dmbg

OpEd | Canberra is holding back the Territory - fix the visa bottleneck now

Thu, 09 Apr 2026 09:25:49 GMT

At the National Press Club last week, former Treasury Secretary and current Chancellor of Macquarie University, Dr Martin Parkinson , warned that Australia faces slower growth and persistent cost pressures.

That may be true nationally but in the Northern Territory, growth is being held back by something far more immediate, and far more fixable.

Federal policy.

Right now, across the Territory, businesses are ready to invest, projects are ready to proceed, and national priorities from defence capability to energy security are increasingly centred in the north, but they are not moving at the pace they should.

Not because of a lack of capital, not because of a lack of demand, because of a lack of people.

And that shortage is being made worse, not better, by federal policies.

At the Darwin Major Business Group’s recent economic analysis launch in late March, business leaders Vicki-Leigh Lettice , David Malone and Mark Furlotte made it clear: the Territory’s biggest constraint is workforce.

While this is not new, what is new is the scale of the disconnect between what the Territory needs and how federal policy is responding.

Employers across the NT are offering jobs today to skilled workers but those workers are waiting, in some cases more than two years for visa processing and approval.

Two years. In any business environment, that is not a delay it is a decision to not proceed.

Projects are being slowed, expansion plans are being shelved, investment is being redirected. That is the ‘path of least resistance’ rule in play.

Critically, this is not just a Territory issue, it is a national one, because many of the projects being delayed are tied directly to Australia’s strategic priorities, defence logistics, energy supply, critical infrastructure and northern development.

At the same National Press Club event, Violet Roumeliotis , CEO of Settlement Services International (ISS), made a practical point: Australia already has people here, migrants and international students, who could be contributing more effectively to the workforce.

In the Territory, that is not an abstract policy discussion, it is an immediate solution, yet barriers remain:

People ready to work cannot access jobs,
Employers ready to hire cannot access workers,

and in between sits a system that is too slow, too rigid and too disconnected from real economic conditions.

This is not a market failure, it is a policy failure.

If the Commonwealth is serious about productivity, then it needs to confront a basic truth, you cannot deliver national economic and strategic outcomes without the workforce to build them.

And right now, that workforce is being delayed by design because a one-size-fits-all migration system may suit larger states managing population pressure but it is actively constraining the Territory, the very region expected to deliver on Australia’s future.

The Northern Territory is not asking for special treatment, it is asking for policy that works.

That means:

Fast-tracking visas for workers with confirmed jobs in the NT — measured in weeks, not years
Clearing the backlog of applications currently sitting in the system
Allowing migrants and international students already in Australia to enter the workforce immediately, where shortages exist
Setting processing benchmarks that reflect economic urgency, not administrative convenience

Because every month of delay is not neutral and it has a cost. That cost is lost output, deferred investment, reduced productivity and slower national growth.

The Territory is ready to deliver, but it cannot do so with a workforce that exists on paper, not on the ground.

Canberra does not need a new strategy; it can fix what is broken. The Territory needs this to happen now.

-----

Click here to watch Dr Martin Parkinson AC PSM & Violet Roumeliotis AM's Address to the National Press Club

MEDIA RELEASE | From hope to momentum: DMBG Report is a ‘call to arms’

Tue, 07 Apr 2026 02:38:35 GMT

The Darwin Major Business Group has released the full keynote address delivered by DMBG Chair, Steve Margetic, at the Group’s third annual economic event. The address was delivered to 180 Territory business leaders and strategic thinkers from across the private sector and government.

In the address, Mr Margetic issued a clear and direct call to action, stating the Northern Territory is at a “fork in the road” and “2026 must be the year when everyone leans in and gets involved.

No arms crossed, sitting back in indulgence, no finger pointing.

We have to move from ‘hope’ to momentum.

Where real things get done – and get done at pace.

This is not a one-person job; it's everyone’s.”

Read the full keynote address below.

“Welcome to the 3rd annual economic event hosted by the Darwin Major Business Group.

Collectively, our 20 members see it as one of the major contributions that we can make to the Territory each year, which is why it is so pleasing to see so many of you here today.

Darwin Major Business Group wants to support a big conversation around our economy, not just for business, even though that is important, but for all Territorians.

It is the economic opportunities that we create that drive our living standards today, tomorrow, and into the future.

Whether we are successful or not depends on many things, and we can discuss those today.

But at a practical level, it simply means, do Territorians have access to great jobs that are pay well?

Can our families pay their bills with enough left over to enjoy life in the Territory?

And together - can we fund the government services we expect, build the infrastructure that we need, and do Territorians have hope in their hearts, or are they thinking about opportunities elsewhere?

Conversations need a conversation kick-starter.

So, this is the third year we have released our annual economic snapshot , prepared for the Darwin Major Business Group by the AEC Group.

It is a gun-barrel straight assessment of where we are today, where we are doing well, and where we aren’t.

These reports are 100% funded by the private sector, Territory businesses putting their hands in their pocket because we care about the Territory’s future.

Our first report in 2024 gave us an honest appraisal of the Territory’s performance over the previous decade.

The next, in 2025, highlighted our challenges and the anchor that is our public debt.

Today’s report is our ‘Call to Arms’.

When Ashley Page from AEC Group gets up a little later to brief you on his report, he will tell you many things, some good and some not so good.

But what gave me and the DMBG Board cause for concern is the data identifying the struggle to maintain the private sector’s share of activity in the Territory economy.

That is never sustainable, and it is an alarm we must acknowledge and respond to.

Yes, we could say the same thing is happening to varying degrees across the country, but to be honest, I don’t care so much about that.

It matters more here because this is our home.

We all know that every successful community has a successful private sector.

So, the message is clear, we currently stand at a fork in the road, 2026 must be the year when everyone leans in and gets involved.

No arms crossed, sitting back in indulgence, no finger pointing.

We have to move from ‘hope’ to momentum.

Where real things get done – and get done at pace.

This is not a one-person job, it's everyone’s.

TURNING POTENTIAL INTO OPPORTUNITY

Since self-Government we have long talked about turning potential into opportunity, you can see the past successes everywhere.

We have 130% more people since then.

An LNG export industry has been built from scratch.

Roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, towers, ports, airports, railway and much more have been built.

We have a strong Defence eco-system in the Top End.

Tourists from every corner of the world visit and marvel.

I could spend all day listing our achievements, someday we should, but today is not that day.

As I said, today’s message is a ‘call to arms’.

To you as business people in this room, to families in suburbs spread right across our great Territory, to our Indigenous leadership and land councils, our politicians, our bureaucrats, and our media.

Because I believe we have made some mistakes in recent times.

We have imported from elsewhere the destructive reflex to throw stones at every idea and every advocate; we have somehow imported an LNG-sized tanker of negativity.

But worse, I fear that we might have forgotten how Territorians got things done.

It was a difference we prided ourselves on, it was our competitive advantage in an ever more competitive world, it was our ability to work together like no-one else to solve challenges together, to back vision together, to join the dots – and to see how good ideas created opportunity for everyone.

Some people tell me, ‘Steve, those times have gone, it is everyone for themselves today, that we just need to accept that the Australian system for everything is primarily adversarial.’

I don’t, and won’t accept that.

I know born and bred Territorians want to see the Territory go forward, and those that chose the Territory, like me, came here for that reason too.

As I said, look around us, the waterfront development and this convention centre delivered under a PPP 20 years ago is a great example of what can be done.

264,000 people now strive to carve out a modern economy across 1.3m square kilometres.

REDISCOVER THE TERRITORY WAY

Our view, that is DMBG, is we need to stop for a moment, we need to each stand tall, shake hands, reconnect and recommit to what has made us successful up to now.

We need to rediscover our mojo - the Territory Way - on Beetaloo, on Middle Arm, on our Marine Industry Park, on Australia and US Defence Infrastructure and Sustainment, on our Tourism Infrastructure, across our resource projects, our relations in Canberra, and so much more.

I’ve already mentioned that today’s report has some sobering messages, but there are positives too.

DMBG sponsors this work so that we all have the conversations we need to have.

Our goal isn’t to point fingers or lay blame, or give space for everyone to step back and leave the challenge to someone else.

Our goal is to do our part to support Territorians in making good decisions.

Decisions that provide work for our next generation, great incomes for our families so they never look interstate for opportunity and proof that 264,000 people in the North can carve out a place that others envy.

Journeys start with the first step - there are many who are doing this today. But success depends on everyone joining the party.

It’s when hope is supplanted by momentum – its real things making the difference we all would like to see.

And it’s our hope that you leave here today with the energy and drive to do just that.

I just want to pause for a moment of reflection. This is for my company, Sitzler, and 2026 marks our fiftieth year here in business in the Territory.

I've been part of that journey for 42 years, and I look back and think of the number of times we have had to pivot, reinvent, refocus that business over those 42 years I've been involved.

It invariably comes down to about every five years. Why that's relevant to what we're talking about today is that the pace of change in industry and the opportunities that sit before us are quite varied.

They don't stay static. Competition for capital is quite intensive, so our ability to respond in a timely manner, at pace and with conviction, is absolutely critical.

