NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

Executive Summary

The Territory Opposition sought public hearings of the Senate Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and Territory Assets and New Infrastructure in the Territory following the CLP Government’s asset sales program that has seen the sale of public assets without a mandate.

The Territory Opposition is concerned about the haste of the asset sales, the lack of considered and public debate. The NT Government has failed to demonstrate undertaking business case and cost benefit assessments and has failed to engage with, and listen to, the community. There is also no evidence the CLP Government has considered the broader community and business impacts, including the development of Northern Australia. In no instance has the CLP Government provided detailed business case analysis or an engagement process with the community.

In comparison, in other jurisidictions we have seen Governments engage in extensive community engagement providing feedback mechanisms, and seeking public mandate for asset sales or leases at the ballot box.

The CLP Government did not signal to Territory voters in the campaign for election in 2012 any intention to sell public assets. In just over two years since being elected to Government, they have sold, or taken action to prepare for sale, the majority of government business divisions or corporations, all without a public mandate.

In 2013 the Government announced the privatisation of Darwin Bus Service and the Government Printing Office would be closed.

In 2014 the CLP Government commenced to split the PowerWater Corporation, the Territory’s public power, water and sewerage utility. The CLP Government has made conflicting public statements about the future ownership of these assets, most recently suggesting they could be privatised.

Following this, the CLP Government sold the Territory Insurance Office without consulting the public about any cost benefit analysis. The Chief Minister made public statements that sale would attract the 15% bonus payment from Government under the Assets Recycling Program, despite providing no indication that a business case had been undertaken to identify if such a sale would qualify. The sale proceeded against public sentiment and concern about the future risk to insurance costs and continued access to the comprehensive flood, storm surge and cyclone cover needed in the Territory.

1 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

In November 2014 the CLP Government tabled legislation in the parliament to proceed with the leasing of Darwin Port, with no public consultation about the cost benefits to the taxpayer. This legislation is expected to pass the Legislative Assembly sitting.

Also in November 2014, the CLP Government indicated it was considering privatising the proposed new public Palmerston hospital. The original public hospital proposal was jointly funded, with federal government funding secured by the CLP Government prior to the 2012 NT election.

The level of secret asset sales activity by the CLP Government is unprecedented in contemporary Australian governance and policy.

The lack of business case and community impact analysis is of significant concern given the already high cost of living in the Territory.

The is a large jurisdiction with a small population-base, a combination that poses unique and well-acknowledged challenges in service delivery, particularly essential services, and should be a significant factor in analysing the public benefit of maintaining assets in public ownership.

Community debate indicates sentiment in the NT is against asset sales with Territorians concerned about impacts on cost of living pressures from privatising the TIO and the essential services.

Territorians have been subject to the significant price rises in the past two years for power, water and sewerage and there is concern about the impact on tariffs should the CLP Government sell our essential services infrastructure, particularly how the government will regulate a monopoly owner against profit gouging.

The Australian Government has identified the Northern Territory as central to the development of Northern Australia, and strategic to the military defence of Australia.

Despite this, there is no evidence that the CLP Government is considering the impact of asset sales on the future development of the north, particularly Darwin Port and essential services infrastructure, nor consulting with the Australian Government about these factors.

The prospective purchasers of Darwin Port and the Territory’s utility assets are likely to be foreign investors, including foreign governments

2 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

The Senate inquiry into the development of Northern Australia, Pivot North heard evidence from a range of stakeholders about the importance of maintaining public ownership of key assets to future development.

The approach of the CLP Government to sell off public assets is a short-term strategy and politically motivated to fund for the government’s re-election campaign, in the absence of any demonstrated capacity to drive economic growth for the future of the Territory.

The sale of these assets foregoes the future financial returns at a time when the Territory economy has been positioned to leverage off the growth underpinned by the nation’s second largest private investment, the Ichthys LNG project.

Across the border in Queensland, the public, presented with an opportunity to vote on asset leases, sent a resounding message against privatisation.

The current agenda of the CLP Government indicates privatisation of the port, essential services, our prisons and new hospital will occur in the absence of a mandate. Territorians deserve the right to have a say on behalf of future generations.

