The SPEAKER ( Ms AE Burke ) took the chair at 12:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
Aged Care (Living Longer Living Better) Bill 2013
Private Health Insurance Amendment (Lifetime Health Cover Loading and Other Measures) Bill 2012
Private Health Insurance Legislation Amendment (Base Premium) Bill 2013
The Government is firmly committed to retaining the existing private health insurance rebates.
So you will not wind back that 30% private health rebate, despite the fact that Labor has been ideologically opposed to it in the past?
No, we won't.
On many occasions for many months, Federal Labor has made it crystal clear that we are committed to retaining all of the existing Private Health Insurance rebates, including the 30 per cent general rebate and the 35 and 40 per cent rebates for older Australians.
Both my Shadow Minister for Health, Nicola Roxon, and I have made clear on many occasions this year that Federal Labor is committed to retaining the existing private health insurance rebates, including the 30 per cent general rebate and the 35 and 40 per cent rebates for older Australians.
We need to return to politics as a clash of principles and to get away from the notion that it is a clash only of warring personalities.
I grow tired of saying this—Labor is committed to the 30 per cent private health insurance rebate.
For all Australians who wanted to have private health insurance, the private health insurance rebate would have remained under a Labor government. I gave an iron-clad guarantee of that during the election.
The difference between Tony "rock solid, iron-clad" Abbott and me is that when I make an "iron-clad commitment", I actually intend on keeping it.
We've committed to it.
We've committed to the 30%. We've committed to the 35% and 40% for older Australians. It's similar to the safety net. We know that many people rely heavily on the assistance that is now provided and would not be able to have private health insurance if that rebate wasn't paid. And lifetime health cover and others that go with it, we are committed to those. We understand that Australia now has a mixed health system, both private and public, and we need them both to be strong in order for the community to be able to get the services.
On many occasions for many months, Federal Labor has made it crystal clear that we are committed to retaining all of the existing Private Health Insurance rebates …
The Private Health Insurance Rebate policy remains unchanged and will remain unchanged.
I, along with something like 5 million other people, insure to enable me to go to hospital on the day I want, at the time I want, and with a doctor I want. For me, that is absolutely vital
… … …
Like most people, I pay my dues to the National Health Service; I do not add to the queue, and if I said, 'Look, because I cannot come when you want me, I must come when I want to' you would accuse me of jumping the queue. I exercise my right as a free citizen to spend my own money in my own way, so that I can go in on the day, at the time, with the doctor I choose and get out fast.
Let's move to another integral part of the health system, the private health rebate, the 30% rebate. Labor has said, "Yes, we will keep it," but you have not said whether you will keep it in total. Can you say now that Labor, if elected, will maintain all of the ancillary measures that encompass the private health rebate?
NICOLA ROXON: Yes, I can. We've committed to it.
Yes, I can. We've committed to it.
The Private Health Insurance Rebate policy remains unchanged and will remain unchanged.
The Government is firmly committed to retaining the existing private health insurance rebates …
YOUR correspondent … should have no concern that Labor will "erode" or abolish the 30 per cent government rebate for private health insurance. Labor is committed to the maintenance of this rebate and I have given an ironclad guarantee—
of that on a number of occasions.
I have heard that more changes might soon be made to the Private Health Insurance Rebate, which will make it even more expensive for me to be insured.
I am emailing you to ask you to vote against these changes, as I am finding the increases in all the various costs which I now pay are making it considerably more difficult to budget.
If I do give up my Health Insurance I will need to go to a public hospital if I get sick, where the waiting lists are too long. Please do not vote for the legislation.
… agencies are tasked to protect our national security and I, frankly, find it astonishing that these agencies would have been effectively sequestered from funding to perform their tasks. I think it is disgraceful and it should be addressed.
… that is now happening—and that is completely unacceptable.