If we cannot do that, we just become part of the numbers. We are a small enough jurisdiction with dynamic enough businesses to be able to respond differently.

The businesses that exist in the Northern Territory today are all well-proven.

They're hardworking.

And in my estimation, and I see quite a bit of this around the country with the various roles I have, the standard of Territory businesses compares very favourably to what you see elsewhere in the country.

I don't believe we fully appreciate that. We don't fully appreciate the significance of what we can do off the back of that skill.

The key is for us to be able to look out and understand where the opportunity is coming from and then choose how we respond to it.

Our hope is that business and investors will respond with conviction to the Territory opportunities. And I must say, I firmly believe this.

To me, there has never been a more interesting time in the Territory, and there's never been a time when we've had such significant opportunity on our doorstep, and some of that is materialising at a pace most people perhaps won't appreciate, but it is significant for us.

Our point about leaning into the challenge is critical.

It can take a number of years to be ready to actually leverage an opportunity that is before us. That opportunity will not sit still.

So, the challenge for us is we either be ready, or other capability will take our place.

I don't believe we should aspire to that.

We should be absolutely participating.

Enjoy the luncheon, thank you.

— Steve Margetic

Chair, Darwin Major Business Group

MEDIA RELEASE | Driving economic growth: Darwin Major Business Group releases third AEC Economic Analysis Report

Fri, 27 Mar 2026 06:29:38 GMT

Darwin Major Business Group is proud to announce the release of the third AEC Economic Analysis Report today.

The Over the Horizons Opportunities report, prepared by independent economic consultants AEC Group, provides a deep dive into the Territory economy, examining the NT’s performance across a wide range of economic indicators to offer valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities for the community.

DMBG Chair, Steve Margetic said Darwin Major Business Group exists for one reason: economic growth in the Northern Territory. Therefore, the Group is committed to sponsoring this important analysis that supports the achievement of this goal.

“The Territory is beginning to turn the corner. Population, employment and housing investment are all strengthening after a challenging period,” Mr Margetic said.

“But the next phase is very important. The Territory has a window of opportunity to accelerate growth right across the economy, by backing in and expanding our private sector.”

AEC Group CEO Ashley Page indicated economic growth is not an abstract concept.

“Economic growth determines the government’s ability to fund hospitals, schools, roads and essential services, “ Mr Page said.

“It influences wages, job opportunities and the ability of young people to build futures.”

“Without sustained growth, the Territory will struggle to reduce debt, attract investment and retain its workforce.”

“Seizing this moment will determine whether the NT will build a stronger, more resilient and sustainable future.”

To view the 2026 AEC report and the DMBG's response, ‘What the Territory Needs, ’ click here .

Keeping more of the Territory’s economic value at home

Wed, 25 Mar 2026 04:11:50 GMT

This week’s NT News business pages carried a quietly important signal for the Northern Territory economy.

A new advanced glass manufacturing facility has opened at East Arm. At first glance, it might seem like just another industrial investment. In reality, it represents something the Territory needs much more of: private capital choosing to build capability here.

The Northern Territory economy has always depended on investment cycles. Major projects arrive, activity surges, and then the momentum fades as the project moves into operations or winds down. The challenge for the Territory has been turning those cycles into something more durable, a broader private sector that continues generating value long after the initial investment.

That is why new private investment matters so much. It does more than create jobs during construction or expansion. It builds capability, attracts skills and deepens the local supplier base. Over time, it helps create a more resilient economy, one that is not solely dependent on government expenditure or the next major project.

There is another structural reason why investments like the East Arm facility are important.

Economists often talk about “economic leakage” in smaller regional economies. In simple terms, this is the share of economic activity that flows out of the region because key goods, services or specialist capabilities do not exist locally.

The Territory experiences this more than most parts of Australia.

When large projects are built here, significant parts of the supply chain frequently occur elsewhere. Specialist fabrication may take place in Adelaide or Brisbane. Technical services may be sourced from Perth. Materials and components are often manufactured in southern states and then shipped north.

The new advanced glass manufacturing facility is happening in the Territory, but large parts of the value chain occur somewhere else.

No regional economy can produce everything locally, and that is not the objective. But when key capabilities are missing, the Territory captures only a portion of the economic multiplier that major investment should generate.

This is where targeted private investment can make a meaningful difference.

When a new manufacturing, logistics or services capability is established locally, it does more than fill a gap, it anchors activity. Once that capability exists, other businesses begin to cluster around it: installers, contractors, logistics providers, engineering services and maintenance specialists.

Over time this creates something the Territory has long needed, a deeper industrial ecosystem and we are beginning to see signs of this broader investment story emerging.

The Middle Arm Industrial Precinct is being planned as a platform for future energy, minerals processing and advanced manufacturing projects. Major resource developments in critical minerals and the Beetaloo Basin are progressing through financing and development stages. The development of the shiplift and marine industry precinct at East Arm is intended to create a nationally significant maritime services hub.

Private capital is also moving in other sectors, for example tourism operators are investing in new experiences and acquisitions as international visitation continues to recover. Logistics and port infrastructure are expanding as northern trade volumes grow.

Taken together, these investments point to a Territory economy that has genuine growth opportunities ahead of it.

But private investors make decisions based on confidence and clarity. They need to know that projects can move through approvals in a predictable timeframe and that development-ready land and infrastructure is available. They need a workforce that can be attracted and retained, and they need a policy environment that signals the Territory welcomes responsible investment.

None of this requires lowering standards. Environmental protection, strong Indigenous partnerships and community expectations are all part of modern investment frameworks and investors increasingly expect those standards to be clear and consistent.

What matters most is certainty.

The Territory’s economic future will not be built by government spending alone. Public investment can create the platform through infrastructure, planning frameworks, strategic precincts, but it is private capital that ultimately drives job creation, innovation and long-term economic depth.

The East Arm manufacturing investment is a reminder of what that looks like in practice as it shows that when the conditions are right, businesses are prepared to invest in the Territory, build capability here and grow alongside the local economy.

If the Territory can continue to attract new industries, deepen supply chains and retain more of the value created by major projects, the long-standing challenge of economic leakage begins to shift.

It will mean more capability stays here, more businesses grow here and more Territorians build careers here. It will mean that more of the economic value generated in the Northern Territory remains in the Northern Territory.

And that is how regional economies become stronger over time.

Strategic weight requires economic alignment

Wed, 25 Mar 2026 04:10:03 GMT

Recent reporting has highlighted that permanent Australian Army numbers in Darwin have declined over the past decade, even as Australia’s overall defence workforce grows.

This is not simply a personnel story. It is an economic ecosystem story.

The Northern Territory carries increasing strategic weight in Australia’s national security architecture. The rotation of US Marines, deepening Indo-Pacific partnerships and sustained investment in northern infrastructure all reinforce that reality.

But strategy alone does not determine footprint.

Defence workforce distribution follows function, infrastructure, industrial ecosystems and family confidence. Where there is housing supply, schooling certainty, spousal employment opportunity and a capable local industry base, retention strengthens. Where those settings lag, numbers drift.

The Territory also faces a structural reality: distance from extended family and established support networks can weigh heavily in relocation decisions for defence families. That is not a criticism of place, it is geography.

Which means the response cannot be rhetorical. It must be practical.

The liveability dividend must be visible and compelling: strong schools, accessible healthcare, employment pathways for partners, efficient freight and logistics systems, housing supply certainty, and a vibrant industrial base that signals long-term economic confidence.

Defence presence in the Territory is not only a strategic asset; it is an economic stabiliser. It underpins population confidence, supports local business capability, drives construction and infrastructure pipelines, and strengthens supply chain depth across rail, transport and port operations, logistics corridors, industrial precincts and advanced capability sectors.

If the north is expected to carry greater strategic responsibility, then the economic settings must match that responsibility.

This is shared work.

The Commonwealth shapes posture and long-term basing clarity.

The Territory shapes planning, services and liveability.

Industry must ensure meaningful employment pathways and a competitive local defence supply chain capable of supporting sustained operations.

The establishment of the Northern Territory Defence Industry Council reflects recognition that alignment across these settings matters. Long-term defence presence depends not only on capability decisions, but on housing pipelines, workforce ecosystems, logistics and freight efficiency, and a resilient industrial base.

Darwin has demonstrated repeatedly over decades that when government and business align around clear economic outcomes, momentum follows.

As we approach NT Defence Week , the conversation should extend beyond how many personnel are posted north to how we strengthen the economic architecture that sustains them.

Strategic intent without economic depth will always struggle to hold.

And economic depth does not emerge slowly or accidentally. It is built deliberately, through infrastructure sequencing, housing delivery, workforce incentives, industrial capability investment and clear signals of long-term confidence.

Decisions in principle are not enough. In a competitive national environment, capital, capability and people follow certainty and pace.

If the north is to remain indispensable in Australia’s defence posture, then delivery must keep pace with intent.

That is how footprint follows function and how strategy becomes sustained economic strength.

Defence footprint supports population.

Population supports services.

Services support private investment.

