Territory Stories

Parliamentary record : Part I debates (11 November 1986)

Details:

Title

Parliamentary record : Part I debates (11 November 1986)

Collection

Debates for 4th Assembly 1983 - 1987; ParliamentNT; Parliamentary Record; 4th Assembly 1983 - 1987

Date

1986-11-11

Notes

Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

Language

English

Subject

Debates

Publisher name

Northern Territory Legislative Assembly

Place of publication

Darwin

File type

application/pdf

Use

Attribution International 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)

Copyright owner

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

License

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Parent handle

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/220605

Citation address

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/698931

Page content

DEBATES - Tuesday 11 November 1986 Mr Speaker, on 28 October, the minister wrote: 'I am advised that, despite exhaustive investigations by officers, there is no reasonable means of providing sufficient water for this group'. And that, Mr Speaker, is a load of absolute rubbish. It is codswallop. The options have been studied year after year. The experts have agreed that it is possible. They have agreed that they can to it within the budget provided,and it is obvious to me that this minister has decided that he will neglect the 150 people who live at Anningie and that, as far as he is concerned, they can continue to go blind and be hospitalised. The people in the Ti Tree area are the most hospitalised group of people in that central area, and there is absolutely no reason for it. The water is there, not 10 m from where they live. But, because the minister will not take the option of utilising a Mexican dam and allowing people to take the water through what is a sensible option in central Australian conditions, he has decided to wash his hands of it. He says they have to find some other land. How many years has it taken them to get that land? You know yourself, Mr Speaker, that they fought for that land for years. Finally, they obtained an .excision. Now that they have that land the minister tells them that they cannot 1 i ve there and wi 11 have to move somewhere else because he wi 11 not address himself to the option of a Mexican dam. I for one am disgusted. Mrs PADGHAM-PURICH (Koolpinyah): Mr Speaker, I will be brief tonight because of the lateness of the hour. I would like to add my remarks to those of the member for Araluen in speaking of the unfortunate death of M.r Ted Stiles who was one of my constituents of later years. I knew him as one of nature's gentlemen. I knew of his work in the Northern Territory for a number of years, although I did not know him very well when we first arrived here. He was a worker who. contributed in no small way to the Darwin we know today, and those of his children who remain in the Territory had a father they could look up to. I believe that the 2 of his children that I know well will make their mark in the Northern Territory in later years, just as their father did. Mr Speaker,I asked the Minister for Primary Production a question this morning regarding the proposed inspectorial services of the federal Department of Primary Industry that are to take over those of the Northern Territory Department of Primary Production at some time in the fut~re. This is to be by arrangement. I understand that it follows from the royal commission into the meat industry which occurred 4 or 5 years ago. In his answer to my. question, if my memory serves me correctly, and I had also been told previously, the minister said that the paramount consideration in the adoption of the inspectorial services of DPI instead of our own was finance. I would hope that we are not selling our heritage for a mess of potage. The minister said that the inspectors of DPI will continue the meat export inspectorial services, and this is what one would expect, but they will also undertake local inspection work. I believe he said also that our DPP inspectors would either continue to receive training as meat inspectors or training would be available to new applicants who wish to become inspectors. I could not quite understand it because to me that is duplication. If we are to pass the inspectorial powers over to DPI, why do we need our own? That is duplication and will cost money, and I hope that has been weighed up against the other financial considerations that are supposed to be so beneficial. I hope our inspectorial services will not be needed in the future, but I suspect they will. Mr Speaker, we all know what happened at Mudginberri abattoir when the DPI inspectors refused to cross a picket line which was mounted outside the export 881


Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are advised that this website may contain the names, voices and images of people who have died, as well as other culturally sensitive content. Please be aware that some collection items may use outdated phrases or words which reflect the attitude of the creator at the time, and are now considered offensive.

We use temporary cookies on this site to provide functionality.
By continuing to use this site without changing your settings, you consent to our use of cookies.