and see if we can
rectify whatever's going wrong in a particular family situation as
soon as possible and where that's not possible and safety
is a concern for the child, that we need to
then be able to have these next steps, and we
wanted to make sure we put a framework around it
that's sent a very clear message to the Department that
(03:45):
all of the effort in those first couple of years
needed to be on making sure that we did everything
we could to keep a family together and that we
would then progress from there.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
I know we've got a situation where now more than
three hundred and thirty organizations from across the Northern Territory
and Australia say that they are united in condemning the
Northern Territory government's intention to amend the Care and Protection
of Children Act. We have got Teresa Rowe, who is
indeed the chair of the Aboriginal Peak Organization's Northern Territory
(04:18):
saying we strongly reject the Northern Territory Government's deliberate portrayal
of Aboriginal families, communities and culture as a risk to
children's safety. I mean, what do you say.
Speaker 3 (04:30):
To say is nowhere in any of the conversations have
I had it have we talked about Aboriginal children. What
we're talking about is every single child in the territory
who may be at risk deserves the best possible opportunity
to be safe and well cared for. And that's one
of the reasons why, for the very first time, we've
put a universal principle in there that applies to every
single child in the Northern Territory. It doesn't matter what
(04:53):
their background is, where they're from, what their situation is
in terms of their cultural or heritage background. Every single
child deserves to have consideration of those elements to ensure
that they are kept safe. And we recognize that there
is some elements that don't apply to all children that
are specific to our Aboriginal children, which is that really
(05:16):
important connection to kinship and culture and country, and we
wanted to make sure that that was reinforced, so that's
what we did. So I'm just really baffled that all
of these organizations are just picking a small section of
the Act and not looking at the Act as a whole,
which in its entirety is designed to make sure our
children are safe and hopefully they are safe with their families.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
I guess you know you said that there's no sort
of reference to Aboriginal children, but I guess the taking
away of the Aboriginal child placement principle, whether intentionally or unintentionally,
does bring that into the discussion or into the scope
of these changes.
Speaker 3 (05:57):
We haven't taken part of it. It's not taken away.
Cadid still there. So there's a universal principle that applies
to every child, including Aboriginal children. And then there's a
reinforcement of a principle specific.
Speaker 5 (06:08):
For abression, so that like the Aboriginal child plays. When
principle was once family first, another Aboriginal family second, sort
of non indigenous care, sort of option of last resort,
that middle part has been taken away, is that right?
Speaker 3 (06:25):
So what we've done is wrap it all up and
say every effort first instance, parents, family, and then the
most appropriate person because quite frankly, the feedback I got,
including from Aboriginal people, was just focusing for five ten
years trying to find any Aboriginal person which could then
(06:45):
look after a child, which is what the previous clause said.
Meant that for those Aboriginal children, they were in limbo
whether it was family or not, irrespective it was any
Aboriginal person.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
I think, Katie, I think first and foremost the care
and Protection Act as it stands, has one core principle
and that is the safety of territory children and that
is and should always be the core function and principle.
Speaker 7 (07:10):
I think what we're seeing.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
Here is, you know, we have a new government in
the territory, or reasonably new government in the colp who
this is what they're proposing to put forward. We don't
agree with that. We think that the watering down or
the removal of that political that particular aspect is of concern.
We think that there are three functions of the Act
as it currently stands, Section ten, Section fifteen and Section
(07:35):
twenty of the Act that works simultaneously together to look
at the best interests, the risk and the safety of
a child. They have to be done before you can
even consider placement with a family. And also, you know,
the child placement principle is incredibly important. It's been built
off years of expertise, of experience, of evidence, and we've
(07:57):
asked the government to make it clear to us where
is the evidence that shows that child placement principle has
been put ahead of the safety of a child, Because
if that has happened, Katie, that's a failure of a
government not of the principle itself.
Speaker 5 (08:12):
I went, I went this week. I made the mistake
Katie yesterday of going back and reading the coronial report
into the death of Deborah Melville in two thousand and seven,
and the coronial was done in twenty ten. It's the honestly,
Stephen King couldn't write a horror story worse than what happened.
Speaker 4 (08:29):
To that girl?
Speaker 1 (08:30):
Can you remind our list?
Speaker 5 (08:31):
So, Deborah Melville was a girl who was removed from
the care of her parents in any result, and she
was placed with an aunt who already had seven children
in her care. And the aunt had actually expressed that
she didn't want these other five children. But the decision
was made to put those five children with the aunt
or the great aunt, because the child protection workers, whether
(08:52):
they were specifically following the act or not, where of
the view it was more important to put them with
an aboriginal family member than with someone else. Deborah Melville
died the most terrific death. She had an infection in
her leg that when untreated for three weeks. She spent
much of those three weeks on the couch at a
(09:14):
home in Woodruff, where she was unable to even go
to the toilet, She was soiling herself on the couch.
She was not being assisted in any way by the
people who were there to care for her. Now, there
were massive failings by the child protection department that didn't
step in and do their job, and many of those
issues exist today and hopelessly overwhelmed child protection department. She
(09:36):
ended up being put outside in the backyard and she
died in the dirt of that home. Her last words
were talking about seeing fairies and pixies because she was hallucinated.