That so much of standing orders be suspended as would allow the Leader of the Opposition to address the House for three minutes to advise whether he accepts scientific evidence on climate change and advise whether he will commit to a reduction of five per cent in carbon emissions.
… they are either deluding themselves, and at the same time the Australian public, if they think a FTTN will deliver high-speed broadband to rural and regional areas, or they are being deliberately deceitful and are trying to trick the public into supporting a plan they know is flawed.
Tax Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy) Bill 2013
Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (2013 Measures No. 2) Bill 2013
Corporations and Financial Sector Legislation Amendment Bill 2013
Statute Law Revision Bill 2013
Not-for-profit Sector Freedom to Advocate Bill 2013
That the bills be referred to the Federation Chamber for further consideration.
The urgent need for real political donation reform.
3.1 The Parties will work together and with other parliamentarians to:
a) Establish a Leaders' Debate Commission—
b) Seek immediate reform of funding of political parties and election campaigns by legislating to lower the donation disclosure threshold from an indexed $11,500 to $1,000; to prevent donation splitting between different branches of political parties; to ban foreign donations; to ban anonymous donations over $50; to increase timeliness and frequency of donation disclosure; to tie public funding to genuine campaign expenditure and to create a 'truth in advertising' offence in the Commonwealth Electoral Act.
Senator RYAN: Thank you, Mr Constable. Senator Brown, I understand, was involved in discussions—and I am using as less inflammatory language as I can—with Mr Wood about the donation, was he not?
Mr Constable: At the time of making the donation?
Senator RYAN: Yes.
Senator RYAN: Whose decision was it not to disclose it prior to the election?
Mr Constable: That was really out of respect to the donor. Yes, we have an aim to improve the disclosure regime. We have an internal policy within the party which looks at how to review as best we can within the resources we have available the capacity of the donor and the alignment of the donor with the aims of the party, and then we have a rule about disclosing donations well in advance of what is currently required.
Wood has certainly forged a unique path and his donation to the Greens is hardly typical of Australian corporate philanthropy, but it is not woolly do-gooding either. He saw the $1.6 million donation as a defensive move that saved him many millions of dollars.
‘I was a bit concerned that if the Coalition got in a lot of my investments in environmental causes would have been down the plughole,’ he says. ‘It will hopefully save me a whole lot of money in fighting other environmental wars or battles.’
… could you tell me what influence he has exerted as a result of his donation? You would, like others, assert that we have to restrain donations because they influence political parties. Could you tell me how Mr Wood has influenced your party and what gain he has had from that?
Mr Constable: I would say that he has not exerted any influence on the party.
Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Compliance Measures No. 2) Bill 2013
Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblower Protection) Bill 2012
Private Health Insurance Amendment (Lifetime Health Cover Loading and Other Measures) Bill 2012
Private Health Insurance Legislation Amendment (Base Premium) Bill 2013
The truth is that I never had a secret plan to scrap the private health insurance rebate …
For all Australians who wanted to have private health insurance, the private health insurance rebate would have remained under a Labor government. I gave an iron-clad guarantee of that during the election.
The government is firmly committed to retaining the existing private health insurance rebates.
The Private Health Insurance rebate policy remains unchanged and will remain unchanged.
International Fund for Agricultural Development Amendment Bill 2012
The House divided. [17:24]
(The Speaker—Ms Anna Burke)
That this bill be now read a third time.
Parliamentary Service Amendment (Parliamentary Budget Officer) Bill 2013
A policy that a Parliamentary party has publicly announced it intends to seek to have implemented after the election.
Therefore finding $50, 60 or 70 billion is about identifying waste and identifying areas where you do not need to proceed with programs.
We came out with the figure, right?
I can say on behalf of David Tune, the secretary of the department of finance, and myself—and get this right—were PEFO to have been released on the 14th of May it would have contained the numbers that were in the budget.
I would have expected Martin Parkinson to say nothing different yesterday because he is—quite appropriately—a servant of the Government.