Private investment supports defence retention.

The opportunity is in front of us. The question now is how quickly we are prepared to move - together.

DMBG submission to the Productivity Commission (PC) - Inquiry into the Determinants of Regional Airfares

Sun, 15 Mar 2026 08:58:53 GMT

Executive summary

Regional aviation in Northern Australia functions as enabling economic infrastructure. It underpins labour mobility, defence capability, tertiary health access, SME participation in national markets and tourism inflows.

Elevated and volatile regional airfares are frequently discussed in the context of airline competition. This submission contends that, while competition remains relevant, the principal determinants of regional airfares in Northern Australia are structural.

Six structural drivers are material:

Thin-route economics in a geographically vast, population-light market;
Limited contestability on long-haul routes;
Airport charging structures operating within natural monopoly characteristics;
Government-mandated security and regulatory cost recovery mechanisms;
Dynamic pricing interacting with non-discretionary demand; and
Limited transparency in route-level price dispersion and cost pass-through.

Sustainable airfare moderation in Northern Australia is unlikely to arise solely from additional airline competition in geographically sparse, long-haul markets. More durable reform may arise from calibrated adjustments to cost architecture, transparency frameworks and regulatory settings.

The Productivity Commission’s inquiry provides an opportunity to examine these determinants rigorously and distinguish structural drivers from behavioural assumptions.

1. Aviation as Enabling Infrastructure in Northern Australia

In Northern Australia, aviation frequently performs the functional role that road and rail perform in higher-density jurisdictions.

Distances are long. Surface alternatives may involve multi-day travel and can be seasonally disrupted. Aviation supports:

Specialist medical access
Defence rotations and personnel mobility
Fly-in fly-out resource operations
Public service delivery
SME participation in interstate markets
Tourism inflows
Education mobility

Accordingly, airfare volatility may generate broader economic effects than in high-density metropolitan corridors.

2. Structural Determinants of Regional Airfares

2.1 Thin-Route Economics

Regional long-haul routes in Northern Australia exhibit:

Lower passenger volumes;
Long sector lengths;
Smaller aircraft deployment;
Higher per-passenger fixed cost allocation.

BITRE data for Darwin trunk routes demonstrates material 12-month fare volatility, with peak fares commonly two to three times the lowest observed return fares.

In thin markets, fixed costs are spread over fewer passengers. This raises the effective fare floor and increases sensitivity to cost shocks.

2.2 Competition and Contestability

Treasury analysis indicates fares are materially higher on monopoly routes than on duopoly routes, and that additional competition can reduce fares by 5-10 per cent depending on the measure used. ACCC monitoring confirms high national concentration and sensitivity of prices to capacity adjustments.

However, Northern Australia presents structural constraints:

Low traffic density relative to sector length;
Entry risk in thin markets;
Slot and terminal access constraints at major hubs;
Limited ability to sustain parallel capacity.

Competition remains important on contestable routes. However, on long-haul thin routes, additional carriers may not materially alter outcomes where underlying demand remains structurally limited.

A policy distinction between contestable routes and structurally thin essential routes may therefore assist in calibrating responses.

2.3 Airport Charging Structures and Regulatory Asymmetry

Many airports operate within natural monopoly characteristics in their geographic catchments. Airlines typically lack close substitutes for primary capital city airports.

Published aeronautical charge schedules indicate that passenger-based charges at major airports can exceed $20 per passenger per movement before mandated security components are included.

Recent reported increases in landing charges at Darwin Airport illustrate how charge adjustments can materially affect thin-route economics.

This submission does not allege improper conduct. However, the interaction between:

Building block pricing methodologies;
Capital recovery timing;
Depreciation settings; and
Limited competitive discipline

warrants examination where cost pass-through materially affects low-volume routes.

There exists regulatory asymmetry between:

Airlines operating in competitive markets with volatile net margins; and
Infrastructure operators operating under monopoly characteristics with light-handed oversight.

The implications of this asymmetry may become more material in thin markets where cost pass-through is less easily absorbed.

2.4 Government-Mandated Security Cost Recovery

Federally mandated aviation security is a national public good.

Where screening costs are recovered solely on a per-passenger basis at low-volume airports, fixed operating costs divided by smaller passenger bases produce materially higher unit costs.

Illustrative Model

Assume:

Regional airport

- 300,000 departing passengers

- $6 million annual screening operating cost

- Unit cost = $20 per passenger

Major metropolitan airport

- 20 million departing passengers

- $100 million annual screening cost

- Unit cost = $5 per passenger

Under a pooled national model:

Total cost = $106 million

Total passengers = 20.3 million

Pooled unit cost ~ $5.22 per passenger

This would reduce regional unit cost from $20 to approximately $5.22, while modestly increasing metropolitan cost.

For a Darwin return journey, this could reduce embedded screening cost by approximately $30 per passenger.

Efficiency Consideration

Deadweight loss may arise where elevated fixed cost recovery suppresses demand below levels that would otherwise occur under alternative cost allocation structures.

The Commission may wish to consider whether point-of-departure recovery of a national public good maximises overall welfare.

2.5 Dynamic Pricing, Volatility and Essential Demand

Airline revenue management allocates lower fares early and higher fares closer to departure. This intertemporal price discrimination is economically rational.

Volatility is particularly pronounced within 7-14 days of departure, a period in which travel is frequently non-discretionary (medical, bereavement, defence posting, operational call-outs).

Snapshot lowest-fare metrics may understate transaction-level volatility and dispersion experienced by passengers purchasing closer to departure.

The objective should not be broad fare regulation, but improved transparency of route-level fare dispersion (including 3-7 and 14-day indicators) to support evidence-based assessment.

2.6 Aviation Cost Stack Transparency

Improved disaggregation of the aviation cost stack would enhance clarity regarding:

Airport passenger service charges;
Runway and airfield charges;
Security screening recovery;
Airservices charges;
Other regulatory fees.

Where cost drivers are transparent, reform can focus on structural architecture rather than individual operators.

3. Regional Airfares and Productivity

High and volatile airfares in Northern Australia affect:

Labour mobility and recruitment costs;
Defence mobility and rotation expenses;
SME interstate participation;
Patient travel scheme expenditure;
Investment attractiveness and population retention.

Workforce Cost Illustration

Assume a Darwin-based project recruits 20 interstate specialists annually. Each requires:

1 interview trip (short notice);
1 relocation planning trip;
2 professional development trips.

If short-notice return fares average $850 compared with $450 in lower-volatility periods, the differential is approximately $400.

$400 × 4 trips × 20 recruits = $32,000 additional annual travel cost.

In larger defence or resource projects with 100+ interstate staff, volatility exposure may scale into the hundreds of thousands of dollars annually.

Even modest reductions in airfare volatility that improve labour mobility at the margin could plausibly generate broader economic effects that warrant evaluation alongside the fiscal cost of alternative cost-recovery models.

Aviation functions as enabling infrastructure in Northern Australia. Where volatility is elevated, economic friction may increase across labour and capital markets.

4. Reform Options

Route classification distinguishing contestable and structurally thin routes;
Examination of national security cost pooling mechanisms;
Strengthened transparency and consultation requirements for major airport charge changes;
Targeted aerodrome upgrades to reduce disruption-driven volatility;
Consideration of competitively tendered PSO-style models for structurally thin essential routes;
Enhanced publication of route-level fare dispersion and reliability metrics.

Conclusion

Regional airfare outcomes in Northern Australia appear to be shaped primarily by structural cost architecture rather than isolated pricing behaviour.

Competition remains important. However, structural determinants particularly security cost recovery, airport pricing architecture and thin-route economics warrant detailed examination.

Recalibrating these structural settings may be more likely to produce durable moderation of fare levels and volatility than reliance on competition alone in geographically sparse markets.

Northern Australia offers a suitable environment in which to trial structural reform.

-----

Click here to view the PDF version of this submission.

DMBG submission to the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee - Aviation Sector 48

Fri, 27 Feb 2026 08:38:16 GMT

Inquiry: State of Australia’s aviation sector and its ability to deliver reliable and affordable services to rural, regional and remote communities (Aviation sector 48)

Executive summary

Reliable and affordable aviation services are essential infrastructure for rural, regional and remote Australia. For Northern Australia and the Northern Territory in particular, aviation is not a discretionary 'lifestyle' mode: it is the practical link to tertiary health care, higher education, specialist labour markets, freight and supply chains, family connections and national participation.

Affordability and price stability are central concerns. The Australian Government's Aviation White Paper reports that, in September 2023, the average ticket price per kilometre on trips involving regional airports was around 52 per cent higher than on capital city trips. This gap is amplified where there are few competing carriers, thin demand, and limited alternatives to air travel.

This submission provides route-level case studies for Darwin's five trunk links (10 directions) and a summary of published airport charge schedules. The Darwin trunk case studies show substantial price dispersion and volatility within a 12-month period, including peak prices that are two to three times the lowest observed fares ( Appendix A ). In structurally thin markets, dynamic pricing and policy-determined cost inputs can interact to produce concentrated welfare impacts for essential travel.