There were several recommendations made by the coroner at the time,
and one of the things that he found was that
basically the child Protection department was taking a relativist approach
(09:59):
to Ki didn't care, and they weren't applying the same
standards to Aboriginal kids that they were applying to non
Aboriginal kids. So they weren't intervening and saying, hey, it's
not okay to have twelve people sleeping on the floor
of a house without a mattress, and they were saying,
but you know. And there was one point where there
was a child protection worker who was basically told by Karu,
(10:23):
who was a group advocating for Aboriginal children at the time,
that she was applying sort of a white woman's world
to an Aboriginal situation, and so then as a consequence,
she wasn't honest in the report that she gave anyway.
I rambling, But the key thing from this is that
the coroner made one specific recommendation in relation to Section
(10:43):
twelve of the Child Protection Act, and that was that
we can't apply this relevus approach, that we need to
treat all children the same, and that a sub section
needed to be written into the Act of that effect.
And this was in twenty ten, and that was never done.
Speaker 1 (11:01):
So there was never the subsection.
Speaker 5 (11:03):
It was never it was never inserted. Section twelve was
never changed to that effect. And what I want to say,
and so I think that is something that really does
need to address. And when we talk about evidence, and
there's a lot of people saying, well, the evidence says this,
and the evidence says that, I think primary evidence is
always better than, you know, an academics report. And I
don't think there's any bit of primary evidence that is
(11:23):
better than what the coroner, Greg Cavanaugh, a man we
deeply miss, I think, wrote in that report back in
twenty ten, and I think everyone who wants to express
an opinion on this, I just encourage them to go
and read that report because it highlights all of the
issues that we're dealing with today, and many of them
were not addressed back then.
Speaker 4 (11:43):
I mean, I just need to clarify.
Speaker 3 (11:45):
Safety is not mentioned at all in the current legislation.
Speaker 4 (11:49):
Able that is not rubbish robin safeguarding. It's not the
same as.
Speaker 3 (11:56):
Safety safeguarding underpinning principles, which is currently Section ten does
not mention safety. So what we've done is we've elevated
Section ten, brought it up higher into the Act, and
every other clause relating to placement of children Universal Placement Principle,
(12:16):
as well as the Aboriginal Children Placement Clause section says
subject to Section eight. So that is the overriding principle, Katie.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
The whole Act as itself is about the safety and
protection of children. And I think, you know, I can
hear Matt's points and I completely agree, but the child
placement principle doesn't mandate that you have to put an
Aboriginal child with an Aboriginal family.
Speaker 7 (12:41):
It's not mandated.
Speaker 1 (12:42):
Wonder though it be mandated. What I wonder, and it
may like it might not be mandated, and I don't know.
I'm not an expert in this space. But what I
wonder is if what's happened over the years is that
within the Child Protection Agency, if people have reached the
point where, you know, where there are bit worried that
if they do remove an Aboriginal child from an unsafe environment,
(13:05):
that you know, they're either going to end up reprimanded,
that they are going to be called racist, that there
is going to be ramifications to it in one way
or another. And I don't know, I don't know whether
that is.
Speaker 3 (13:16):
I can assure you that every policy that relates to
how you assess, how you place, what you consider, every
single policy that currently exists, preferences the the you must
look at this principle, the placement guidance for Aboriginal children first.
So it's like you have to whatever it takes, whatever
(13:39):
it takes well, as Katie just said, over time, interpretations
have made and quite frankly, when you're in government, if
you realized and recognized that that had been misunderstood and misinterpreted,
which is clearly what's happened, which is why we're making
it absolutely clear that safety is the paramount principle for
every single.
Speaker 4 (14:00):
Child, then why didn't you fix it?
Speaker 3 (14:02):
Because I can tell you I've gone back over documents
from the last ten years and that had been the
absolute thing we want to talk about.
Speaker 4 (14:10):
The real issue unification.
Speaker 2 (14:12):
Governments just to live at a budget with not an
additional sent for an extra caseworker frontline child protection worker
to address the disgusting number of case loads that we
are talking to child protection workers, he say they have
over two hundred caseloads.
Speaker 6 (14:27):
The government has wanted to talk about changed. That has
never changed. I was the shadow Minister for Child Protection
in twenty ten when the whole Deborah Melville case came
to light, so I've had a bit of history and
I was a former Minister for Child Protection for five minutes.
But look, I don't think people have a problem with
(14:48):
placing Aboriginal children with Aboriginal families. I think that's a
no brainer. But I think there have been problems with
it being interpreted too literally and all at the expense
of common sense. There have been problems with it.
Speaker 4 (15:07):
Chancey.
Speaker 6 (15:07):
You know that with certain children it has been impossible
almost to find Aboriginal family to place children with and
that has caused disruption to those children. I heard the
minister in her speech on Tuesday. I think it was
side a couple of cases like that, these kids bouncing
(15:27):
around from family to family indefinitely because they haven't been
the Department hasn't been able to find a stable family,
and I think a line has to be drawn there,
and I think that's what the government is intending to.