(1) Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 16), after item 2, insert:
2A Section 7
Insert:
election commitment , in relation to a general election, means a policy that a Parliamentary party has publicly announced it intends to seek to have implemented after the election.
(2) Schedule 1, item 5, page 3 (lines 27 and 28), omit "publicly announced policies", substitute "election commitments".
(3) Schedule 1, item 10, page 5 (line 33), after "setting out", insert ", for each designated Parliamentary party".
(4) Schedule 1, item 10, page 6 (lines 1 to 10), omit paragraphs 64MA(1)(a) and (b), substitute:
(a) costings of all the election commitments of that party that the Parliamentary Budget Officer, in his or her best professional judgement, reasonably believes would have a material impact on the Commonwealth budget sector and Commonwealth general government sector fiscal estimates for the current financial year and the following 3 financial years; and
(b) the total combined impact those election commitments would have on the Commonwealth budget sector and Commonwealth general government sector fiscal estimates for the current financial year and the following 3 financial years.
(5) Schedule 1, item 10, page 6 (lines 11 to 13), omit note 1, substitute:
Note 1: The post‑election report must be prepared in accordance with section 64MAA.
(6) Schedule 1, item 10, page 6 (after line 39), after subsection 64MA(4), insert:
(5) Within 3 days after the end of the caretaker period for the election, the Parliamentary Budget Officer must prepare, for each designated Parliamentary party, a list in writing of all the election commitments of that party that the Parliamentary Budget Officer, in his or her best professional judgement, reasonably believes would have a material impact on the Commonwealth budget sector and Commonwealth general government sector fiscal estimates for the current financial year and the following 3 financial years.
(6) In preparing the list of election commitments of a designated Parliamentary party under subsection (5), the Parliamentary Budget Officer must have regard to:
(a) any list of policies given to the Parliamentary Budget Officer by the party under subsection (3); and
(b) any public announcements made by the party before or during the caretaker period for the election.
However, the Parliamentary Budget Officer is not required to include any of those policies or public announcements in the list of election commitments prepared by the Parliamentary Budget Officer under subsection (5).
(7) As soon as practicable after preparing the list of election commitments of a designated Parliamentary party under subsection (5), but not later than 3 days after the end of the caretaker period for the election, the Parliamentary Budget Officer must:
(a) give the list to the party; and
(b) if the party has given the Parliamentary Budget Officer a list of policies under subsection (3) and the Parliamentary Budget Officer's list of election commitments is different from the party's list of policies—give the party a statement explaining the reasons for the difference.
(8) Within 3 days after a designated Parliamentary party receives the list of election commitments under subsection (7), the party must give the Parliamentary Budget Officer comments on the list.
(7) Schedule 1, item 10, page 7 (lines 1 to 16), omit subsections 64MA(5) and (6), substitute:
64MAA Requirements for post ‑election report of election commitments
(1) The Parliamentary Budget Officer must comply with this section in preparing the post‑election report for a general election required by subsection 64MA(1).
(2) The Parliamentary Budget Officer may, but is not required to, take account of any comments given to the Parliamentary Budget Officer under subsection 64MA(8).
(3) The post‑election report must:
(a) set out any comments given to the Parliamentary Budget Officer by a designated Parliamentary party under subsection 64MA(8); and
(b) if a designated Parliamentary party did not give the Parliamentary Budget Officer any comments under that subsection—include a statement to that effect.
(4) The post‑election report:
(a) must not include costings of election commitments other than:
(i) those in the list prepared by the Parliamentary Budget Officer under subsection 64MA(5); and
(ii) those referred to in any comments given to the Parliamentary Budget Officer under subsection 64MA(8); and
(b) in relation to each election commitment for which a costing is included in the report:
(i) must include an explanation of the reason the Parliamentary Budget Officer decided that the commitment was an election commitment (as defined in section 7) and that a costing of the election commitment should be included in the report; and
(ii) must state the source (or sources) of information from which the Parliamentary Budget Officer identified the election commitment.
