I believe Kon and Rolf are both substantially correct about some of this, even though at times they seem to contradict each other. It is pretty apparent that during the first five or so years of the NT ALP government it wilfully imitated the CLP governments of the previous 23 years in policy priority terms, and went for an "economic development first" approach, which necessarily favoured the Darwin region and mining companies. Their electoral strategy appeared to be to simply secure the Darwin/Palmerston marginal seats, buttressed by the bush seats they presumed had nowhere else to go, as a home base for governing, by supporting improved living standards for urban workers, particularly the relatively high proportion working in government departments, the vast majority of whom live in Darwin.
As with Porky Everingham, and many other CLP leaders since, the ALP's first Chief Minister Clare Martin seemed to think that only this economic development strategy would provide a base from which Aboriginal disadvantage could be chipped away at, incrementally, by a gradual improvement in services and education, and maybe even jobs. She and those around her seemed to lack any sense of the urgency in the situation, or the need for a more comprehensive strategy, such as that outlined for Aboriginal services and development in the Party’s official Platform. They ignored, or failed to recognise the gravity of the downward spiral of complex inter-related problems throughout most of the Aboriginal community. The crises of child neglect, domestic violence and abuse of women were just the tip of this mighty big iceberg.
The events of 2006 and 2007 brought this situation to a quick end, and almost sank the ship of Martin and the NT ALP government. The Aboriginal caucus rebelled, Martin lost her job, and the Henderson government was forced to give up much of its budget autonomy and comply with Commonwealth demands to contribute to programs for development of essential infrastructure and services for the bush.
So now, since 2007, you have the Commonwealth paying for greatly expanded health, education, policing and other safety mechanisms, early childhood, child welfare and youth programs, housing and related essential services and more throughout the bush and in the regional towns such as Alice Springs, to compensate for the previous 29 years of electorally cynical neglect of these needs by both sides of NT politics.
This is accompanied by the NTG being forced to pick up ancillary costs associated with many of these Commonwealth funded programs, and also being forced to include provision for their continuation in their forward planning. (It appears that Terry Mills has little comprehension of this electoral lead in his budgeting saddle bags, given his obsession with quickly eliminating the NT government debt, despite the necessity of continuing just about all these programs and his ignition of unrealistic expectations in Aboriginal communities about overthrowing the unwieldy and virtually unworkable Shire system).
In this sense, Kon is correct: there are “new clinics, schools, housing and the expansion of services in the communities”, but not, in the vast majority of instances, because the NTG decided that it was their priority to put them there, but rather because the Commonwealth decided this and tried to force the Henderson government to accept that they had to pick up the ongoing costs of these services and make some token contribution to their creation.
Regardless of the details of who did what in its production, the Henderson government did virtually nothing to claim due credit by clarifying its contributing role in the creation of this vast web of new investment and services, most of which were badly needed and are appreciated on the ground. Nor did they even attempt to convey a broad understanding of the true scope, cost and benefits of all this investment to their bush constituents. They thereby displayed not just their ineptitude, but also their government’s fatal flaw: it was still galvanised by thoughts of the potential punishing power of Darwin voters, and completely unaware of the potential retribution from bush voters who felt slighted by apparent neglect and disregard. It should have celebrated its partnership with the Commonwealth, and the bringing of much needed extra health, education, housing and children’s services to the bush. Instead, it kept these achievements hidden under a bushel.
Vatskalis is also onto something when he states that factors other than political affiliations were important, although he may over-estimate the “family links and relationships”, and underestimate the importance of sheer organising power, resources and ambition.
The NT ALP government was far too beholden to party apparatchiks who valued the latest slick market research tactics from interstate and overseas, and had no knowledge of or feeling for communicating with or campaigning and delivering programs in remote Aboriginal communities, and in the end this was its undoing in a most spectacular way.

As for Gerritsen’s theory about Anderson persuading Mills to “allow the communities to select candidates”, and this being a significant plus, I’m not sure that this is correct, as there doesn’t seem to be much evidence to support it. Francis Maralampuwi Xavier may well have been favoured by his home community, in the sense that the Tiwi Land Council HQ seems to have endorsed him and helped fund his campaign, but in what sense was the community on the Tiwi Islands asked about him as a candidate, let alone the mainland parts of the Arafura electorate, prior to the actual election? Certainly Bess Price seems to have done well in most places other than her home community. Larissa Lee’s home community lies outside the electorate in which she stood. Maybe Gerritsen has inside information about Wadeye and the partying mango farmer?