Speaker 7 (15:41):
Do, you know.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
I just think all we're asking for is de identified
real examples of where the placement by the Department has
been put above the safety of a child.
Speaker 7 (15:51):
And Katie, I.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
Think we all you know, I'm standing here with all
of the Robins and the mat today. This is going
to go to an inquiry. I think it's going to
allow people to have their opportunity, whether they are a
care whether they're an Aboriginal family, whether they're an organization
or a peak body, to put forward their lived dicis.
Speaker 4 (16:09):
Just on that, Katie.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
I know that one of the real concerns that it's
been expressed to me by some of Chances Labor Party
colleagues are certainly organizations who depend on federal government funding
families and carers. Their concern about if we put forward information,
is that going to come back onto us. I just
want to assure anybody who is thinking about that, what
(16:33):
they need to do is, if they wish to put
a submission, make it very very clear at the beginning
of the submission that they do not want their details published.
That will be respected. All of the evidence that they
provide will be considered in deliberations, but their submissions won't
be published publicly.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
All right, We're going to take a really quick break.
When we come back, I do want to talk a
little bit more about the review which is set to
get underway, and indeed, the discussion around the two people
who are set to oversee that review stick around plenty
happening right here on Mix one oh four point nine,
three point sixty. It is the week that was Now
if you've just joined us, see in the studio this morning.
(17:11):
We have got Matt Cunningham, We've got Robin Lamley, Robin
Karl and Chancey Paig. Now there has been discussion already
about the changes to the Child Protection Act, but I
want to sort of talk a little bit more about
this review that was also announced earlier in the week. Well, Minister,
you'd given us some further detail about who's going to
oversee that review. So, former New South Wales Police Commissioner
(17:35):
Karen Webb and veteran Northern Territory Public servant Greg Shanahan
are going to lead that review into the territory's child
protection system. Well, following on from the alleged murder of
Kumanjai little Baby. The investigation is beginning, as I understand it,
next week and it's going to examine the Department of
Children and Families handling of the case along with the
(17:56):
broader child protection process. Now there's been already this week
about the fact that people maybe feel it needs to
be broader, and also criticism about the two people who
have been put in charge of that review. Criticism about
the fact that Karen web obviously is a former New
South Wales Police commissioner, and that Greg Shanahan. I don't
(18:19):
know a huge amount about Greg's background, but I believe
that he was with corrections and I know just as sorry.
So I know that there was some discussion on ABC
National this morning sort of saying, why have you got
two people overseeing that you know nobody that actually works
in the child protection space.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
Well, I think one of the things that I absolutely
indicated when we first just announced that our review was
needed was that we needed people who were totally independent,
but we also needed people who had some knowledge and background.
So I sought advice from the Office of the Department
of Chief Ministers about how the best way was to
(18:57):
go about this. A number of names were pulled together.
Wasn't involved in that decision making process, and the decision
was made that Karen Webb as somebody who has had
extensive experience in child protection and also had done a
national review of domestic violence for the New South Wales
Police which included coming to the territory and looking at
(19:20):
what was occurring and what the systems were in place
for domestic violence. The decision was made that she would
be a really good independent choice to do that, but
with someone who had knowledge in the area, so not
a totally blank slate. And then that Greg as somebody
who is well known in the territory, well respected, has
a justice department background, would be able to balance for
(19:44):
the territory perspective and also importantly to have both a
man and a woman involved in the team, so there
was no impediment to talking to anyone around what we might.
Speaker 6 (19:55):
Need complete objectivity. I think you've got to be at
arm's length for these thens. So I think what we
suffer from in the Northern Territory is that we're too
close to the problem. As I said on Radio with
you yesterday, Katie, there's no separation and for something like
this you need to be completely objective.
Speaker 2 (20:13):
I'm not disagreeing about having outside of the jurisdiction do
the work. I think we have asked Minister Carl a
few questions about the scope of whether it's just surrounding
the heartbreaking and tragic events that led to the passing
of kumun Jay little baby, or the trial protection system itself. Look,
I think from our perspective, we are concerned that there
(20:35):
wasn't a person who had the tertiary experience and qualifications
from a child protection space, whether.
Speaker 7 (20:42):
That's a social social worker or.
Speaker 2 (20:45):
Someone who's been an experienced practitioner from an outside jurisdiction,
or particularly predominantly someone who's got that experience of First
Nations children in care. Given that, you know, I think
it's ninety percent of children in the art of home
care system at the moment in our First Nations. But
look that investigation is taking its course now. I think
it's starting next week, Robin, that's correct. So we'll let
(21:07):
that do its thing, and we'll certainly look forward to
the recommendations when they are done, and we'll look at
what they ask.
Speaker 5 (21:14):
I mean to chance this point, I'm a bit surprised
that the Children's Commissioner hasn't announced her own own initiative
investigation into these issues, which she has the power to do.