This submission outlines the process taken by the CLP Government associated with the sale of public assets conducted to date and the preparation for sale of other public assets.

3 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

Darwin Bus

The CLP Government announced privatisation of Darwin Bus Service in December 2013.

This sale was undertaken without a public mandate or consultation.

The management of this privatisation exercise was inconsistent with that undertaken for the Government Printing Office as bus drivers were not afforded the option to take a redundancy.

The CLP Government guaranteed bus drivers would retain their wages, conditions and entitlements under the sale.1 Despite those guarantees, it has been reported that drivers have since lost their entitlement to paid meal breaks. 2

Territory Insurance Office

The Territory Insurance Office (TIO) was established in 1979 to meet the specific cyclone, storm surge and flood insurance needs of Territorians due to difficulties in getting interstate companies to do business in the Territory after Cyclone Tracy.

The TIO provided banking and insurance services and administered the Motor Accidents Compensation Scheme on behalf of the CLP Government.

The Motor Accidents Compensation scheme is funded by Territorian motorists through a portion of their vehicle registration charges. The scheme provides injured people with an entitlement to compensation for certain expenses they will incur as a result of a motor vehicle accident.

The Territory Insurance Office (TIO) was an important asset to Territorians providing the insurance safety net needed for our unique conditions.

Prior to the sale, TIO was the only insurer providing no-loophole cyclone, storm surge and flood insurance cover needed for Territory conditions. While other private insurers serviced the Territory market, none provide the same level of cover provided by TIO.

1 Jobs to stay as Buses sold off, NT News 7 December 2013 2 Emilia Terzon, Darwin's bus drivers devastated' by loss of paid lunch breaks, says transport workers union, ABC News, 30 October 2014, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-30/bus-drivers-angry-about-unpaid-lunch- breaks/5851536

4 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

The Katherine flood experience highlighted the importance of having a local Government-owned insurer in the Territory. TIO was the only insurer that met its obligations without delay and many resident insured with private providers had to resort to legal action to obtain insurance payouts, adding to their distress. Many local businesses also found TIO was their only insurance option for flood and storm surge cover after the Katherine floods in 1988.

During the public debate about the sale of TIO, a Katherine resident publicly stated they could only access one other private insurer other than TIO to provide insurance, but at an extra $8500 per year. 3

A resident, Paul, living in a storm surge area in Darwin told local media a private insurer’s quote for insurance was more than 100% higher than TIO, for cover “as close as I could get” to TIO. ABC Radio 23 October 2014.

A local insurance broker publicly raised concern that a privatisation of TIO would see home and business owners at risk of being unable to obtain policy cover, particularly for storm surge:

“TIO are the only open market insurer in Darwin, one that’s actually offering storm surge at the moment… each insurer words it slightly differently as to when cover would apply but the thing that is important to note about the TIO wording is there’s no, if’s but’s or maybe’s . If you have water damage from any cause it’s covered including storm surge, flood, you name it….Other insurers will either choose not to quote or they’ll very much sub limit how much cover they give you for flood or storm surge.”

Brett Hagan, Insurance Risk Solutions. ABC Radio 23 October 2014.

The CLP Government’s legislation to facilitate the sale of TIO and the conditions of sale offered no legal protections for Territorians to guarantee future insurance coverage, confirming the concerns of the insurance sector were well founded.

Evidence about the impacts of the sale of Government owned insurer Suncorp in Queensland, highlighted insurance cover became unaffordable or was completely withdrawn in North Queensland. Considerable evidence was provided to the Australian Parliament’s Inquiry into the Development of Northern Australia by the Queensland Government, Regional Development Australia and the Townsville City Council that residents in North Queensland could no longer access household

3 Katherine residents fear insurance premiums could double with TIO sale, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11- 01/katherine-residents-fear-consequences-of-tio-sale/5853200

5 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

insurance or were paying substantially more for the same value of household insurance cover than in other parts of the state and the nation. The Inquiry was advised the insurance crisis in Queensland was impeding investment in Northern Australia.

