Incompetent Labor Government deserves $2b cut: 1Territory


p2327-Braedon-EarleyLETTER TO THE EDITOR
Sir – Recent slashing of the Territory budget by the Federal Government will cost Territorians approximately $2b over four years. Territorians may ask, why did this happen?
• The NT Government has been too slow to approve major infrastructure investment and development which could provide massive employment and economic boosts to the economy. One example of this is the North Crest Development, Berrimah Farm, Darwin.
• There has been a blatant waste of public sector resources, employing Labor Party hacks from down south into the NT public service.
• There has been an anti-competitive approach to business activities, by legislating against businesses like Dan Murphy from coming to town, then wasting further tax monies by challenging them in court. The NT is losing construction jobs and investment.
• The legislating for extra public holidays in the Northern Territory, hurting small to medium business’s unnecessarily (the major employers in the NT).
• The NTG is soft on crime, allowing the community of the Northern Territory to live in a siege-like environment since Labor was elected.
• The Don Dale debacle, which Labor is mostly responsible for. Mis-managed to the point whereby the Michael Gunner Government is now compensating criminals with tax payers money.
• The recent back-paying of all those employed as firefighters, an election promise in order to secure their votes. Plus, the promise of pay increases and extra FIFO firefighters.
• The constant need for Territory politicians and minders to travel interstate and internationally, delivering no outcomes or direct benefits for the Northern Territory economy or its people; another waste of taxpayers’ money.
• Not holding Major Projects in the Northern Territory to account. The liability in all major projects has to be accounted for, especially when problems become obvious. What does it mean for Territorians? Has the quality of the project been compromised? Will this impact on Territorians? Is there the risk the project could explode / hurt someone? Who is responsible if it does?
• The inadequate focus on health, education and housing for people living on indigenous communities and in regional centers throughout the Territory. The high levels of crime, sexual and alcohol abuse on these communities has not been addressed by the government. History does repeat; the last time Labor was in power in the NT the Liberal Federal Government intervened, this could well happen again – the climate is right for it.
• Unmentioned availability of funds from the sale of TIO and Darwin Port. Using hollow logs (places to hide money) in Treasury reports is one of Labors oldest tricks, the money miraculously appears during the fourth (election ) year.
The prospects of the Federal Government taking back the Territory is real. They could run it cheaper and they get to frack for gas.
If Chief Minister Michael Gunner thinks crying foul to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is going to change anything, then he may be given that option “get on with it or get out of the way”.
Mr Gunner has created the perfect environment for this funding cut to take place. He sails a rudderless vessel with no experienced crew, on board or in sight, whilst his Opposition and Independents swim and sunbake on the back deck.
Someone might be walking the plank sooner than expected!
Braedon Earley (pictured)
1Territory Party


  1. Surely the Labor Government gets a couple more months to turnaround the debacle that was the previous CLP Government before we place every current issue at their feet.
    I have to wonder whether the Labour hacks from down south are any worse than the CLP hacks, wherever they dug those fossils up from.

  2. @ Braedon: Discussing high levels of crime, sexual and alcohol abuse and health standards (remote communities are not remote – they impact towns), while critiqueing the government for showing caution on Dan Murphy’s 800 share meter liquor barn, of which a major issue is surrounding outlet density, seems illogical.
    As you appear to point out, it’s time that political leaders ditch the confusion on economic leadership.

  3. @ Russell Guy: Sorry, mate, didn’t realise communities didn’t include townships.
    The Dan Murphy’s no go is about political donations and mates of mates, your comments are noted, the BDR/TBL or retail floor size doesn’t stop the increase / decrease consumption of alcohol or problem drunks it just moves the problem out of your eyesight.
    Last time I checked my B.App.Sc (Property Economics) was still on the wall. Cheers.

  4. @ Harold: This government has plenty of time to research and understand the role of the Commonwealth Grants Commission and the formulae by which they distribute the GST funds. Here it is for your information, please read it then re read what we have issued as a press release.
    An independent statutory authority that operates under the Commonwealth Grants Commission Act 1973. The Commission recommends to the Australian Government how general revenue assistance should be allocated between the States and Territories. The Commission’s recommendations are based on the principle of horizontal fiscal equalisation, which is defined as:
    A distribution of Goods and Services Tax revenue to State and Territory Governments such that, after allowing for material factors affecting revenues and expenditures, each would have the fiscal capacity to provide services and their associated infrastructure at the same standard, if each made the same effort to raise revenue from its own sources, operated at the same level of efficiency and maintained the average per capita net financial worth.

  5. Sorry, Braedon, mis-read your letter. I thought I read “remote” communities.
    My comment was meant to highlight the fact that remote communities impact NT towns (I include Darwin) due to excess levels of alcohol consumption and vice versa.
    The point being that by increasing alcohol consumption, which is presumably why Dan Murphy’s want to open, otherwise why bother, unless their discounts are deeper than the existing competition. How low can you go?
    We already have the highest rate of national consumption, so by increasing it, we add the cost to the budget. Health is only one strand – there’s policing, correctional, community well-being and funding deprivation from more useful aims.
    If, as you say, the BDR/TBL, floor price supply reduction instruments are useless in reducing alcohol consumption, but useful to police in reducing domestic violence, then it appears that you have no solution, except jobs for alcohol outlet construction.
    Economically, it seems contradictory and unsustainable, so maybe the Federal Government is sending a message. Cheers.

  6. @ Braedon: Nice deflection old son. I’ve not commented on the method of GST distribution, in fact most of your pile of drivel isn’t related to that either.
    Why you’d bother copy and paste something not in dispute is a little beyond me.
    Although, do I recall you be heavily involved with the CLP debacle? You weren’t involved in recruiting those fossils, were you?

  7. Oh dear, I’m confused. Surely Mr Earley isn’t writing letters such as this with a political agenda in mind. Surely not. Then again, obviously Mr Earley knows so much about what the Labor mob CAN’T do right.
    I’m just not sure there is anything left that they can do right, in his opinion. Pun intended.
    I do tire of such partisan grandstanding.

  8. Opening a Dan Murphy’s isn’t going to increase alcohol consumption, it is going to take revenue from existing takeaway outlets – that’s the real argument.
    The Federal Government is sending a message and for those that don’t listen you will have your funding reduced, period.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here