In fact, if you look at the changes to the
Child Protection Act over the last fifteen years, and I
was talking before about that recommendation from Greek Cavett Kavin
are not being implemented. But one thing that has been
implemented is the establishment of the Office of the Children's Commissioner,
(21:38):
and so she certainly has the power to do that,
but for her own reasons, she's decided she wasn't going
to do that. And then I saw earlier this week
she came out and said there should be a board
of inquiry, which we've actually had before, and that she
should head that up. But she has the power to
do that, Katie. I just I think, you know, more
is more in this situation. And on top of Karen
(21:59):
Webbinak Shanahan's investigation. The Children's Commissioners should do our own,
as Colin Gwin did back in twenty eighteen, and I
produced a pretty damning report and how a bath.
Speaker 2 (22:09):
You know, I think we need to see what the
recommendations are from this inquiry.
Speaker 7 (22:14):
As we said, we would have liked some additional scope
in there.
Speaker 2 (22:16):
But I think one of the biggest issues that comes down,
and both parties are guilty of this.
Speaker 7 (22:20):
I'm not going to try and say that one is
all the other.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
We had the Little Children a sacred you know, Rex
Wild and Pat Anderson, we had the Bath Report. We've
had the Royal Commission into the Protection and Attention of Children.
We've had the Children's Commissioner's reports when Colin.
Speaker 4 (22:34):
Gwynn was and before that.
Speaker 3 (22:36):
You may may or may not be across this one
because it was a long time ago.
Speaker 4 (22:39):
That's how long I've been here.
Speaker 3 (22:40):
But in the late nineties there were the learning lessons.
Speaker 7 (22:42):
Learning lessons, yeah, of course, so it's.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
Been a long time that we've had lots of reports
about it.
Speaker 2 (22:47):
It does come back to the fundamental issue that we
are suffering and I suffered at where we were in a government.
Speaker 7 (22:52):
Robin will be suffering it.
Speaker 2 (22:53):
Being in there now, it's sitting around the table and
lobbying for additional money into particular areas that need to
be priorities of government. Lots of the issues we're seeing
in child protection are a result of resourcing in the territory,
whether that's in housing, health, education or the tertiary end.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
Actually, I'm glad you made that point because one of
the stories that surprised me over last weekend I think
it was reported in The Australian on the weekend was
the level of money that's going into Tongue and Jeer Council. Now,
obviously I think it was twenty seven million dollars, but
twenty four million dollars of that is going into staff. Now, sorry,
what was it? Okay? Sorry, Matt, we got you off.
Speaker 4 (23:33):
My out of forty out of forty.
Speaker 1 (23:35):
Seven million, I do apologize. And look, I know that
there's been a lot of discussion about the state of
remote or town camp housing, I should say, following on
from the tragedy that we saw. But when you consider
those numbers, I got to tell you, I was scratching
my head thinking how are we in a situation where
that level of money is going into staffing and it's
(23:58):
no disrespect to any of the staff a tongue in Gier,
because I'm sure that they work bloody hard. But then
I also noted in that report there was a lady
that was quoted that was saying, you know, she'd had
a broken shower head. I think it was for I
can't even remember the period of time, and that it
hadn't been fixed. And you think to yourself, when there's
that amount of money going in, why are some of
(24:18):
those things money?
Speaker 7 (24:19):
One of these We've got to be careful.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
Tongue in Dura are not responsible entirely for the repairs
and maintenance of homes on town camps.
Speaker 7 (24:27):
There is a relationship.
Speaker 2 (24:28):
There's a relationship in place with the Department of Housing
and with Community Central Australia Affordable Housing. There's a combination.
And I'm not saying one person is guilty of it
and one persons not, but it's more complex. I think
it requires them to talk about it, not us.
Speaker 3 (24:47):
Well, I can tell you that we're we're talking about
about eleven hundred homes in the Allie Springs town camps.
Speaker 7 (24:52):
That's wrong. There's not eleven hundred homes.
Speaker 3 (24:54):
On eleven hundred people, so my apologies it's about eighteen hundred. Well,
however many houses there are. I can tell you that,
Tang and gee if we do, because that has been
the discussion. So from the Northern Territory government's point of view,
they get one point eight six million dollars for tenancy
management services around. That covers tennency management, repairs and maintenance.
Speaker 4 (25:18):
And assistance with construction.
Speaker 3 (25:20):
So that's nearly two million dollars and you've got people
coming forward to the Australian and good on them for
coming forward saying I can't even get a new lock
on my door, or I can't get.
Speaker 4 (25:30):
My fridge fixed or my washing machine fixed.
Speaker 3 (25:33):
So that's a lot of money that's specifically allocated for
that work.
Speaker 4 (25:39):
Katie.
Speaker 6 (25:40):
Going back to about twenty fourteen fifteen, Tongguanjira Council was
stripped of their contracts to maintain the housing and manage
the housing in on all those town camps because of this,
because they they were not performing. The town camps were
an absolute mess. And the fundal event was that under
(26:02):
that was under the Giles CLP government, they were stripped
of all their contracts and they were reduced to basically
nothing now under labor those contracts returned to Tongue in Jira,
and here we are again, history repeating itself. Years later,
we're talking about the state of the town camps.