The Inquiry’s report, ‘Pivot North’, recommended expanding TIO across Northern Australia because “it is affordable and consistently available” and would address their insurance crisis.4 The head of that Inquiry, Hon Warren Entsch MP publicly stated he warned the CLP Chief Minister against the sale of TIO:

“I was concerned that by selling it we would end up in the same situation we are in the rest of Northern Australia where Government institutions, or institutionalised entities, like the state government insurance office for example in QLD, basically lost any concept of community obligation or community service and we’ve seen an absolute disaster in relation to market failure and what is clearly market gouging”

Hon Warren Entsch MP. ABC Radio 12 November 2014.

Despite this evidence and the public discourse about this risk, the Territory Government failed to address these concerns in the TIO sale process and ignored the recommendation of the Inquiry.

I urge this Inquiry to consider the evidence provided to the Inquiry into the Development of Northern Australia that informed its recommendation to expand TIO, against the actions taken by this Territory Government to sell this asset without a mandate and without policy discourse at a national level.

Previous CLP Governments had maintained the policy of price equalisation for TIO insurance premiums, ensuring Territorians had equity of insurance pricing regardless of where they live. This is patently important for Territorians living in areas that can be subject to flood, storm surge and cyclone. The CLP Government abandoned this policy in the TIO sale process to make the insurer more attractive to a buyer, despite the risk to Territorians. The Chief Minister claimed that insurance premiums would rise by 200% in some areas if a sale did not proceed, despite the price equalisation policy providing for more reasonable premium increases Territory- wide to ensure all Territorians could access the insurance cover they need.

This ‘scaremongering’ by the Chief Minister followed the revelations that private insurers in the Territory were already charging 200% more than TIO for the same insurance value. The Insurance sector have seen TIO as the price signaler in the market, while not always the cheapest because of their more comprehensive cover,

4 Ibid

6 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

privatisation of TIO would see TIO insurance rates meet the private market. Losing public ownership of TIO also meant losing the capacity to keep downward pressure on premium costs. The Chamber of Commerce NT also expressed support for price equalisation to avoid the Territory being subject to the same issues facing Queensland home and business owners.

Since the sale of TIO, Territorians living in particular areas in Katherine have since been advised they will no longer be able to access flood cover.

Public sentiment

There was and remains overwhelming public opposition to the sale of TIO.

In just over two weeks over 4300 signatures were collected across the Territory on petitions opposed to the sale.

The NT Opposition undertook a snap poll in the seats of Katherine, Port Darwin, Fong Lim, Sanderson, Goyder, Daly and Greatorex with results showing over 80% were opposed to the sale. The poll conducted by the NT News reported 90% were opposed. A poll undertaken by local commercial broadcaster Mix 104.9 recorded over 80% in opposition and a poll conducted by the NT News recorded over 90% in opposition to the sale of TIO.

Ordinary Territorians took to the airwaves and social media to voice their opposition.

A snapshot of public opinion:

“Adam and the CLP would do well to realise that they don't own these companies, we do. You have no mandate for these sales. Once gone we can't get them back. So how about going to the people with this policy and we, the owners, will decide.” Joy Mclaughlin

“If the government is going to try to sell public assets then the public should be able to have a say in it. There will need to be a vote on this, the government should not be allowed to try to sell public assets with out a say from the public.” Trudi Andersson

“As soon as public owned assets are sold off, prices will generally sky- rocket. It should be held to a referendum whether any public assets should be given, I mean, sold off. With today's technology, a referendum should be easy, quick and cheap to implement. The first to benefit from public asset sales, always seem to be those pushing for their sale. Hands off public assets.” Spiros Lambrinidis

7 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

“If gone are the days that the territory no longer needs it's own insurance provider. Then why can I find no other insurer that will insure my house & contents for all NT weather events... for the same price. Adam Giles will sell and that's when the cat 5 will come.” Stacey of Darwin

The Northern Territory Chamber of Commerce has advised the CLP Government that its members are strongly opposed to the sale of TIO, raising that members do not know enough about the potential impacts on their businesses and that the business sector do not want to see the issues experienced in North Queensland occur in the Territory. The results of a survey conducted by the Chamber of Commerce NT is located at the end of this submission.