(5) The post‑election report does not have to include information that the Parliamentary Budget Officer considers should not be included because:
(a) it is confidential commercial information; or
(b) its disclosure in the report could prejudice national security.
Note: The post‑election report must not include any information given to the Parliamentary Budget Officer by the Head of a Commonwealth body under subsection 64MB(4), if the Head requested that the information be kept confidential under subsection 64MB(5) (see subsection 64V(4A)).
(6) If the Parliamentary Budget Officer does not have sufficient information, or has not had sufficient time, to assess the cost of any election commitment, the Parliamentary Budget Officer may reflect this in the post‑election report.
(8) Schedule 1, item 10, page 7 (lines 19 to 29), omit subsection 64MB(1), substitute:
(1) If the Parliamentary Budget Officer needs more information about an election commitment of a designated Parliamentary party for the purpose of preparing the post‑election report required by subsection 64MA(1), the Parliamentary Budget Officer may ask any of the following for that information:
(a) an authorised member of the Parliamentary party that made the election commitment;
(b) any other person who the Parliamentary Budget Officer believes, on reasonable grounds, has been associated with the calculation, review or announcement of the financial implications of the election commitment.
(9) Schedule 1, item 10, page 8 (lines 25 and 26), omit paragraph 64MB(7)(b), substitute:
(b) the policy is an election commitment that is to be included in the post‑election report;
(10) Schedule 1, item 10, page 9 (lines 4 and 5), omit "a post‑election report under section 64MA", substitute "the post‑election report required by subsection 64MA(1)".
(11) Schedule 1, item 10, page 9 (lines 8 to 14), omit subsection 64MC(2), substitute:
(2) At least 48 hours before publicly releasing the post‑election report under subsection (1), the Parliamentary Budget Officer must give each designated Parliamentary party a copy of the part of the report setting out the costings of that party's election commitments and the information required under paragraph 64MA(1)(b) in relation to those election commitments.
(12) Schedule 2, page 11 (after line 2), after the heading to Schedule 2, insert:
Parliamentary Service Act 1999
1A Paragraph 65A(2)(c)
Omit "writing; and", substitute "writing.".
1B Paragraph 65A(2)(d)
Repeal the paragraph.
(13) Schedule 2, item 1, page 11 (table item 9), omit the table item, substitute:
That this bill be read a third time.
Australian Jobs Bill 2013
We … strongly disagree with the mechanisms proposed in the policy … We would urge government to pursue a far less costly, and more effective way of achieving these policy objectives.
… this type of intervention is unnecessary, and indeed deeply patronising to the sector—
…compliance costs will increase, again, … without commensurate additional benefit to Australian industry.
It does not provide adequate justification for the increase in costs.
… the Bill should not proceed in its current form. The Government has not presented a persuasive case for a legislated instrument on local industry participation. Instead, the Federal Government should acknowledge that there are already a number of policies in place to address local industry participation, that local content penetration in major projects is significant, and looks to ways of coordinating these efforts more effectively as a means of promoting full, fair and reasonable opportunity for local suppliers.
… the proposed … bill … only adds to the regulatory red-tape and cost of projects which are becoming increasingly marginal as a result of Australia’s high cost structure, regulatory burden, tax regime and currency exchange rate.
APPEA considers that the proposed legislative approach is unlikely to significantly increase opportunities beyond those created by the extensive efforts already employed by the oil and gas industry to provide full, fair and reasonable opportunity to local suppliers.
… what should concern the Government is that a large 2.305 million Australians (18.2% of the workforce) were unemployed or under-employed in March …
The proposal to embed public servants inside companies is both unnecessary, unwarranted and inefficient.
Australian mining companies use more than 80 per cent local goods and services.
We are already buying Australian when it makes good business sense to do so.