Speaker 4 (26:18):
Nothing has changed.
Speaker 6 (26:19):
I acknowledge that managing these town camps is extremely difficult,
but nothing changes.
Speaker 7 (26:25):
Katie and Katie.
Speaker 2 (26:26):
Let's just I just think it's important to be clear
here that the government can't walk away from having some
ownership and responsibility. The lease arrangements for town camps are
a tripartheid. They sit with the Commonwealth, the territory government
and Tongue in Dura and the Remote Housing program. And
the Minister for Remote Housing can and has the ability
to tell us how many new houses their CLP government
(26:48):
are going to build on town camps because they've not
built one since they've come to government.
Speaker 6 (26:52):
The chance we have built sixty four during a four
year period of whatever it was.
Speaker 7 (26:56):
You Act sixty four or more than that, it's.
Speaker 6 (27:00):
Those people chancy. But you know it's time to sort
of sit back and say, Okay, well, maybe those town
camps have been resourced fairly adequately in recent years, and
that the money goes out Bush or somewhere else.
Speaker 3 (27:11):
If you look at the houses and the condition that
we saw in the report that was done in the Australian,
clearly they haven't been maintained and supported. But what I
will say is that Minister Edgington, as the Responsible Minister,
has indicated he will do a full audit and he's
calling on the Federal government to do the same about
the funding that they provide because and you'll know, Senator
(27:32):
just Enterprises similarly asked for an order to be done
so we can make sure the money is being spent
where it should and we're getting outcomes not outputs.
Speaker 1 (27:39):
Well, look on that note, and speaking of money, we
might take a quick break because I'm keen to talk
about the federal budget and I know that there was
a bit to discuss from that, so let's take a
very quick break. Well, you are listening to the week
that was in the studio this morning. We've got Chancey Paig,
We've got Robin Carl, Robin Lamley and Matt Cunningham. Now,
the Federal budget was handed down on Tuesday night and
(28:00):
will it announce they announced this tax break for more
than thirteen million working Australians. Excuse me, handling their response
to the cost of living crisis. So a two hundred
and fifty dollars a year tax benefit comes into effect
from twenty seven to twenty eight. So don't know how
far that two hundred and fifty mic go off. You've
got a diesel car and you're trying to fill it up.
(28:21):
But the Treasurer, Jim Tarmas, said that the offset was
targeted at workers and represented the most meaningful permanent increase
to the tax effective tax free threshold in more than
a decade. Now, we also saw that some of the
tax perks that have been used by property investors for
decades to maximize profits and offset their losses is going
(28:43):
to be restricted from now on in what's been described
as what they've described as one of the most significant
changes to the tax system in years.
Speaker 4 (28:50):
So we're talking.
Speaker 1 (28:50):
Capital gains, tax negative gearing now big, you know, they're
big headline items. What I always look for though in
the federal budget is what's in it for the Northern
Territory and trying to see if there is much in
it for the Northern Territory. And one area that a
lot of families in the territory were keeping an eye
up for was ten million dollars that we've been hoping
(29:11):
to receive from maternity services at Royal Darwin Hospital. Now,
to any bond that's been following along for a little while,
you'll know that after the private ward at the private
hospital closed, it did mean that there was obviously an
increase in numbers at the maternity ward at Royal Darwin Hospital. Now,
unfortunately that money was not in the budget. We interviewed
(29:34):
Luke Gosling yesterday. He said no, no, it's coming, we
are going to get it, but he didn't give a
date when.
Speaker 6 (29:40):
Now.
Speaker 1 (29:40):
I got to tell you though, I was quite annoyed
about the whole thing because I saw that then in
Bloody Saint George they got thirteen million dollars for a
rugby league excellence facility. I know they're coming last in
the NRL at the moment.
Speaker 5 (29:52):
And there's one hundred million for a Papua New Guinea
rugby league team as well. I mean, we just get
so shay nothing.
Speaker 4 (30:00):
Territories definitely not the territory. It's definitely not a priority.
Speaker 5 (30:03):
We're literally the land of the vergotten it and we're
partly to blame ourselves, you know, we get most of
our funding from the federal government. We get it. We
get all this GST funding, which you know it isn't
tied to anything, and we probably waste in a lot
of areas where we probably shouldn't. But you know, we
need an injection of billions and billions and billions of
dollars from the federal government. Look at the state of
(30:24):
our roads. I mean, I drove out to Kakadu the
weekend before last, and I drove back from Catherine a
couple of weeks ago as well. A national highway right
and it can't go a kilometer without coming across potholes
that caused you to, you know, have to seriously slow
down and swerve, and someone's going to die as a
consequence of them at some point, the real tragedies.
Speaker 3 (30:47):
We have been lowing pretty hard for the additional money
so we can get a service in play while Hellscope
sorts itself out.
Speaker 4 (30:55):
Everyone knows what my views on that is.