“Well there’s some significant concern about if there was a sale went through and another larger insurer came into the market that that would have some fairly major impacts on premiums and we’re also very concerned that people aren’t really across all of the issues. There was actually quite a large, a fairly substantial percentage of people who were still unsure and don’t know enough about exactly what the impacts would be on their businesses. So there is very significant concern in the business community that we’ll be passing on to Government to take into consideration.”

Greg Bicknell, CEO Chamber of Commerce NT. ABC Radio 30.10.14

The Motor Traders Association also raised concerns about the impact of the TIO sale on local panel beating businesses:

“we’ve had two members already say to us that if TIO is sold they will not continue in business.”

Peter Donovan, Executive Officer, Motor Traders Association. ABC Radio 3.11.14

Sale Timeline

A cloak of secrecy was applied to the TIO sale process and the CLP Government undertook a ‘crash through’ approach ignoring the community opposition.

The first indication the CLP Government intended to sell TIO was revealed on 4 October 2014 in a leak to the local newspaper, the NT News.

8 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

The CLP Government issued a statement that day confirming they were considering the future of TIO.

The CLP Government deliberately avoided testing the privatisation agenda with voters at the Casuarina by-election. The first promotion of the sale option came two days after the Casuarina By-election, on Monday 20 October 2014, with a full page advertisements in the NT News and seeking public feedback on potential infrastructure projects that could be funded with the proceeds of a sale of TIO, indicating the decision was already made and there was no intention of engaging in community consultation on the merits of a sale. The government’s promotional website provided no means for Territorians to lodge their views about the sale.

The Chief Minister in answering questions in the Legislative Assembly about the intended sale, revealed on 21 October, that the Government had commenced work to sell the asset in March 2014, some seven months earlier. There was no public announcement in March that the CLP Government was considering a sale of TIO and would undertake community consultation.

The sale of TIO was announced on 24 November and legislation rushed through the Parliament to enact the sale.

Within two months of confirming to Territorians that the sale of TIO was ‘on the cards’ it was sold, without public consultation and without a mandate.

Sale deception

The deception by the CLP Government included the financial arrangements about the return to Territory taxpayers when they announced that TIO had been sold “in a deal worth $424 million.” 5

This statement is a misrepresentation. The entity was actually sold for $284 million. The banking arm of TIO was sold to People’s Choice for $48 million and the Insurance arm to Allianz for $236 million. The remaining component of the transaction was a $140 million drawdown from the Motor Accidents Compensation Scheme, a drawdown that could occur without the sale – it was not part of the ‘sale price’ paid by Alliance or People’s Choice yet was spun to the public as such.

The Chief Minister also told Territorians “the sale of TIO would make the Territory eligible for Commonwealth Government Asset Recycling funding of 15 per cent on any money the Government puts back into infrastructure”. There has been no evidence provided to confirm these statements.

5 Joint Media Release (NT Government, TIO, Allianz, People’s Choice Credit Union) 24 November 2014

9 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

In efforts to downplay the significance of the sale of TIO, the Chief Minister publicly stated “it is not a sale, it is just a transfer of ownership.”

On Friday, Mr Giles said he was avoiding the use of the word "sale" in discussions about the issue and in media advertising, telling the ABC the decision was made to instead use the term "change of ownership". "We are very clear in changing our language deliberately so that people have a firmer understanding [that] come any day after a potential sale it will look exactly the same, feel exactly the same," he said. 6

PowerWater Corporation

The CLP Government has been actively preparing the PowerWater Corporation for sale, splitting the utility into three corporations: PowerWater Corporation, Jacana Energy and Territory Generation. The utility provides power, water and sewerage services.

Territorians have been burdened with skyrocketing tarrif increases in the past two years, shifting the public utility from a path of financial sustainability to one of profit- making, indicating the Government’s agenda to prepare it for sale.