Competition and contestability matter. Treasury analysis finds that airlines facing less competition charge higher prices, while prices tend to be lower and more stable where there are more competitors. ACCC monitoring also highlights the high concentration of the domestic market and the sensitivity of prices to capacity and competitive dynamics.

Airport and government-mandated charges are not the only drivers of fares, but they are policy leveraged

inputs that can materially increase per-passenger costs on thin and remote routes. Appendix B summarises selected published charges at airports relevant to Darwin trunk routes. Recent reported changes at Darwin Airport include a more than doubling of the general landing charge from 1 July 2025.

High and volatile airfares have broader place-based impacts. They reduce liveability, create barriers to population growth and retention, and deter economic investment by raising the cost and uncertainty of attracting and retaining staff (health, education, construction, defence, resources and tourism). These impacts are outlined in Appendix C .

This submission responds directly to the Committee's Terms of Reference for Aviation Sector 48 and focuses on practical reforms that can lower the level and volatility of airfares, while improving reliability and resilience of services to rural, regional and remote communities.

The Productivity Commission’s current inquiry into the determinants of regional airfares further underscores the structural nature of these issues and the need for coordinated reform across competition settings, cost-recovery mechanisms and transparency frameworks.

This submission does not allege improper conduct by airlines or airports; rather, it examines how structural cost settings and market architecture interact with thin-route economics in Northern Australia.

Summary recommendations:

Adopt a route-classification framework (contestable vs structurally thin/essential routes) and tailor policy accordingly, including explicit objectives for affordability, volatility and reliability.
Introduce an equitable, sustainable funding mechanism for federally mandated security screening at regional airports (including assessing a uniform national levy option) to reduce per-passenger cost spikes.
Strengthen economic regulation, transparency and dispute resolution for airport charges that flow through to regional and remote fares (and consider extending monitoring to airports central to remote connectivity).
Remove avoidable barriers to entry/expansion on contestable routes (including slot, terminal and ground-handling access constraints at hub airports).
Establish a national Public Service Obligation (PSO) / contract-and-cap model for 'thin' routes, using competitive tendering and service level agreements to stabilise prices and frequencies where competition is structurally limited.
Scale and harmonise resident and essential-travel support (building on WA and QLD models and international practice) with robust design to minimise capture by higher base fares.
Use government purchasing power (health travel, public service, defence and contracted services) to secure baseline capacity and stable contract pricing on key regional and remote routes.
Publish better route-level price and service data (including price dispersion, last-minute fare metrics and cancellation/delay reasons) to support accountability and enable evidence-based interventions.
Rebalance aviation cost-recovery settings where they disproportionately affect regional operators and passengers (including a review of Airservices and other federally imposed charges on remote services).
Trial and evaluate the above measures in Northern Australia first, with independent evaluation against clear affordability, volatility, reliability and regional development outcomes.

Response to the Terms of Reference

The Committee's Terms of Reference for Aviation Sector 48 focus on the cost drivers, regulatory

settings and market structure that shape the ability of the aviation sector to deliver reliable and

affordable services to rural, regional and remote communities. This submission addresses each item

and draws on a Northern Australia/Northern Territory lens where aviation is essential, distances are

long, and there are few practical substitutes for air travel.

1. Costs, fees, levies, taxes and charges that are core components to pricing of airfares and associated services

Airfares are ultimately set through airline revenue management and competition on each route, but they are anchored by an underlying cost base. Remote and regional routes typically have higher costs per passenger because fixed costs are spread over fewer passengers (thin demand), aircraft are often smaller, sector lengths can be long, and disruption costs are higher when there are few alternative services. Core cost components include aircraft ownership and maintenance, fuel, crew, ground handling, distribution, and airport/airspace charges.

BITRE's published fare series (including 'cheapest available return fares') provides a useful indicator of the price dispersion and volatility consumers face, but it is based on advertised fares captured at a point in time and will generally understate the prices paid by travellers who must book late or travel at peak times. For Darwin trunk routes, the 12-month range of published 'cheapest return fares' shows material volatility, with peak prices commonly two to three times the lowest observed fares ( Appendix A ).

While airport and government charges are not the only determinants of fares, they are policy influenced inputs that can raise the cost 'floor' on thin routes and increase volatility when charges change abruptly. Appendix B shows that published passenger-based charges can exceed $20 per passenger per movement at some major airports before security screening and recovery charges are added12 (e.g., terminal usage plus airfield components, plus screening charges at Perth).

Many airports operate as natural monopolies within their geographic catchments, reflecting the absence of close substitutes rather than any unlawful market conduct.

Recommendations under Term 1:

Adopt a standardised 'regional aviation cost stack' reporting framework so governments and communities can see (by route class) how airport charges, airservices charges, security screening, and other mandated costs contribute to the delivered fare.
Where major cost spikes are driven by policy-leveraged inputs (airport pricing, mandated security screening, and cost-recovery settings), prioritise reforms that reduce or smooth those costs to avoid sudden fare shocks.
Expand and make permanent route-level transparency on fare dispersion (including 'last-minute' fares) and service reliability to support accountability and targeted intervention (aligned with current government consultation on performance and competition data).

Indicative example - components of a Darwin-Brisbane return fare

To illustrate how policy-leveraged and airport charges sit within the overall fare, consider an indicative Darwin–Brisbane return fare of around $600 (within the range observed in BITRE data for this route).

A stylised breakdown for a narrow-body jet service on this sector is:

Airport and mandated charges (approx. 15-25% | ~$90-$150)

Includes passenger service charges, runway/airfield charges, security screening and other mandated recovery charges at both origin and destination. Published schedules at major airports show per-passenger charges that can exceed $20 per movement before some mandated security components.

Fuel (approx. 25-30% | ~$150-$180)

Highly variable with global fuel prices and sector length; typically one of the largest cost items.

Aircraft ownership, maintenance and engineering (approx. 15-20% | ~$90-$120)

Includes leasing or capital costs and scheduled maintenance.

Crew and operations (approx. 10-15% | ~$60-$90)

Flight crew, cabin crew and operational support.

Ground handling, distribution and overheads (approx. 10-15% | ~$60-$90)

Includes check-in, baggage, systems, sales and corporate overheads.

Margin and commercial risk buffer (variable)

Reflects demand risk, load factors and competitive dynamics.

This example shows that while airport and mandated charges are not the majority of the fare, they are a material and policy-influenced component. On thin routes with lower load factors, these per-passenger charges are spread over fewer travellers, raising the effective cost floor and increasing the likelihood that charge increases flow through to fares.

1.a Qantas decision to close its regional staff bases in Canberra, Hobart and Mildura on 1 October 2025

The Terms of Reference specifically call out Qantas' decision to close regional staff bases in Canberra, Hobart and Mildura (effective 1 October 2025). While airlines must manage their operations efficiently, regional staffing decisions can have downstream impacts on reliability, engineering support, turnaround performance, and the ability to recover quickly from disruptions - particularly where there are limited alternative services.

Recommendations under Term 1a:

Require airlines to publish a Regional Workforce and Service Resilience Impact Statement when closing or materially reducing regional bases (including expected impacts on cancellations, delays, and recovery times).
Where airlines receive government support (direct programs, route subsidies, or significant government travel spend), attach clear service reliability and regional workforce expectations to that support through contract terms and KPIs.
Ensure procurement agencies and regulators have visibility of the operational impacts of base closures so that essential regional connectivity is not undermined by workforce consolidation.

2. Disparities in the costs, fees, levies, taxes and charges across rural, regional and remote airports, and the basis for these disparities

Disparities in airport charges arise from differences in ownership models, traffic volumes, capital programs, and pricing structures, but also from market power. Many airports operate without close substitutes within their geographic catchments and airlines have limited alternatives. Published schedules show large variations in passenger-based and aircraft-based charges across major and regional airports ( Appendix B ). For Northern Australia, recent reported increases at Darwin Airport, including more than doubling of the general landing charge from 1 July 2025, highlight how airport pricing changes can quickly flow through to higher fares for both RPT and charter services.

Darwin International Airport shares its runway with RAAF Base Darwin under a joint user arrangement, and significant runway resurfacing and reconstruction works have been underway in recent years. The operator has publicly cited these works as one factor contributing to its decision to more than double landing fees, which has drawn criticism from industry and political stakeholders. However, while runway upgrade costs are a plausible contributory factor, they are not clearly the sole or dominant cause of higher charges, other structural factors including remoteness, traffic volumes, and the commercial nature of price setting in a market characterised by limited competitive constraints also play important roles.

Recommendations under Term 2:

Strengthen economic oversight of aeronautical pricing at airports operating as natural monopoly infrastructure where it materially affects regional and remote connectivity, including extending monitoring and transparency requirements to additional airports central to remote services (building on the Productivity Commission's airport regulation framework).
Require airports to publish clear, comparable schedules and explanatory statements for major charge changes (including capex drivers, depreciation assumptions and expected passenger impacts), with an accessible dispute resolution pathway for smaller operators.
Assess whether airports that are critical gateways for remote communities should be subject to additional safeguards against abrupt fee shocks (e.g., staged implementation, caps on year-to-year increases for core aeronautical charges, or mandated consultation standards).