Speaker 3 (30:57):
But the other component of this is we've clearly articulated
to the federal government where we have a shortfall in
the pressure that's on the public hospital system with it's
been a long standing issue, but we've really quantified it
and gone to them and said, you know, we're spending
around two hundred million dollars a year into the acute
care system providing age care bed services, which is a
(31:20):
really bad fit for those people who are stuck in
that acute care system. We really need some assistance with that.
And the other thing that's an anomaly is that for
emergency retrievals in the top end are not supported by
the federal government. Everywhere else in the country, emergency retrievals
for people for flights is covered by the Fed. So
we said, look, at least give us the same funding
(31:42):
for the same services as you do for everyone else.
Speaker 4 (31:45):
And we didn't even see that.
Speaker 1 (31:46):
Well, look, I guess what it made me also think, though,
is how are we ever going to go getting a
new tertiary hospital or Robin and Chancey. I'm sure that
you guys would like a new one in Alice Springs.
You know, I don't want to get contentity.
Speaker 4 (31:57):
Look, Katie.
Speaker 6 (32:00):
Robinson, leaning, look, did we get Chancey from the federal government.
Speaker 2 (32:06):
When we when we look at the federal budget, I mean,
we've had the territory budget handed down and they're talking
about being responsible and not throwing money everywhere, and I
think we've seen that in the federal budget.
Speaker 3 (32:16):
I think they're going to grow there. They're deficit by fourteen.
Speaker 2 (32:21):
Member for Solomon has said that ten million dollars is coming,
So we'll keep an eye on that and see when
it comes and where it comes.
Speaker 7 (32:28):
But Katie, I think you know when we talk.
Speaker 2 (32:30):
About air retrieval services, that's been a long standing issue
in the territory. It was under the previous Labor government
in the territory, it was under the previous CLP government,
under the previous Morrison government. It is an issue and
we do need to kind of have those conversations. I mean,
seventy three percent of the territory's actual budget is Commonwealth funding,
(32:50):
and we do get a better deal out of the
Commonwealth on roads. Every other state is usually fifty to fifty.
We get eighty from the Commonwealth, twenty from the terrors.
Speaker 5 (33:00):
Behind though, aren't we And if you go back to
where what we inherited itself government, we inherit the government
greatest deficit of all time. It's never been made back
up again.
Speaker 2 (33:09):
I think every government has had an issue here in
the territory around infrastructure because when they handed over the
keys and said, happy days. Hang on, we're not going
to tell you that we haven't actually given you an
appropriate budget line to address all this infrastructure. And you know,
I mean, as I said this week, Bill's done the
best he can do with the circumstances that he's got.
But let's be clear, delivering services for two hundred and
(33:31):
thirty thousand people.
Speaker 4 (33:33):
And sixty four thousand come on, catch up.
Speaker 7 (33:34):
Sorry I'm talking.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
I'm outside of Darwin at the main but you know,
like you know, for that population across one point three
million square kilometers, it's it's cost and.
Speaker 3 (33:42):
Particularly when you look at the fact that the Northern
Territory has the answer to so many of the energy
crisis challenges that are facing Australia and critical for us
to be able to deliver on that is to make
sure that our infrastructure supports it. The most important thing
is our rail and our roads. So we've got an
national highway that's in an absolutely appalling state. It's a
(34:03):
national highway that means the federal government should be pitching
in much more than they are.
Speaker 1 (34:09):
What did you make of Angus Taylor. They're making his
budget reply speech and saying that well permanent residents who
are not Australian citizens that they're obviously not going to
be able to be eligible then for you know, for
Center Link payments and that kind of thing.
Speaker 5 (34:24):
I understand the politics of it, but from a Northern
Territory perspective, I think where I think the federal coalitions
on pretty shaky ground, and you know, there's a real
anti immigrant line that's coming through at the moment, and
the coalition is playing this game because they're worried about
getting smashed by one nation, right, they just got absolutely
(34:46):
walloped by them in the pharaoh by election. But the
Northern Territory without immigrants is a place, is no place
at all. We rely on them so heavily, you.
Speaker 4 (34:56):
Know, to get the Northern Territory, the whole country right.
Speaker 3 (35:00):
When people are down in Victoria, can't get their Uber delivered,
can't get their taxi service, can't get because most of
the people you know who come and do those services
are well international students.
Speaker 2 (35:11):
They generate enormous amounts of absolutely education.
Speaker 1 (35:16):
Where I did not know that non citizens actually had
access to seventeen different welfare programs.
Speaker 6 (35:25):
But look, I think we all acknowledge that we need
immigrants coming to the Northern Territory and beyond. But if
there's no houses for them to live in, isn't that insane?
Isn't that the definition of insanity. We can't house the
people we've got here. The federal government are reducing their
immigration intake, apparently down to just over two hundred thousand
(35:48):
a year people. But I think we have to be
practical about this. We need the professional services and the
tradees for the services that these people provide. But where
do they live on them? And the federal government budget
has been housing. You know, Let's take away the money
(36:09):
from the rich people who are doing well in life,
tax them to the hill, take away the benefits of
capital gains tax and negative gearing. Let's disseminate the money
from the rich to the poor. You know, great Marxist philosophy,
they're great socialist principles. Let's give it all back to
the poor the people who employ those people, by the way,
(36:32):
business people. You know, the poor people are employed by
the captains of business. But let's put that to the side.