This is consistent with findings in the report on electricity privatisation, Electricity Privatisation in Australia: a Record of Failure: “in some cases, governments have sought to increase the sale price of assets by raising costs to consumers in the lead up to privatisation, or by allowing price increases after privatisation.” 7

In 2012 the CLP Government installed tariff rises of 30% for electricity, 40% for water and 25% for sewerage. The CLP Treasurer indicated this would result in a $2000 rise in annual PowerWater bills the average family.

Part-way through this tariff rise the results were already impacting of cost of living for families. A cost of living analysis, the Cost of Living Report, October 2013, published by the NT Council of Social Services highlighted CPI in Darwin rose higher than any other jurisdiction at 3.9% compared to the national average of 2.4%, in the year to June 2013. In the same period utility costs increased by 29.3% in the NT compared to 13.3 per cent nationally, and well above the increase in CPI for all goods.8

6 TIO: Northern Territory Government confirms sale for $424m after months of speculation, protests and petitions, ABC Online 25th November 2014, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-24/nt-government-confirms-424m-tio-sale/5912838 7 John Quiggin Opinion and Consulting, Electricity Privatisation: A Record of Failure, February 2014, p12 8 NTCOSS, Cost of Living Report, Issue No 1 October 2013, pg 1-2

10 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

The 2014-15 Statement of Corporate Intent by Power Water Corporation shows that PowerWater made $259.4m Net Profit After Tax, which includes a direct Operating Revenue profit of $106.6m

While Territorians were struggling to cover the cost of their high power and water bills PowerWater made a profit of $260 million last year, with $106 million related to tariff hikes.

The NT Opposition is concerned privatization of our electricity assets will lead to job losses, reduced reliability and higher costs for households, issues that have been identified in South Australian and Victoria after privatisation of electricity assets there.

In their submission to the Legislative Assembly’s Public Accounts Committee Inquiry in Splitting the Power and Water Corporation, NTCOSS pointed to the impact of privatisation of electricity assets in other jurisdictions:

“Privatisation in other states, for example in South Australia (1999), has led to higher electricity prices for households, with the CPI for electricity rising 175% in Adelaide since 2000 (SACOSS, 2013). NTCOSS’ concerns centre on the needs of low income and disadvantaged Territorians, and how they will fare under a system of competition (and possibly privatisation at a future date). 9

Electricity Privatisation in Australia: a Record of Failure, found

“States that privatized their electricity sectors in the 1990s (Victoria and South Australia) were financially disadvantaged compared to those that retained public ownership” and that ‘cash gained from selling public assets comes with the cost of forgoing the earnings it would have generated in continued public ownership.”

The Premier of Western Australia is reported to oppose the sale of whole utilities as it would be permanent and would hinder the Government's ability to build the State and that “in the long term those utilities will provide steady income to the state”. 10

Electricity Privatisation in Australia: a Record of Failure also highlights electricity prices are highest in privatised states. The report found in privatized states customer billing includes almost 10 per cent per annum interest on the corporate

9 NTCOSS submission to the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory 12th Assembly Public Accounts Committee, Inquiry in Splitting the Power and Water Corporation, p 3 10 The West Australian, 26 November 2014; The Australian Financial Review, 12 January 2015

11 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

owners debt on electricity assets, compared to government borrowing costs closer to 3 per cent.11

The assertions that privatization leads to more efficiency have been challenged by the McKell Institute’s analysis of electricity privatisation, Nothing to gain, plenty to lose: “this report finds that privately-owned providers frequently have higher overheads than comparable public providers, and that their overheads have been growing at a materially faster rate than public providers over the past eight years.” 12

This report analysed the projected sale of NSW’s transmission and distribution assets and states “evidence suggests that prices are in fact likely to be higher under privatisation in the long-run.”

In estimates hearings held in October 2014 it was show that the separation of the PowerWater Corporation that occurred in July 2014 was rushed with the CLP Government unable to provide any financial evidence or cost benefit analysis to justify the split.

In hearings it was clear that Territory Generation and Jacana Energy were unable to answer many questions about their financial operations, highlighting they were not ready for the split.