3. Mechanisms for recovering federally mandated security and regulatory costs, and options for ensuring those mechanisms are equitable and sustainable

Federally mandated security and regulatory requirements (including passenger and checked-bag screening, security programs and compliance obligations) are essential to safety and national security, but they can impose high fixed costs on small and regional airports. Where costs are recovered through per-passenger charges at low-volume airports, the resulting charge per passenger can be large and can suppress demand, creating a feedback loop that further increases unit costs. The Australian Government has previously recognised this issue, including through funding programs for screening upgrades and the undertaking of case studies to assess impacts.

A key equity question is whether the ongoing costs of mandated screening at regional airports should be recovered only from the relatively small number of passengers using those airports, or spread more broadly across the network. Term 3 specifically asks the Committee to consider the merits of a uniform national levy. In principle, a uniform levy (or an equivalent national funding mechanism) can:

(i) reduce per-passenger cost spikes at small airports

(ii) avoid demand suppression on essential routes, and

(iii) improve price stability by smoothing a significant fixed cost across a larger base.

Recommendations under Term 3:

Undertake an independent, transparent financial analysis of the ongoing operating costs of mandated screening at regional airports (not only capital upgrades), and publish the results (building on earlier case study work).
Progress an equitable funding model for ongoing mandated screening costs, including a uniform national passenger levy option, with ring-fenced governance and clear auditing to ensure funds reduce regional unit costs.
Where cost recovery remains airport-based, require standardised reporting of screening and regulatory charges per departing passenger and ensure charge changes are staged to avoid sudden fare shocks.

Conclusion

The Committee can improve affordability and reduce volatility by focusing on:

(a) competition and contestability where it is feasible,

(b) reforming or smoothing policy-leveraged cost inputs such as airport charges at airports with limited competitive constraints and mandated screening cost recovery, and

Northern Australia is an appropriate early focus for trial and evaluation because the impacts of high

and volatile airfares are most acute.

Reform should focus on recalibrating structural cost architecture rather than assuming that increased

airline competition alone will materially reduce fares in geographically sparse markets.

-----

Click here to view the PDF version of this submission (including appendices).

4. Competitiveness of the aviation sector to service rural, regional and remote communities, and implications of reducing or withdrawing services

The competitiveness of aviation services to regional and remote communities is shaped by market concentration, barriers to entry, and the economics of thin routes. Treasury analysis shows that weaker competitive constraints are associated with higher prices. ACCC monitoring highlights the high concentration of domestic aviation and the sensitivity of fares and service levels to capacity decisions and competition.

For many regional routes, and even for some remote capital links, competition is limited or episodic. When services are reduced or withdrawn, communities can be left with no practical alternatives, with large welfare impacts given the essential nature of travel for health, family and work.

Recommendations under Term 4:

Reduce barriers to entry and expansion on contestable regional routes (including slot/terminal/ground-handling access at major hubs and transparent, non-discriminatory access terms).
For structurally thin routes where competition is unlikely to be sustained, use competitive tendering (PSO/contract-and-cap) with clear service level agreements to guarantee baseline frequency and capped pricing for essential travel.
Consider targeted trials that increase contestability for remote gateways (including where previously proposed in earlier inquiries), with strong safeguards and evaluation to ensure benefits flow to consumers and communities.

4A. Structural Industry Realities and the Limits of a Competition-Only Response

Several stakeholders have correctly observed that a narrow focus on airline competition alone is unlikely to materially change airfare outcomes for Northern Australia.

Benchmarking of comparable long-haul domestic routes suggests that Darwin is not uniquely priced when assessed against distance and sector economics. However, benchmarking parity does not eliminate the disproportionate impact of price volatility on thin, long-haul routes where aviation is essential. For example, historical comparisons show that DRW-SYD fares have, at times, tracked broadly in line with routes such as BNE-PER, and that fare increases on BNE-DRW over recent years have aligned with movements on other long east-west trunk routes. Similarly, the presence of multiple operators on a route has not consistently resulted in materially lower average fares relative to single-operator long-haul routes.

This reflects a deeper structural reality: Australia’s aviation market is geographically vast, population light and high-cost. The economics of operating long sectors with relatively thin demand differ materially from high-density short-haul markets such as SYD-MEL.

Airlines in Australia have historically generated modest and highly volatile returns. Over the past century, sustained double-digit net profit margins have been rare. In contrast, several upstream suppliers in the aviation value chain, including certain airports and service providers operating within natural monopoly frameworks, operate in regulatory environments that have produced materially higher EBITDA and net margins. This asymmetry warrants scrutiny where those costs are passed through to passengers on structurally thin routes.

The Committee should therefore distinguish between:

Market competition constraints which are difficult to materially alter in a geographically sparse country; and
Structural cost settings, many of which are policy-determined or operate within natural monopoly or light-handed regulatory frameworks.

It is unlikely that airlines can be “shamed” into materially lowering fares on long-haul regional routes where underlying cost inputs remain high. Airlines operate on commercial revenue management models and are increasingly disciplined in yield optimisation. Sustainable airfare relief is more likely to come from structural cost reform than from appeals to competitive behaviour alone.

Structural Reform Areas Warranting Examination

This submission therefore emphasises structural levers that sit outside airline commercial discretion, including:

(a) National Security Cost Equalisation

Federally mandated security screening and regulatory compliance costs are essential national security functions. However, where these costs are recovered on a per-passenger basis at low-volume regional airports, the unit cost can be materially higher than at major metropolitan airports.

A national security equalisation mechanism, such as a uniform passenger levy or pooled funding model, could spread fixed security costs across the broader national passenger base. Given the significantly higher passenger volumes at major airports, even a marginal increase in per-passenger cost in capital cities could materially reduce the unit burden at low-volume regional airports. For example, if a uniform national levy of $2-$3 per passenger at major metropolitan airports were adopted, the resulting pooled revenue could materially offset per-passenger screening costs at low-volume regional airports, potentially reducing delivered fares on certain routes by $15-$25 without reducing security standards.

This approach recognises that aviation security protects national infrastructure and population centres, not merely the point of departure. Spreading security cost recovery more evenly across the national network could reduce delivered fares on regional routes without undermining security standards.

(b) Airport Market Power and Profitability

Where airports operate as natural monopoly infrastructure within their geographic catchments, their pricing decisions directly influence the cost base of airlines serving regional and remote communities. Reported EBITDA margins at certain airports materially exceed those of airlines operating within the same ecosystem. Publicly available financial statements indicate that several major Australian airports have reported EBITDA margins in excess of 60 per cent in recent years, while airline net profit margins have typically remained in single digits. These measures are not directly comparable given differing capital structures and accounting treatments, but they illustrate the asymmetry in pricing power within parts of the aviation value chain.

This does not imply improper conduct, but it does raise legitimate public policy questions about:

The effectiveness of current monitoring frameworks;
Whether building-block pricing models are appropriately calibrated for regional equity; and
Whether additional safeguards are warranted where airport pricing materially affects remote connectivity.

Airports typically exhibit structural characteristics consistent with natural monopoly economics within their catchments, meaning pricing oversight relies on regulatory and monitoring frameworks rather than competitive discipline alone.

A more granular public reporting framework that disaggregates the “aviation cost stack” would assist policymakers in identifying where structural inefficiencies or disproportionate margins arise within the
value chain.

5. Adequacy of government fees and levies to equitably address costs incurred due to federal legislation and regulations

Where the Commonwealth imposes requirements that create ongoing costs for the sector, the design of cost recovery and fees should account for regional equity. Cost-recovery settings that may be efficient in high-volume environments can be inequitable in low-volume regional settings where unit costs are structurally higher and travel is essential.

Airservices charges, regulatory fees and other Commonwealth-imposed costs should be assessed against an explicit 'regional equity test' to ensure they do not inadvertently increase the delivered cost of essential regional travel.

Recommendations under Term 5:

Review Commonwealth aviation cost-recovery and user charging frameworks with an explicit focus on regional and remote equity impacts (including unit-cost effects on thin routes).
Where appropriate, introduce rebates, cross-subsidies or direct appropriations for mandated costs that would otherwise fall heavily on low-volume regional services and passengers.

6. Effectiveness of government processes to identify and quantify costs incurred by the aviation sector due to federal legislation and regulations

The Committee's focus on identifying and quantifying costs is well placed. Effective policy requires an evidence base that links regulatory requirements to:

(i) direct compliance costs,

(ii) how those costs are recovered (per passenger, per movement, per tonne), and

(iii) the downstream impact on fares and service levels.

The 2019 inquiry and subsequent government response referenced the need to assess security screening impacts through case studies. A similar discipline should apply across new mandates: publish assumptions, assess distributional impacts on low-volume airports, and commit to post-implementation review.

Recommendations under Term 6:

Establish a standing 'Regional Aviation Cost Impact Statement' requirement for significant new aviation regulatory changes, including a distributional assessment for rural, regional and remote services.
Improve ongoing data collection and publication on fares, fees and performance (aligned with the government's current work on airline performance and competition data) so policy impacts can be evaluated transparently.