It's their whole premise is about creating more housing. It
just mystifies me how one transpires to the other and
comes up with a great housing policy. But Anglist Taylor's
(36:53):
budget response was underwhelming. I think, you know, for a
man who sort of days of probably number, but what
he's saying is true, you have to stem the flow
of immigrants until we catch up with housing.
Speaker 3 (37:07):
I think we just need to clarify though, that those
couple of hundred thousand that they're talking about, a significant
majority of those people already live here, already work here,
already pay taxes, already have housed.
Speaker 1 (37:18):
So that's where I think they've got to clarify it.
Because the way that he was, you know, the way
that he was sort of providing that budget response was
making it sound as it's people that are not working,
people that are not part of the workforce, and that
they're then on welfare and moving to Australia for that,
And you go, well, hang on, if we're talking skilled workers,
et cetera, that are filling jobs, I think it's a
very different point.
Speaker 2 (37:38):
And I'm agreeing with Robin Carl. Oh my god, no,
I know it's terrifying. But you know, like the people
that we're talking about when we talk about immigration, they're
not free loaders. They're people who run so much of
the territory, they help our economy.
Speaker 1 (37:51):
I think this is the thing though I reckon in
the Northern Territory it might be a pretty different situation
to what it may be in other parts of Australia.
You know, in terms of.
Speaker 2 (37:59):
Our speech is a response to the growing popularity of
one nation and trying to curve that. I think in
the long run that'll cause him much more pain than
it will.
Speaker 3 (38:11):
And just on the housing side of things, there's this
presumption that's been made by the treasure of Federal Treasurer
that people who buy investment homes are wealthy people, you know,
hoarding houses and manipulating the system. A lot of those
people are just mum and dad investors who want to
have a second property that they might eventually give to
(38:32):
their kids.
Speaker 4 (38:32):
But you know, it helps them in the short term.
Speaker 3 (38:34):
And I was talking to mortgage broker just recently who
said these changes will pretty well annihilate the opportunity for
young people to get into the market, which is just ironic.
Speaker 6 (38:45):
And so it takes away those steps for them all though,
there's one message we've got from Albaniasi and Jim Chalmers
is don't save your money, don't work hard, don't invest,
don't plan for your future. In fact, you know when
you get older, when you get to sixty five, you
know the government it's not going to back you. They're
going to take away the Medicare incentive or the private
medical incentive. Look, I found this budget, this federal budget,
(39:10):
completely offensive and even the look looking at Jim Chalmers
on the TV this morning turns my stomach. If this
is the way, if this is the direction of Australia,
if this is where we're going, then we are in
for Robert.
Speaker 1 (39:26):
Do you feel that what's happened is that you know,
the reality is for the government, whether you're talking Labor, Libs,
you know whoever, that you know that we've got the
younger generations sort of coming up. They're trying to win
the votes of the younger generation.
Speaker 6 (39:40):
Targeting these vulnerable young people who don't know what life's about,
they don't know about economics and fiscal management. Labor are
targeting these young people very cleverly, I have to say,
and they are assuming that those people will just be
on board on the labor train forever. And they might
well be, but this is not how you run a
democratic Western society.
Speaker 3 (40:02):
And the young people who are still living at home
when they're thirty.
Speaker 7 (40:05):
I think, Katie pray for ever.
Speaker 2 (40:07):
I think the proof will be in the in the
in the outcomes. I mean, if this is the government,
this is their agenda, this is what they're putting forward. Well,
we'll get to measure it in the number of people
that enter the housing market over the next few weeks.
Speaker 7 (40:19):
This will be the.
Speaker 1 (40:19):
Good thing is it's actually I would think a you know,
a part of the budget that we can actually measure
with KPI.
Speaker 7 (40:25):
It's like it can actually be the people.
Speaker 1 (40:29):
That's exactly right. How many are actually able.
Speaker 2 (40:31):
To get into the housing market that haven't. I just
before we flip to another issue, I think while we're
talking about health and funding, we should be advocating to
the Commonwealth Government to give us the beer of our
barracks to build a new Darwin hospital on because it's
right next to the and Robin I want to build.
Speaker 6 (40:47):
I'm saying, you're Fromala Screens, we need a hospital. Is
it possible to.
Speaker 2 (40:58):
Why do you just put on the right across the territory.
We need new hospitals. Darwin needs a.
Speaker 6 (41:05):
New Niky, this new hospital's government.
Speaker 2 (41:07):
Needs a new Hospital Catherine is on aund But you
know that an opportunity has come up for a strategic
parcel of land in between Darwin and Palmeston. It's right
next to the airport for air retrieval services. If we
can even at least get that land quarantined by the
Commonwealth that want to offload it, that is a future
proofing site for a new hospital at some point when
one is built. It can be done with a member
(41:30):
for Ara lew And to advocate for a new site
for an Alice Springs hospital.
Speaker 7 (41:34):
Whichause to itself.