The Bill does not pass the test of good legislation—the problem is poorly defined, the costs and risks of the Bill are understated and the costs and benefits of sensible, alternative policy options have not been properly assessed.
... only adds to the regulatory red-tape and cost of projects which are becoming increasingly marginal as a result of Australia's high cost structure, regulatory burden, tax regime and currency exchange rate.
... establishes a worrying new precedent for government intervention ... This will add to Australia's reputation as a costly and unpredictable place to invest in major capital projects. The introduction of a new regulator to oversee project procurement risks creating an antagonistic instead of a cooperative and constructive relationship with business.
Overall, APPEA does not believe that a case has been made to justify the imposition of a complex and potentially time consuming regulatory process.
… increase complexity, uncertainty and the cost of compliance.
The House divided. [20:05]
(The Speaker—Ms Anna Burke)
(1) Clause 8, page 12 (lines 15 and 16), omit subclause (2), substitute:
(2) For the purposes of this Act, major project threshold amount means:
(a) for the period of 10 years starting on the day on which this section commences—$250 million; and
(b) after the end of that period:
(i) $250 million; or
(ii) if the legislative rules specify another amount—that other amount.
(2) Clause 8, page 14 (after line 13), at the end of the clause, add:
Project may be deemed to be major project in special and extraordinary circumstances
(11) The Minister may, by legislative instrument, declare that a specified project is a major project for the purposes of this Act if the Minister is satisfied that:
(a) project expenditure as referred to in subsection (1) is or will be less than the major project threshold amount; and
(b) there are special and extraordinary circumstances that make it appropriate to treat the project as a major project.
(12) The legislative instrument may specify that the declaration is subject to any conditions imposed by the Authority, including conditions that the Minister directs the Authority to impose.
Project proponent may request that project be treated as major project
(13) A project proponent may, in writing, request the Authority to treat the proponent's project as a major project for the purposes of this Act, if the project proponent believes that:
(a) project expenditure as referred to in subsection (1) is or will be less than the major project threshold amount; but
(b) project expenditure is or will be at least $50 million.
(14) The Authority may:
(a) reject the request; or
(b) accept the request and declare, in writing, that the project is a major project for the purposes of this Act.
(15) The declaration may be subject to conditions imposed by the Authority and specified in the declaration.
That this bill be now read a third time.
That business intervening before notice No. 1, government business, be postponed until a later hour this day.
That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the private Members’ business notice relating to the disallowance of the Building Code 2013, dated 25 January 2013, made under the Fair Work (Building Industry) Act 2012 and presented to the House on 6 February 2013, being called on immediately.
That the Building Code 2013, dated 25 January 2013, made under the Fair Work (Building Industry) Act 2012 and presented to the House on 6 February 2013, be disallowed.
The House divided. [21:15]
(The Speaker—Ms Anna Burke)
Tax Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy) Bill 2013
That this bill be now read a third time.
Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (2013 Measures No. 2) Bill 2013
That this bill be now read a third time.
Corporations and Financial Sector Legislation Amendment Bill 2013
That this bill be now read a third time.
Statute Law Revision Bill 2013
That this bill be now read a third time.
Not-for-profit Sector Freedom to Advocate Bill 2013
That this bill be now read a third time.
Corporations Amendment (Simple Corporate Bonds and Other Measures) Bill 2013
That this bill be now read a third time.
If consumer confidence falters, Australia will have nothing more than a mandatory superannuation system which offers insufficient incentive for additional voluntary contributions …
… federal Coalition leaders, backed by Tony Abbott, urged their state allies to unlock huge gas reserves …
… urged Mr O'Farrell and his ministers to act urgently …
FEDRAL Leader of The Nationals Warren Truss has today outlined a blueprint for coal seam gas development in Australia.
Mr Joyce told The Echo that CSG is a hot button issue for the upcoming election. He said however that many Byron Shire residents may not agree with his view that the CSG industry should continue.
'We shouldn't have a moratorium,' he said …
We will work to fix these issues should we succeed later this year.