7. Policy and practical measures to assist the aviation sector to provide services to rural, regional and remote communities

A practical affordability and reliability strategy requires different tools for different route types. No single policy will address all drivers. This submission recommends a package across four pillars: competition where feasible, cost and charge reform where policy-leveraged, targeted support where markets are structurally thin, and stronger reliability/data/consumer protections.

Fare Dispersion, Dynamic Pricing and Essential Travel Safeguards

Modern airline revenue management systems allocate seat inventory dynamically over time. Lower fare classes are typically released well in advance of departure, while higher fare classes are retained for late-booking passengers whose travel is time-critical. This intertemporal pricing model is commercially rational and widely used across transport and accommodation sectors.

However, on structurally thin regional routes where travel is often essential rather than discretionary, dynamic pricing can result in significant late-booking price escalation. Patients travelling for specialist medical treatment, families responding to bereavement, and essential workforce movements frequently have limited flexibility in travel timing. In these circumstances, fare dispersion can generate substantial welfare impacts.

Historically, airlines offered discounted “standby” or last-seat inventory to fill marginal capacity. The evolution of sophisticated yield optimisation systems has largely eliminated such practices. While this reflects commercial efficiency, it also reduces flexibility for communities where aviation is essential infrastructure.

The Committee may wish to consider whether:

Enhanced reporting of route-level fare dispersion (including fares at 3, 7 and 14 days prior to departure) should be mandated to improve transparency;
Essential-travel inventory mechanisms (including capped emergency fares or government-backed essential seat allocations) are appropriate for structurally thin routes; and
Public Service Obligation or contract-and-cap models could incorporate late-booking protections where travel is demonstrably non-discretionary.

The objective should not be to regulate airline pricing across competitive trunk markets, but to ensure that dynamic pricing structures do not disproportionately disadvantage regional communities where aviation is the only practical mode of travel.

Indicative example – Welfare Impact

To illustrate the interaction between dynamic pricing and essential travel, consider a Darwin-based family of four required to travel to Sydney at short notice due to bereavement. This example is illustrative and based on publicly reported fare ranges.

If tickets are purchased several weeks in advance, return fares on long-haul routes such as DRW-SYD may be available within the mid-range of observed prices (for example, approximately $500-$650 per passenger in recent published fare series). However, where travel is required within three days of departure during peak periods, published fare data shows that prices can escalate materially, in some cases approaching or exceeding $900 per passenger.

For a family of four, this difference may represent an additional $1,000-$1,500 in immediate travel cost relative to early-booked fares. For households in regional Australia, such unexpected expenditure can represent a significant financial shock, particularly where alternative modes of travel are impractical.

The issue is not that airlines apply dynamic pricing, which is economically rational, but that in thin, long-haul markets with limited substitution options, essential late-booking travel can generate disproportionate welfare impacts. This strengthens the case for examining targeted safeguards for demonstrably non-discretionary travel, rather than broad-based price regulation.

Recommended package under Term 7:

Route classification and targeting: classify routes as (a) contestable, (b) structurally thin/essential, and (c) remote access routes, then tailor interventions accordingly.
PSO / contract-and-cap for essential thin routes: competitively tender minimum service levels and capped fares, with transparent community consultation and periodic retendering.
Resident and essential-travel support: expand well-designed resident discount schemes and compassionate/medical travel arrangements, with safeguards to minimise fare inflation capture.
Airport charge transparency and regulation: strengthen monitoring, consultation standards and dispute resolution for airports with market power that materially affects regional connectivity.
Security screening equity: adopt a sustainable national funding approach for ongoing mandated screening costs to avoid high per-passenger charges at low-volume airports.
Government procurement leverage: aggregate government travel demand to support baseline capacity and negotiate stable pricing on key regional and remote routes (health, education and public service travel).
Reliability and consumer protection: improve reporting of cancellations and delays and progress consumer protection reforms so reliability incentives are aligned with community needs, especially where alternative services are limited.
Workforce and operational resilience: invest in regional aviation workforce pipelines and require transparency when major operational changes (such as base closures) may affect service reliability.

8. Review of government responses to previous relevant inquiries, and the status of those responses

The Senate's 2019 inquiry into regional air routes made recommendations spanning airfare determinants, airport regulation and security screening cost impacts. The Australian Government's December 2019 response noted key recommendations and referenced ongoing and planned work, including security screening funding and impact assessment. The commencement of the Productivity Commission inquiry into determinants of regional airfares reflects the continuing relevance of those issues.

Recommendations under Term 8:

Publish a clear, updated implementation tracker for prior inquiry recommendations relevant to regional affordability and reliability (including screening cost analysis and airport pricing transparency).
Ensure future policy reforms are delivered as an integrated package (competition, charges, targeted support and transparency), rather than isolated measures that shift costs between participants.

9. Any other related matters

Airfare affordability and reliability are not only consumer issues; they are regional development issues. High and volatile fares undermine:

(i) population growth and retention,

(ii) liveability and access to services, and

(iii) business investment and workforce attraction and retention.

These effects are particularly acute in Northern Australia given long distances and the essential role of aviation ( Appendix C ).

From a policy perspective, this strengthens the case for treating a subset of regional and remote aviation links as essential infrastructure, with explicit, measurable objectives for affordability, volatility and reliability, and with governance that ensures reforms translate into lower and more predictable prices for residents and businesses.

DMBG submission to the NT Government Workforce Consultation

Tue, 10 Feb 2026 02:56:00 GMT

Executive summary

Darwin Major Business Group (DMBG) welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the NT Government workforce consultation.

Workforce availability, skills capability and population attraction are now structural determinants of the Northern Territory’s economic performance. Across multiple industries, employers are willing to invest, expand and employ, but are constrained by persistent labour shortages, skills gaps and barriers to participation.

This submission highlights four priorities:

The scale and breadth of workforce challenges facing Territory industries
The barriers limiting workforce participation and training effectiveness
The need for a trusted, industry-aligned education and training system, including strong quality assurance and certification integrity
A coordinated strategy to attract and retain people in Darwin as a place to build a career and a life

DMBG’s perspective is grounded in the experience of major employers responsible for delivering jobs, infrastructure and economic activity across the Territory.

Executive summary Darwin Major Business Group (DMBG) welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the NT Government workforce consultation. Workforce availability, skills capability and population attraction are now structural determinants of the Northern Territory’s economic performance.

About Darwin Major Business Group

Darwin Major Business Group represents a cross-section of major employers operating across the Northern Territory economy, including construction, resources, tourism and hospitality, transport and logistics, defence support industries, property, professional services and critical infrastructure.

Our members are large employers, investors and operators with direct experience of workforce shortages, skills constraints and training system challenges. This submission reflects practical, employer-led insights into what is required to build a sustainable and competitive Territory workforce.

1. Workforce needs and challenges across industries

Workforce availability remains the single most significant constraint on business growth across the Northern Territory.

Key challenges identified by DMBG members include:

Persistent skills shortages across construction trades, engineering, health, hospitality, aviation, logistics, defence support services and professional roles
A limited local labour pool, particularly for skilled and mid-career positions
High workforce churn linked to housing availability, cost-of-living pressures and family support considerations
Seasonal employment patterns that complicate workforce retention and long-term skills development
Project timing and delivery risk, where workforce uncertainty delays or constrains public and private investment

These challenges are no longer cyclical. They represent a structural risk to the Territory’s capacity to deliver infrastructure, attract investment and grow private-sector employment.

2. Barriers to workforce participation and training

Barriers to workforce participation and training are interconnected and require coordinated responses.

DMBG members identify the following as key constraints:

Housing availability and affordability, limiting the ability to attract and retain workers, particularly families and mid-career professionals
The cost and accessibility of training, including travel, accommodation and time away from work, especially for regional and remote participants
Fragmented training pathways, with inconsistent alignment between employer needs, training delivery and qualifications
Insufficient wrap-around supports for some cohorts, including childcare, transport and mentoring, to translate training into sustained employment
Skilled migration and labour mobility processes that are often complex and misaligned with business project timeframes

Addressing participation barriers requires alignment across workforce, housing, education, migration and infrastructure policy settings.

3. Skills and training systems that support local jobs

DMBG supports a workforce system that prioritises local employment outcomes while recognising the ongoing role of migration and labour mobility in supporting the Territory economy.

An effective skills and training system should include:

Employer-led training design aligned to real job requirements
Strong partnerships between industry, government and training providers
Flexible delivery models that allow people to upskill while remaining in work
Clear pathways from education and training into employment
Long-term workforce planning aligned to infrastructure pipelines and economic priorities

The role of CDU and VET / TAFE Training Organisations

A capable and trusted education and training system is foundational to workforce development in the Northern Territory.

DMBG believes a strong, stable and industry-aligned Charles Darwin University (CDU), as a dual-sector university, is critical to delivering higher education, vocational education and training, applied research and professional skills that support the Territory’s economic priorities. Employers rely on CDU to produce job-ready graduates across both tertiary and vocational pathways and to partner with industry in addressing emerging workforce needs.