Speaker 6 (41:35):
A new hospital was built in Palmerston in twenty eighteen.
We actually probably don't need a new hospital here in
Darwin as much as we do in Katherine Tenet Creek
and Alistair Catherine.
Speaker 2 (41:45):
Absolutely. I mean it's flooded. We've seen people being treated
out of a shed. We know that work needs to
happen there. But I think you know, when strategic pieces
of land come up, we should be looking at acquiring them.
Speaker 1 (41:56):
Well, look, we're going to have to take a quick break.
You are listening to Mix one now for nines three sixty.
It is the week that was well, it's been a
very busy morning in here and before we wrap up,
if you have just joined us, we have missed an
hour of power. Matt Cunningham, Robin Lambley, Robin carl and
Chancey Paike in the studio. But this new IKAK body,
or the new Integrity Commission is what it's being called now.
(42:19):
We had the announcement earlier this week that the former
NTI ombudsman Peter Scheyer is going to be the inaugural
Integrity and Ethics Commissioner, alongside Bruce McClintock and indeed Rhys
Kershaw as the CEO. I mean, what do you make
of it, Matt? Do you think it's going to make
things more effective? I know you've had strong opinions of
the Iyekak over the years, as have I.
Speaker 5 (42:41):
My only thought, Katie is that the first thing that
they should look into is the old IKAK.
Speaker 4 (42:49):
I do you, Matt, do you reckon they'll do that?
Speaker 5 (42:52):
Unlikely?
Speaker 2 (42:54):
It's going to be a challenge, k I think you know,
when we're looking at it, we'll get to see the
d detail, the budget, the resourcing. But I think Robin
Lamley's mentioned this before. Any kind of integrity or corruption
body that's in the territory always runs the risk of
having to declare conflicts because the territory is so small
(43:15):
that you know someone or someone knows someone, or someone
knows something about something.
Speaker 3 (43:18):
So but it's something we're used to managing, I think.
And the important thing here is that the commissioner, though
Peter Schuyer can focus on his job, we've got Reese
kurse or he'll be running the office, which is the
first time we've kind of.
Speaker 4 (43:31):
Separated that out.
Speaker 3 (43:31):
So it's it's I think it's a really great reform
and we're really looking forward to seeing.
Speaker 1 (43:37):
I mean, will it be difficult for Reese as the
former Northern Territory Police Commissioner if indeed there are ever
issues raised about.
Speaker 3 (43:44):
Police, Well, he's but he's just running the office like
he's in charge of the administ making sure everybody's doing
their administrative functions, running the services, supporting the commissioners. So
he's he's not the commissioner making the decisions. He's that's
up to that's Peter and supported by Bruce McClintock.
Speaker 7 (44:02):
Look, it's a new body.
Speaker 2 (44:03):
I think we all need to watch it unfold over
the next twelve months. It's got a budget appropriation, we'll
see how it handles matters that are referred to it
and what kind of reports in the level of detail
that it produces.
Speaker 1 (44:17):
Well, that's all We've had to do something different. Yeah,
that's all we've got time for this morning. We are
going to have to wrap up. Matt Cunningham from Sky News.
Thank you as always, Thanks Katie. Robin Lamley, the Speaker
of the Northern Territory and also the member for Aura
lun thank you for your time.
Speaker 6 (44:30):
Thank you, Katie.
Speaker 1 (44:31):
Robin carl the Minister for Children and Families and various
other portfolios, thank you for your time.
Speaker 4 (44:36):
Thanks Katie.
Speaker 3 (44:37):
Just a really quick shout out to the territory String
Stingers women's team who won the semi final last night
in the Malaysian Hockey League. Very exciting progressing to the final,
great territory.
Speaker 1 (44:47):
Moment, fantastic stuff. And the member for Galgia I can
never pronounce it quite right, Roger Chancy Paig.
Speaker 2 (44:54):
Thanks Katie. Just to shout out to all of our
correction stuff today. It's Corrections Day, so just acknowledging all
their amazing work and its international Families Day, so shout
out to all our families across the territory.
Speaker 1 (45:04):
Wonderful stuff. Thank you all so much for your time
this morning,
Popular Podcasts
Joy 101 with Hoda Kotb
Joy is essential. And it's also elusive. You can't order it, borrow it, or simply hope it into life. But now, there's a new and exciting way to start your journey toward a more joyful existence: The Joy 101 Podcast with Hoda! Best known for her Emmy-winning work and co-anchoring Today, Hoda Kotb infuses her authenticity, curiosity, and warmth into conversations with the world’s most fascinating people. Entertainment legends, sport icons, wellness experts, and everyday folks will share how they find, allow, and experience joy. Hoda will offer her own tips and takes on seeking a more balanced, harmonious life. If you're craving inspiration, support, and useful tools to maximize your joy, tune in to these candid, uplifting, and moving on-air chats. Joy after a breakup, joy as an empty-nester, joy after loss, joy as a caretaker — Hoda's new podcast will speak to you. Joy 101 with Hoda Kotb, an iHeartPodcast.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
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