Without a cap on the amount that can be claimed under this deduction, it's possible to make large claims for expenses such as first class airfares, five star accommodation and expensive courses.
The Medical Board of Australia and medical colleges require doctors to maintain their skills through continuing professional development, while hospitals have in place credentialing systems as part of quality assurance arrangements. The cost of the education and training required to comply with these regimens are significant and generally well above $2000 per annum. For example, the Australian and New Zealand Surgical Skills Education and Training (ASSET) program cost is $3280, the Care of the Critically Ill Surgical Patient course cost is $2735, while a GP attending the Clinical Emergency Management Program (CEMP) workshops can face combined costs of over $3000. These types of courses equip doctors with essential skills in caring for patients, yet from the government's approach, they appear to be regarded as excessive. Doctors must also travel both within Australia and overseas to learn about the latest medical research and innovations, innovative surgery techniques, and advances in overall patient care.
Rural doctors are often unable to access this type of training locally and would seem to be particularly penalised by the government's policy change. The government's policy will hit junior doctors, salaried doctors, GPs and other specialists alike and is simply not in the public interest. It will create a huge disincentive for doctors to pursue specialised education that could help save lives and improve the quality of life for many Australians.
This initiative is mean-spirited, short-sighted and deeply disturbing. This policy is the antithesis of supporting a 'knowledge nation'. No profession better exemplifies lifelong education, teaching and learning than ours,—
That is, the medical profession—
and this proposed budget cut sends the message loud and clear that the Labor Government does not value education.
Let's get dressed in pink and white
And put on our comfy shoes
Put on our make-up, grab our specs
And go out and spread the news
About this city, which we love,
And all it has to give.
What a wonderful place to visit
And better still, to live
We tell about the north and south,
And always include the west,
So that folk can choose to visit
Whichever they fancy best.
Some people ask us why we do this.
Why do we even bother?
The smiling faces when we meet says,
The reward is each other.
So it would be an agreement between you and your Apple US parent in terms of obtaining hardware to sell here. iPads, iPhones, Macbooks are all purchased from your overseas parent?
Correct. Apple Australia would purchase hardware and software from Apple overseas.
We have very robust and deep accounting systems in place to ensure that all of the revenues associated with doing business in Australia are fairly reported and all of the cost of sale in terms of the hardware, transformation costs and shipping costs are fairly reported …
Certainly at a global level we are setting consistent product costs for internal use around the world. Those are a function of a number of different things but I am not privy to the underlying details within the product costs.
We set our prices worldwide from Cupertino with input from the local team ...
… have very robust and deep accounting systems.
There were more than 67 different nationalities at Ford … Lots of Italians, Greeks, Turks, and Vietnamese. Management ran different programs to teach us English, they understood English was our second language.
Ford is like my home. I spent three quarters of my time there. My friend got me a job there and I helped my other friends get jobs there. I know people who have worked there for 47 and 50 years, we worked like a family.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms K Livermore) took the chair at 12:10.
Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2013-2014
Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2013-2014
Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2013-2014
Inclusion of this section on the national road network ensures that federal funds can be allocated to major works complementing the State Government's own funding and forward commitments for the upgrade of the Anzac Highway and Sturt Road intersections. These two locations are the two busiest intersections and most congested on the corridor. The next largest intersection, Grand Junction Road, is located at the far end of the route and has also been identified for improvements in the short term.
Tax Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy) Bill 2013
Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (2013 Measures No. 2) Bill 2013
Corporations and Financial Sector Legislation Amendment Bill 2013
Statute Law Revision Bill 2012
Principles based legislation is the underlying mantra of the Westminster system. They go on:
Plain language drafting refers to a range of techniques designed to create legislation that is readable and easy to use by the relevant audience(s) for that legislation.
At the level of vocabulary, plain language drafters try to use words and expressions that are familiar to everyone … At the level of syntax, plain language drafters try to create sentence patterns that are easy for the average person to process.
