The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. John Hogg) took the chair at 12:30, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.
Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission Bill 2012
Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (Consequential and Transitional) Bill 2012
The creation of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profit Commission is the culmination of a long process and has broad support from the community and social services sector.
If we really want to support the NFP sector, the best way is to establish the ACNC, fulfilling the promise of all those inquiries and the desires of NFPs.
… strongly supports the ACNC Bills on the basis that they provide for the establishment of an independent and responsive regulator for the charities and not-for-profit sector.
I have little doubt that the vast majority of organisations are doing the right thing and are doing great work. The problem is that we cannot sort out the many good not-for-profit groups from the handful of bad ones or those who are underperforming. It is my belief that this threatens the donor-charity trust relationship within the sector at large.
It is here that government needs to step in and provide clarity where confusion prevails. After all, the government does have a legitimate interest in the not-for-profit sector, as the sector is the beneficiary of a raft of taxpayer funded subsidies handed out by government.
… … …
Charities have a good reputation but trust can very easily be lost. It is vitally important that the sector makes itself more efficient and transparent, lest the sector experiences a decline in trust. There is a role here for government to step in and promote high standards within the sector and to establish a clear, transparent regulatory regime that will allow Australian charities to thrive in the 21st century.
You are only going to achieve full red-tape reduction with the involvement of the states and territories.
The committee believes the fostering of an independent not-for-profit sector is essential, and supports this as an object of the Bill. Gag clauses are an objectionable feature of contracts with not-for-profit entities. They are particularly inappropriate in those contexts where a monopsony exists: where the government offering the contract is the only purchaser of services. The committee believes such clauses should not be introduced.
When it came along the street, I wasn't terribly excited. Now we are using it, I'm convinced it's the best thing since sliced bread. It's been a remarkable success for us.
Skype doesn't break up and fail like it used to. It's pretty important. We've got procurement links in China. I'm talking to people in America, Canada and Sweden. The NBN puts you in a better position to have an intelligent conversation.
Initially I thought it was a wicked waste of money and I just didn't understand it. Now that I've got on it, it's just made my life so much easier. I for one wasn't aware of its capabilities.
That the Senate take note of the minister's failure to provide either an answer or an explanation..
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Finance and Deregulation (Senator Wong) to a question without notice asked by Senator Brandis today relating to the Budget.
As promised, we will return the budget to surplus in 2012-13.
This budget is bringing the budget back into surplus in 2012-13—
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Science and Research (Senator Evans) to a question without notice asked by Senator Wright today relating to the white paper, Australia in the Asian Century and education.
That the Senate records its deep regret at the death, on 28 October 2012, of the Honourable Gordon Neil Bilney, former Minister and Member for Kingston, places on record its appreciation of his long and meritorious public service, and tenders its profound sympathy to his family in their bereavement.
I saw your letter today of 26 February. One of the great pleasures of private life is that I need no longer be polite to nincompoops, bigots, curmudgeons and twerps who infest local government bodies and committees such as yours. In the particular case of your committee, the pleasure is acute.
… he had a wonderful sense of humour; a dry sense of humour …
That the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement be authorised to hold a public meeting during the sitting of the Senate on Wednesday, 31 October 2012, from 12.45 pm, to take evidence for the committee's inquiry into the gathering and use of criminal intelligence.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Crossin for today, for personal reasons.
That the provisions of paragraphs (5) to (8) of standing order 111 not apply to the following bills, allowing them to be considered during this period of sittings:
Social and Community Services Pay Equity Special Account Bill 2012
Social and Community Services Pay Equity Special Account (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2012.
That the provisions of paragraphs (5) to (8) of standing order 111 not apply to the following bills, allowing them to be considered during this period of sittings:
Aviation Legislation Amendment (Liability and Insurance) Bill 2012
Federal Circuit Court of Australia Legislation Amendment Bill 2012
Higher Education Support Amendment (Maximum Payment Amounts and Other Measures) Bill 2012
Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Further 2012 Budget and Other Measures) Bill 2012.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) Friday, 26 October, was the celebration of Eid al-Adha, a special day the calendar for Muslim Australians,
(ii) 26 October marked the beginning of Eid al-Adha, or the Festival of Sacrifice, commemorating Ibrahim's (Abraham) willingness to sacrifice his son to God,
(iii) Eid al-Adha is a time of peace, respect, sharing, caring and donating to those in need for Muslims and, it is particularly special for Muslim children as it involves the exchanging of gifts and getting together with family, and
(iv) this significant time coincides with the annual Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia; and
(b) wishes all our Australian Muslim friends who are travelling to Mecca a safe trip on their way to and home from their spiritual journey.