DMBG also recognises that employer confidence depends on the integrity of training delivery and certification processes across all providers. Recent reporting regarding certification issues affecting a cohort of apprentices has reinforced the importance of robust quality assurance, clear communication, and efficient remediation pathways to minimise disruption for students and employers.

Similarly, high-quality VET and TAFE training organisations play a vital role in meeting demand for trades, technicians and operational roles across the Territory economy. Consistency of delivery, instructional capability and alignment with employer demand are central to ensuring training translates into employment outcomes.

DMBG supports training providers that are:

Well-governed, adequately resourced and industry-connected
Equipped with current, capable trainers and assessors
Focused on employment outcomes, not just enrolments
Committed to strong certification and records assurance, including prompt rectification when issues arise
Willing to collaborate across the tertiary and vocational system to address gaps and avoid duplication

DMBG encourages continued strengthening of system assurance settings that protect students, employers and the standing of Territory qualifications, including clear certification processes and timely issuance requirements.

4. Workforce attraction and retention - positioning Darwin and the Territory

Addressing workforce shortages also requires a compelling proposition that attracts people to Darwin and supports long-term retention.

Darwin offers a unique combination of economic opportunity, lifestyle and career acceleration that aligns strongly with the NT Government’s population growth and economic development objectives.

DMBG believes workforce attraction strategies should emphasise:

A clear “land of opportunity” narrative, where ambition and capability translate into responsibility and advancement more quickly than in larger cities
Career visibility and leadership opportunity, allowing individuals to make an impact and grow into influential roles
Lifestyle advantages, including reduced commuting, access to the outdoors and strong community connection
Housing and relocation incentives, including grants, build incentives and targeted assistance that support relocation and settlement
Whole-of-family attraction, recognising the importance of schools, health services, childcare and employment opportunities for partners

Darwin cannot compete with larger cities on scale, but it can compete on opportunity, lifestyle and the chance to succeed.

A coordinated, whole-of-government and industry approach to attraction and retention will strengthen workforce supply, support population growth and reinforce confidence in the Territory’s long-term economic future.

Closing comments

The Northern Territory’s economic potential is widely recognised, but realising that potential depends on having the right people, with the right skills, in the right place.

DMBG encourages continued engagement with employers and industry groups to ensure workforce policies are practical, responsive and aligned with the realities of doing business in the Territory.

We welcome the opportunity to contribute further as workforce reforms progress.

OpEd | Skills shortages aren’t just a workforce problem - they’re an economic one

Wed, 04 Feb 2026 23:59:00 GMT

Across the Northern Territory, skills shortages are no longer an occasional inconvenience for employers. They are now a structural economic problem – and one that is quietly holding the Territory back.

Latest data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows more than 5,000 unfilled positions in the NT , with approximately 85 per cent of those vacancies in the private sector. This represents lost output, delayed projects and unrealised economic potential.

At the same time, the Federal Government, through Jobs and Skills Australia , is examining how Australia’s skills system should evolve, including how skills are developed, recognised and matched to the needs of the economy.

For the Northern Territory, this discussion is critical.

Regions ultimately succeed or struggle based on whether they have enough people to do the work and the right skills to remain competitive. When workforce settings are aligned with economic needs, productivity improves, investment follows and living standards rise. When they are not, growth stalls.

Across construction, health, education, hospitality, professional services and the trades, NT businesses report the same challenges. Projects are delayed. Growth plans are postponed. Costs increase as employers compete for scarce skills or rely on overtime, contractors and short-term fixes simply to stay operational.

In a small economy, these effects compound quickly.

Skills shortages also have broader consequences. They place sustained pressure on existing workers, driving burnout and higher turnover. Wage growth can outpace productivity, contributing to inflation and higher prices. Service quality declines, and communities feel the impact.

This challenge is intensifying nationally. As baby boomers retire in large numbers, all regions of Australia are adjusting to major labour market change. For the NT, with its smaller and more mobile workforce, the effects are more immediate and more pronounced.

Migration has always been central to the Territory’s workforce and economic development. The NT’s vibrant multicultural community is not just a social strength, it is an economic one. Skilled migrants support essential services, enable businesses to operate and contribute directly to productivity and population stability.

However, migration settings must work for regional economies. Pathways that are slow, uncertain or overly complex undermine the very benefits migration is intended to deliver, particularly for small and medium-sized employers.

Importantly, this is no longer simply a matter of filling vacancies. Whole economies are now competing for labour.

When regions get their settings right, the benefits extend well beyond business. Stronger economies deliver higher living standards, and the taxes raised help fund health, education and other community services. Get the settings wrong, and it becomes an exercise in frustration, plenty of effort, but little progress.

Business owners and managers must play an active role in shaping future workforce policy. Those at the coalface understand what skills are needed, where systems fail and what incentives actually work. Policymakers need that input if reforms are to succeed.

DMBG believes the Northern Territory offers Australians career opportunities and lifestyle benefits that few regions can match. But belief alone is not enough. We must tell that story clearly, reduce barriers and be prepared to compete hard for talent.

The future prosperity of the Territory – and the wellbeing of its communities – depends on getting this right.

MEDIA STATEMENT | DMBG welcomes the return of international Test cricket as a major win for the Territory economy

Mon, 02 Feb 2026 06:46:00 GMT

The Darwin Major Business Group (DMBG) has welcomed the announcement by the NT Government that international Test cricket will return to the Northern Territory in 2026, describing it as a significant boost for business confidence, visitation, and economic activity across the Top End.

The Test match, along with a multi-year schedule of international fixtures, reinforces Darwin’s growing reputation as a capable and competitive host of world-class sporting and business events.

A DMBG spokesperson said securing a major international Test match was about far more than sport.

“Events of this scale deliver immediate economic benefits for accommodation providers, hospitality venues, transport operators and retailers, while also strengthening Darwin’s national and international profile as a destination to do business, invest and visit,” the spokesperson said.

“From a business perspective, major events are proven economic stimulators. They fill hotel rooms, support jobs, and inject confidence into the local economy.”

DMBG noted the Test match announcement builds on a strong pipeline of major events delivered, including:

The successful return of international T20 cricket, generating millions in economic activity
The MXGP of Australia , which brought global exposure and strong visitation outcomes
Continued support for the Supercars , a cornerstone event for Darwin’s dry-season economy
High-profile sporting and entertainment events that help position Darwin as a year-round events destination.

“What business wants to see is consistency and follow-through,” the spokesperson said.

“This announcement signals growing confidence in the Territory’s ability to host complex, high-value events that deliver real returns for the economy.”

DMBG also highlighted the broader opportunities that flow from major sporting events, including corporate travel, business delegation visits, and the ability to attract conferences, incentives and business events alongside headline fixtures.

“When major events are leveraged well, they create a halo effect - encouraging repeat visitation, future investment and new business activity,” the spokesperson said.

“That’s where the long-term economic dividend lies.”

The DMBG congratulates the Northern Territory Government, event partners and sporting bodies involved, and encourages continued collaboration with the private sector to maximise the commercial and economic benefits of major events for Territorians.

Opinion Pieces & Commentary | Strong employment reinforces the case for policy certainty and investment confidence

Tue, 27 Jan 2026 01:43:00 GMT

Drawn from analysis by local economist Dave Malone

The latest employment data released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) confirms that labour market conditions remain strong nationally and in the Northern Territory.

Across Australia:

Unemployment sits at 4.1%
Total employment rose to 14.68 million, up 0.4% on November and 1.1% over the year
Hours worked increased to 2.001 billion, up 8 million hours month-on-month and 1% year-on-year.

This level of labour market strength reinforces a key message for policymakers: the economy continues to operate with underlying momentum. With inflation still outside the Reserve Bank of Australia target range, and employment demand remaining firm, the scope for stimulatory policy settings is narrowing.

From an industry and business perspective, this underscores the importance of policy certainty, disciplined fiscal settings and a clear pipeline of investable projects, particularly those that unlock private capital rather than crowd it out.

Northern Territory implications

In the NT, employment rose to 147,100, a 1.4% increase in a single month. Only Western Australia recorded stronger monthly growth.

Unemployment fell to 3.9%, reinforcing that labour demand remains robust despite broader cost pressures.

While the DMBG cautions against drawing firm conclusions from a single month of Territory data, given its volatility, this result is a positive signal following a relatively subdued employment year in 2025.

For the Territory, sustained employment growth will depend on:

Continued investment certainty
Timely delivery of enabling infrastructure
Workforce settings that support business growth rather than constrain it
Strong labour market outcomes are not accidental.

They are the product of confidence, capital deployment and policy settings that encourage businesses to invest, employ and expand.

OpEd | Making the quiet case for Territory economic growth

Mon, 12 Jan 2026 06:49:00 GMT

This DMBG opinion piece was published in the NT News on 12 January 2026.

Strip away the labels and the Darwin Major Business Group (DMBG) exists for one reason: economic growth in the Northern Territory.