… … …
Plain language drafters also draw on the research and insights of experts in document design. They pay as much attention to fonts and white space as they do to choice of words. They try to devise methods of presenting material visually that will assist the reader to use the statute book effectively, and with minimum effort.
Finally, plain language drafters try to provide information that will help readers to interpret the text. Such information typically takes the form of purpose statements, explanatory notes, examples, summaries, overviews and the like
Not-for-profit Sector Freedom to Advocate Bill 2013
That this bill be now read a second time.
Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2013-2014
Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2013-2014
Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2013-2014
These advance auctions in the Budget forecast years are based upon average EU-ETS market futures prices for 2013-14 and 2014-15. However, carbon prices in the Budget projection years are not forecasts of carbon prices.
Projections for carbon prices for emissions liabilities for 2015-16 and 2016-17 incorporate the straightforward approach of a linear transition from market prices in 2014-15 to the modelled price of $38 in 2019-20 …
The longer-term modelled carbon prices from SGLP reflect the price levels required to meet long-term global environmental goals as well as the international commitment pledges for 2020 …
When the current Prime Minister and the Treasurer and others tell you that the Australian economy is doing better than most—they are right.
While it is easy, and understandable, that you should be pessimistic about this government, everyone should be optimistic about our country.
We've always been committed to a Palmerston hospital. We've never suggested in any way shape or form that there wouldn't be a Palmerston hospital but I guess coming into government we've realised that what Labor was putting forward was would be inadequate over the coming decades. That was fairly short sighted so we've committed to spending $5 million or less hopefully on the scoping study just to make sure we get it right. We think that it's absolutely essential that we do get it right not just that the people of Palmerston and the rural area but the whole of the greater Darwin area.
We've committed to a two-hospital system in the greater Darwin area. There will always be a Royal Darwin Hospital and there will always be a hospital placed within that Palmerston area to service the future growth of the greater Darwin area but yes, the scoping study will be available for public scrutiny and inspection. We think that really the plans that Labor put forward really don't take into account the demographic forecast for the area satisfactorily.
In respect of the involvement of the Royal Australian Air Force in the Melbourne Grand Prix 2013,
(1) what will it entail;
(2) what is the estimated total cost;
(3) will part of the estimated total cost be covered by outside persons or organisations; if so, what proportion; and
(4) what is the estimated cost of the F/A 18 flyover (a) in total, and (b) to the Government.
(1) Air Force provided the following support to the Formula One Grand Prix 2013:
(a) On 14 to 17 March 2013 RAAF Roulettes provided an aerial display for 15 minutes each day;
(b) On 16 and 17 March 2013 an F/A-18A/B Hornet provided a ten minute aerial display each day.
(c) On 15 and 17 March 2013, an Air Force Pilot signed autographs and conducted education seminars for approximately 30 minute period on both days.
(2) The total estimated cost for Air Force support to the Formula One Grand Prix 2013 is $113,895.60.
(3) There will be no part of the estimated total cost covered by outside persons or organisations.
(4) In total, the estimated cost for the F/A-18A/B flyover in support of the Formula One Grand Prix is.
(a) $95,190.60 in total, and
(b) $95,190.60 to the Government.
In the last ten years, what total sum has the Government spent on the involvement of the Royal Australian Air Force in the Melbourne Grand Prix.
In the last 10 years, the total sum the Government has spent on the involvement of the Royal Australian Air Force in the Melbourne Grand Prix is $3,846,514.07.
The Royal Australian Air Force did not participate in this event in 2004, 2009 and 2011.
What number of premises is leased by his department, and (a) what is the (i) per square metre, and (ii) total rental, cost per financial year for each premises, and (iii) address of each premises, and (b) in instances where the premises joins another agency, what financial contribution is made by that agency.
The number of premises leased by my department is eight (8).
Please refer to the table below for details.