Anti-Money Laundering Amendment (Gaming Machine Venues) Bill 2012
That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 , and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
The aim of the Anti-Money Laundering Amendment (Gaming Machine Venues) Bill 2012 is to reduce the activity of money laundering in gambling venues by amending the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 .
In September this year, journalists Chip Le Grand and Adam Shand from The Australian revealed that a Melbourne hotel had failed to act on suspicions of money laundering through its poker machines, even though there were records showing an individual and his family were claiming winnings of up to $40,000 per week.
Anyone who knows anything about poker machines will tell you these odds are impossible.
This article was only the most recent in a long history of stories and warnings about the vulnerabilities of poker machines to money launderers.
In 2010, Vanda Carson of the Sydney Morning Herald wrote that "industry sources estimate that nearly $2 billion a year is laundered through hotel, club and casino poker machines and gambling chips. As much as 40 percent of this is laundered in New South Wales."
Whilst that figure cannot be independently verified, it does highlight a systemic issue—the ease with which money can be laundered through poker machines.
According to the current laws, gambling venue owners are supposed to report suspicious transactions, but there is no legal obligation.
Usually, the most common way for criminals to launder money through the pokies is simply to load up the machine with a large amount of cash, play a few games and lose a small amount of money, and then cash out the remaining credits.
In New South Wales, for example, up to $10,000 can be loaded onto a machine at one time. If the amount is just under $10,000 it currently escapes the reporting requirements for AUSTRAC.
Depending on the regulations in each state, careful 'playing' can ensure the criminal walks out with thousands of dollars in 'clean' money.
A second option for criminals, usually used in combination with the first, is to wait around venues until a gambler wins a prize. Depending on the regulations, winnings over a certain amount are issued by cheque, to make sure that gamblers have a cooling-off period while the cheque processes, so they don't gamble their winnings.
Instead, criminals approach gamblers and offer to buy the cheques off them for cash (often at a discount), which the gambler can then immediately use to play. The launderers then cash the cheques, which have been signed over by the original claimant.
This bill aims to address both avenues through various measures.
Firstly, the bill inserts a new definition of 'gaming machine credit' to ensure that both winnings and unplayed credits are captured by the provisions in the bill.
Secondly, the bill inserts two new paragraphs into the definition of 'threshold transaction'. Under the Act, a threshold transaction is one that must be reported in the required form to AUSTRAC. This reporting usually includes relevant personal details and details of the transaction itself.
These two new paragraphs will mean that any payout of winnings or gaming machine credits totalling over $1,000 in a gambling venue will be a threshold transaction, and therefore reportable to AUSTRAC.
They also require the cashing of any cheque that is a payout from a gambling venue and where the cheque has been transferred to another person to be a threshold transaction.
It is important to note that the very nature of poker machines means this will not be an undue burden on venues. Poker machines rarely pay out in large amounts, and instead are generally programmed to provide smaller, interspersed wins in normal use.
Creating these two new definitions of threshold transactions will allow AUSTRAC access to information relating to large wins, and will show up particular patterns or habits that will be vital in the organisation’s crime prevention activities.
Thirdly, the bill also amends the Act so that the controller of a gaming machine venue will be considered to be providing a 'designated service' under the Act. This will mean controllers of gaming machine venues will be required to abide by the laws surrounding threshold transactions.
Lastly, the bill inserts a new subsection, which requires gaming machine venues to issue cheques for payouts of winnings or gaming machine credits over $1,000. The cheques must also indicate that they have been used for this purpose, so that they can be identified if signed over to another party. Failure to do so will result in two years' imprisonment or a fine of 120 penalty units.
Currently, poker machines are a soft target for money launderers. The ability to load them up with large amounts of cash, as well as the often lax regulations surrounding payouts, mean that launderers can, and do, take advantage of the system. The fact that no or very little face-to-face contact with staff is required also advantages criminals in these situations.
AUSTRAC already has regulations in place relating to some forms of gambling, including sports betting and casinos. These additional safeguards are a way to plug a loophole in the law, as well as protecting problem gamblers and venue owners.
