ANDAMOOKA COMMUNITY CONTRIBUTIONS SCHEME

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (15:09): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for State/Local Government Relations a question regarding outback communities, in particular the community of Andamooka.

Leave granted.

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: The former minister, the Hon. Russell Wortley, told this place in February 2012:

The proposed expansion of the Olympic Dam mining project has created an expectation that the township may attract new residents seeking accommodation and work outside of Roxby Downs.

I, like the former minister—and I suspect and hope the current one—commend the Andamooka Progress and Opal Miners Association, and particularly Mr Peter Allen, for their volunteer work in promoting and growing their community and its infrastructure.

I read with interest an article in the Roxby Downs Sun on 30 May about the Ombudsman's finding that the Outback Communities Authority (OCA) breached section 25(1)(a) of the Ombudsman Act and that their community consultation on new management structures for Andamooka was inadequate. Before asking questions, I note that section 21 of the act governing the OCA allows for a community contribution scheme (CCS) to be raised. I understand that an annual $400 has been imposed on all Andamooka landholders and, together with a proposal for Iron Knob, these are the first CCSs to be applied thus far in the OCA areas.

The same section of the act allows for the creation of an asset sustainability levy which I understand will in future be used to fund systems across the whole OCA area such as sewerage and aerodromes at various communities which are currently paid for out of general revenue.

My questions are as follows, and I acknowledge that the minister might want to take some on notice:

1. How much money has the CCS raised in Andamooka and Iron Knob respectively?

2. Given that this is the first CCS implemented under the act, will the minister promptly bring to the parliament an accounting of the income and itemised expenditure of the CCS moneys?

3. Does the minister find it odd that out of the whole Andamooka community only one person has been granted the full CCS concession?

4. I acknowledge that the community needed a town manager but has the government reconsidered its approach on the Andamooka governance model, given the Olympic Dam expansion is either off the table or not happening in the immediate future?

5. Where is the planning and implementation up to on the OCA-wide asset sustainability levy?

6. How much is the ASL expected to be in total revenue per annum and per landholding in the OCA regions?

7. What consultation is underway or will be underway for that levy?

8. What sites need to be paid for via that levy?

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for State/Local Government Relations) (15:12): I thank the honourable member for his most important questions. Indeed, in a number of ways the arrangements at Andamooka under this new community contribution scheme have been a real success story and a real testament to very tough and resilient characters in that community who are faced with enormous challenges but are able to make the best of what they have and get on with the job. They have a very strong sense of community and a preparedness to work together.

The honourable member is quite right. With the expected growth in Andamooka and the general demand for services in that region, it was completely unsustainable and unrealistic to expect that a volunteer organisation could continue to deliver basic community services in that area. APOMA sought urgent assistance from the outback communities (OCA) in relation to that. They were pretty burnt out. They had worked so hard for so many years and really just could no longer sustain the amount of work or provide the resources needed to provide basic services and amenities.

The authority and APOMA, with state government support, agreed to establish the Town Management Committee and appoint a town manager to oversee public services and essential infrastructure and to provide advice and plans for the future. There was a committee chaired by Cecilia Woolford which included APOMA representatives, including Peter Allen, and OCA representatives as well.

APOMA and the town management committee have recently consulted the Andamooka community on the future government options for the ongoing management of the township, and feedback has been received about that, so that is an issue that they have been very preoccupied with. I have also met Ms Woolford, and she has given me an update on the sorts of developments they have undertaken in that area, and I certainly congratulate them.

In terms of introducing the community contribution scheme for the township of Andamooka, my understanding is that the scheme will raise just over $250,000 that was planned for the 2012-13 financial year, so that is $256,000 to help fund the provision of services and support for the Andamooka community. The scheme was intended to apply to most properties in the Andamooka township and nearby White Dam area.

The scheme was requested by the Andamooka Progress and Opal Miners Association (APOMA) on behalf of the Andamooka community and in accordance with the Outback Communities (Administration and Management) Act. The scheme is authorised by the Community Affairs Resourcing Management Agreement between OCA and APOMA. I am advised that the Andamooka Town Management Committee, established by OCA, conducted extensive consultation with the Andamooka community on the policy for calculating and also the methodology for the community contribution scheme, and the consultation included a mail-out to all property owners and two information sessions.

The community contribution is similar to an annual service charge applied by councils for community wastewater schemes, and it is not based on the value of the land. OCA has determined that the community contribution will be $400 per property and that the amount will vary according to various property values. The honourable member did mention the Ombudsman's investigation, so I just want to briefly put that on the record.

The Ombudsman found that OCA had failed to comply with requirements of subsection 17(4) of the outback communities act to consult with the Community Affairs Resourcing Management (CARM) agreement for Andamooka in accordance with its public consultation policy and that OCA did not have valid authority to impose the community contribution scheme. In summary, the Ombudsman found that OCA failed to comply with section 17(4) of the act because, prior to the execution of the CARM agreement with APOMA, OCA had consulted on its policy for CARM arrangements, the draft community scheme policy and the Andamooka Town Management Community Plan financial and annual budget.

However the Ombudsman did not consider that the three consultations were specifically about the Andamooka CARM agreement. Although the ATMC's documents did flag the introduction of a community contribution, it failed to comply with its public consultation policy, as it only allowed a three-week period for feedback, not four as stated, and only placed public notices in the two Roxby Downs newspapers and not the other regional newspapers as stated. The Ombudsman commented that it was a technical error.

You can see that they had gone to extraordinary lengths to consult extensively and rigorously. It was the first time they had done it. They were very disappointed in the outcome. However, the Ombudsman did comment that it was a technical error and also that he did not consider that OCA had acted without due diligence and good faith. He held the view that the error had resulted from the OCA's inflexible public consultation policy and its belief that by consulting with APOMA it was consulting with the community at large.

OCA is obviously aware of this and has taken the Ombudsman's findings into consideration and will make changes accordingly. The Ombudsman did not recommend any changes to the current community levy arrangements or any other changes in collection or activity. It was really around that consultation process that the technical error did occur. That will be rectified. There were some other quite detailed questions asked. I am happy to take those on notice and to bring back a response.