It was clear that the CLP Government in splitting the Territory’s utilities had neglected to make the necessary preparations.

Under current policy settings a community service obligation is in place to ensure price equalisation is applied to tariffs. There is concern that in pursuing a sale of our public utilities the CLP Government will abandon price equalization, which combined with expected tariff hikes under privatization, will have dire impacts on family budgets across the Territory.

The NT Opposition is also concerned about reduced maintenance investment under a privatised model and job losses.

The CLP Government has no mandate to sell PowerWater and prior to the NT General Election in 2012 made no indication asset sales were on the agenda.

11 Quiggan, p 5 12 Stephen Koukoulas and Thomas Devlin, The McKell Institute, Nothing to gain, plenty to lose, p10

12 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

Darwin Port

The CLP Government’s is proposing to lease Darwin Port under a 100-year lease arrangement, which is effectively a sale, despite the Chief Minister ruling out a “sale of Darwin Port”.

The CLP Government has failed to consult with Territorians about the merits of a lease/sale of Darwin port, and does not have a mandate to proceed.

Like the TIO sale, the CLP Government commenced an expression of interest process to privatise the port before consulting the public and before the associated legislation has been debated in the Legislative Assembly.

After considerable investment by previous NT Governments in Darwin Port, including expansions, the Port is now reaping improved returns with a $17 million profit last year.

At a time when the Territory economy has been positioned to leverage off the growth associated with gas exploration, the CLP Government is privatising key economic infrastructure without a demonstrated economic impact analysis or business case.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) Chairman, Rod Sims, has warned states to closely monitor recently privatised ports amid concerns about the cost of port purchases pushing up prices:

"There have been very high multiples paid for some of these ports and the worry is that the buyers may only recoup their outlays if they push up prices quite a bit more than otherwise would have happened." 13

The NT Opposition is concerned a private operator may seek to increase profits and return on investment through job cuts and increased Port freight costs, which would be passed on to consumers and businesses, adding to the cost of living and cost of doing business pressures faced in the Territory.

13 Port Prices a ‘Concern’, Australian Financial Review, 30 October 2014

13 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

Conclusion:

The NT Opposition is concerned that the CLP Government is flogging off public assets at haste, without community consultation, business case or economic impact analysis and with a public mandate.

The election result in Queensland is a resounding anti-asset sales message.

Unlike Queenslanders, Territorians haven’t been given the option to voice their view on privatisation at the ballot box.

In the Northern Territory context, there are substantial additional costs of delivering public infrastructure and services to a small population across a large land mass. Privatising these assets and services, particularly as privatised monopolies, is more likely than not to lead to market gouging.

In this context, this submission concludes with the following pointed comments and reiterate the Senate Inquiry recommends strengthening business case analysis and community consultation requirements of state and Territory jurisdictions considering public asset sales to ensure public mandate, and provide Australian Government oversight to jurisdictional asset sales not subject to public mandate.

ACCC Chairman, Rod Sims, has flagged concern about privatization of monopoly assets, speaking at the CEDA State of the Nation Conference 23 June 2014:

“We shouldn’t be surprised when buyers pay a high price to acquire monopoly power, with the expectation that they will be able to recoup that expenditure by increasing prices.

I will shortly be writing to all governments to point out that the trend towards selling monopoly or near monopoly assets with the primary aim of maximising proceeds, without due consideration of the competition implications, is effectively a tax on future generations.

The ACCC is becoming aware of an increasing level of concern amongst businesses that are most directly affected by the sale of upstream monopoly assets to downstream competitors. The trade-off here is short sighted and the costs in terms of productivity and investment are likely to be significant.” 14

14 Rod Sims, The Need to elevate competition in our public policy, http://www.accc.gov.au/speech/the-need-to-elevate- competition-in-our-public-policy

14 NT Opposition Submission to the Inquiry into the Privatisation of State and

Territory Assets and New Infrastructure

Chamber of Commerce NT TIO Privatisation Survey Results published at www.chambernt.com.au

15