The DMBG was established in 2017, at a time when the Territory was confronting familiar challenges: weak private investment, stagnant population growth, rising costs of doing business, and a persistent gap between economic ambition and delivery.

Its formation reflected a view shared by senior business leaders that the Territory needed a small, disciplined, business-led forum focused squarely on economic growth; not politics, not ideology, and not daily commentary.

DMBG exists to advocate for policies and decisions that support sustainable economic growth in the Territory. Growth that creates jobs, attracts investment, improves productivity and strengthens the Territory’s long-term financial position, the fundamentals. That growth is expected to occur within the community’s normal standards for environmental responsibility and social progress, because long-term economic success depends on both.

The Group is deliberately small. Membership is by invitation, with an expectation that members contribute time, experience and strategic insight. Members include locally headquartered companies and national firms with a substantial, long-term operating presence in the Territory. The common thread is commitment to the NT economy, not corporate scale. That distinction matters.

The Northern Territory has always relied on external capital. From pastoral expansion, to mining, to defence and major infrastructure, the Territory’s economic progress has depended on investment decisions made well beyond our borders. The question has never been whether outside capital should be involved. The real question is whether the Territory positions itself well enough to attract it, retain it, and convert it into lasting benefit for all Territorians.

That task is made harder by the gap between national rhetoric and national action. There is constant talk about the strategic importance of Northern Australia and the Northern Territory in particular. What is missing is Commonwealth funding and policy settings that reflect that rhetoric. Strategy papers do not build roads, deliver housing, reduce freight costs or unlock private investment.

The same pattern applies to structural reform. Proposals such as special tax or investment zones for Northern Australia surface regularly, are acknowledged as sensible responses to higher costs, and then quietly shelved. If the Northern Territory is genuinely regarded as nationally strategic, it should not be expected to compete on the same settings as lower-cost, better-serviced jurisdictions.

That is where the DMBG focuses its effort. The Group does not campaign on day-to-day political issues. It does not exist to generate headlines. Much of its work happens quietly: economic analysis, policy submissions, briefings with government, and direct engagement with decision-makers, often before an issue reaches public debate.

Since its establishment, the Group has consistently focused on core economic enablers: infrastructure investment, efficient and predictable regulation, competitive freight and logistics, workforce availability, energy security and policy stability. These issues rarely attract applause, but they determine whether projects proceed, stall or walk away.

The DMBG does not claim to speak for all business, nor does it try to. Its purpose is simpler, and harder: to speak plainly about economic challenges and consequences, even when that message is uncomfortable.

Talking up the Territory is easy; funding it, reforming it and backing it properly is harder and that is the gap that still needs closing.

MEDIA STATEMENT | Darwin Major Business Group supports Vopak’s new CO₂ terminal to deliver 1,000 Territory jobs

Fri, 07 Nov 2025 01:48:00 GMT

The Test match, along with a multi-year schedule of international fixtures, reinforces Darwin’s growing reputation as a capable and competitive host of world-class sporting and business events.

A DMBG spokesperson said securing a major international Test match was about far more than sport.

“From a business perspective, major events are proven economic stimulators. They fill hotel rooms, support jobs, and inject confidence into the local economy.”

DMBG noted the Test match announcement builds on a strong pipeline of major events delivered, including:

The successful return of international T20 cricket, generating millions in economic activity
The MXGP of Australia , which brought global exposure and strong visitation outcomes
Continued support for the Supercars, a cornerstone event for Darwin’s dry-season economy
High-profile sporting and entertainment events that help position Darwin as a year-round events destination.

“What business wants to see is consistency and follow-through,” the spokesperson said.

“This announcement signals growing confidence in the Territory’s ability to host complex, high-value events that deliver real returns for the economy.”

“When major events are leveraged well, they create a halo effect - encouraging repeat visitation, future investment and new business activity,” the spokesperson said.

“That’s where the long-term economic dividend lies.”

DMBG part of Territory business delegation in Pearl Harbor to secure US defence opportunities

Mon, 08 Sep 2025 05:42:00 GMT

A delegation of local Territory businesses and peak industry bodies, supported by DefenceNT, are currently in Pearl Harbor to participate in the Indo-Pacific Regional Summit , hosted by the American Society of Military Engineers.

The Summit kicked off today and will run up until 10 September. The event focuses on building capability and capacity in the region, much of which will be delivered through the US$15 billion Pacific Deterrence Initiative (PDI) Multi-Award Construction Contract (MACC).

This initiative directly aligns with the priorities identified in the DMBG’s AEC Report , which emphasises strengthening defence partnerships, securing investment, and maximising opportunities for Territory businesses.

The MACC presents opportunities for direct US investment in the NT, in addition to the United States Force Posture Initiatives (USFPI) infrastructure projects already underway.

The Pearl Harbor delegation includes DMBG members Sitzler , DCOH and Dave Malone, as well as Bear Claw , McMahon Services, the Industry Capability Network NT , Chamber of Commerce NT , Master Builders NT, DefenceNT and DefenceNT Strategy Group members from both Australia and the US.

Connections made through the NT-led Partnering for Strength workshop, held in the United States earlier this year, resulted in several US firms travelling to Darwin for NT Defence Week.

One of these firms, Texas-based SLSCO, has since commenced construction on a US$460 million (AUD$705million) project at RAAF Base Darwin.

The Territory’s construction industry is supporting SLSCO to deliver this significant project - the largest single USFPI infrastructure investment to date.

Local industry is also securing major contracts, with Sitzler delivering the AU$747 million Training Areas and Ranges Project, and DCOH delivering the AU$389 million Robertson Barracks Base Improvements.

Territory businesses have a proven track record of delivering world-class projects and are ready to support the US in delivering its works program.

DMBG | New Board Appointments

Thu, 04 Sep 2025 03:43:00 GMT

Darwin Major Business Group Ltd (DMBG) is pleased to announce its new Board of Directors, confirmed at the 2025 Annual General Meeting.

Our Board brings together leaders from across the Northern Territory’s major industries — construction, resources, retail, hospitality, aquaculture and property — all with a shared commitment to growing the Territory economy.

2025 DMBG Board of Directors

Steve Margetic (Chair) – Director, Margetic Sitzler. A long-standing Territory business leader with deep experience in construction and infrastructure.

Sam Jeffries (Deputy Chair) – General Manager, CGH CoreStaff. A respected recruitment and workforce industry leader supporting major NT projects.

Elysia Billingham – General Manager, Sentinel Property Group – Casuarina Square. Leading one of Darwin’s key retail and commercial precincts.

Vicki-Leigh Lettice – Franchisee, VIGR McDonald’s. A Territory business owner contributing to jobs, training, and community investment.

Kamal Ali – CEO, Kolsen Group. A Northern Territory-owned company delivering integrated services across facilities, security, and infrastructure.

Rob Porter – Executive General Manager, Airport Development Group NT. Driving the Territory’s aviation and logistics gateway through Darwin, Alice Springs, and Tennant Creek airports.

Dan Richards – CEO, Humpty Doo Barramundi. Building Australia’s largest barramundi farm and a flagship Territory aquaculture enterprise.

Peter Savoff – General Manager, Darwin Convention Centre. Bringing world-class business events to the Top End and supporting Darwin’s visitor economy.

Together, this Board will guide DMBG in its mission: driving investment, creating jobs, and strengthening the Northern Territory’s economy.

We sincerely thank outgoing Director Michael Sitzler for his service and contribution as Treasurer, particularly through a period of significant growth and major initiatives for the Group.

MEDIA STATEMENT | Darwin Major Business Group Ltd (DMBG) backs CLP planning reforms to reignite private investment and economic growth

Wed, 03 Sep 2025 11:01:00 GMT

The Darwin Major Business Group (DMBG) welcomes Vopak’s planned carbon dioxide import, storage and handling terminal at the Middle Arm Precinct – a project expected to create up to 1,000 local jobs and deliver significant long-term economic benefits for the Northern Territory.

This project aligns strongly with DMBG’s Over the Horizon report priorities, including accelerating private sector investment, fast-tracking major projects, workforce development, and leveraging the Territory’s strategic geographic location to build sustainable industries.

DMBG A/Chair Sam Jeffries said the Vopak announcement demonstrates how major projects can deliver tangible economic benefits for the Territory while advancing innovation and skills.

The Middle Arm facility will also support heavy industry by providing open-access infrastructure for carbon capture and storage (CCS), helping the Territory contribute to national decarbonisation goals while underpinning economic growth.

DMBG will continue to support initiatives that build investor confidence, strengthen local capability, and create lasting economic opportunities across the Territory.

“Vopak’s CO₂ terminal at Middle Arm is a positive step forward for the Territory. It drives private investment, creates local jobs, builds workforce skills, and strengthens our strategic role in the Asia-Pacific economy. This project is the type of forward-looking initiative highlighted in the Darwin Major Business Group’s Over the Horizon reports.

We also support the Territory Government’s decision to grant an exclusive ‘not-to-deal’ commitment to Vopak, sending a strong signal to investors that the Territory is open for business and committed to growing the energy sector.”

— Sam Jeffries, A/Chair, DMBG