Ultimately, poker machines cause enough harm in our communities without being a soft touch for crimes such as money laundering. This bill is an important step in reducing this risk.
That the Economics Legislation Committee be authorised to hold a private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) during the sitting of the Senate on Thursday, 1 November 2012, from 3.30 pm.
That the time for the presentation of the report of the Economics References Committee on the effects of the global financial crisis on the Australian banking sector be extended to 28 November 2012.
That the Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee be authorised to hold a public meeting during the sitting of the Senate on Tuesday, 30 October 2012, from 6.30 pm, to take evidence for the committee's inquiry into the performance of the Department of Parliamentary Services.
That the Select Committee on Electricity Prices be authorised to hold a private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) during the sitting of the Senate on Wednesday, 31 October 2012, from 9.30 am.
That the Senate—
(a) notes Bight Petroleum's referral of a proposed action under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the Act) (Reference number: 2012/9583) dated 15 October 2012, which sets out the company's intention to undertake seismic testing over a 3 000 sq km area to the west of Kangaroo Island between January and May 2013;
(b) recognises the ecological, economic and social importance of the Kangaroo Island canyons and pool, first and foremost for the Kangaroo Island community, but also for South Australia as a whole; and
(c) calls on the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (Mr Burke) to use his powers under the Act to reject Bight Petroleum's referral as clearly unacceptable.
The Senate divided. [16:15]
(The Deputy President—Senator Parry)
That the Senate—
(a) notes that, in addition to the $60 a week decrease to the base rate of their income support, some single parent families who are already juggling part-time work with caring can also expect to lose up to another $30 a week in concessions from 1 January 2013 as a result of new taper rates associated with the shift from Parenting Payment Single to Newstart; and
(b) calls on the Government to:
(i) model the impact of this policy on single parents and examine whether this perversely impacts on their workforce participation,
(ii) increase the single rate of Newstart and other allowances by $50 a week, and
(iii) stop attempting to achieve a surplus at the expense of low-income families.
The Senate divided. [16:19]
(The Deputy President—Senator Parry)
That the provisions of paragraphs (5) to (8) of standing order 111 not apply to the Dental Benefits Amendment Bill 2012, allowing it to be considered during this period of sittings.
Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:
The systemic Government waste and incompetence exposed at Senate Estimates, including the manifest failure of signature Rudd/Gillard election initiatives.
That procurement was for eight machines which was one for each of the staff kitchens. We did that obviously to provide a level of staff amenity but also because we thought it would be beneficial for productivity for staff to be able to buy their coffee on the premises rather than go out of the building.
Ms Roxon has done her high office and her reputation no favours by becoming mired in the messy legal fallout of Mr Slipper's ghastly text messages that fit the definition of "misogyny" in any dictionary.
Deep divisions have emerged in the federal government over the handling of the sexual harassment case against former speaker …with strong internal criticism of the role of Attorney-General Nicola Roxon.
Here are just some examples of Labor waste and mismanagement which was uncovered by the Coalition this week during Senate Estimates.
"They are disorganised, with no apparent leadership, no co-ordination, too individualistic, lots of wasted effort, poor timekeeping, meaning agencies had to drop off, [and] poor impact … [They used] bad tactics. Estimates is most effective when two or three co-ordinate an attack."
That the Senate take note of the document.
In 2009, the government convened the Pulp and Paper Industry Strategy Group to undertake a strategic review of Australia's pulp and paper industry.
The strategy group will run in parallel with the current company review, which is intended to be completed by the end of June.
The review and the strategy group report will give government, the North-West Coast community and the industry a clearer understanding of where things are at and what the industry may need to sustain its future.
Ordered that the report be printed.
Dental Benefits Amendment Bill 2012
That the Senate take note of the report.
Superannuation Laws Amendment (Capital Gains Tax Relief and Other Efficiency Measures) Bill 2012
Superannuation Auditor Registration Imposition Bill 2012
That these bills may proceed without formalities, may be taken together and be now read a first time.
That these bills be now read a second time.
SUPERANNUATION LAWS AMENDMENT (CAPITAL GAINS TAX RELIEF AND OTHER EFFICIENCY MEASURES) BILL 2012
This Bill amends various superannuation laws to implement a range of improvements to Australia's superannuation laws.
Schedule 1 reinstates the temporary tax relief for merging superannuation funds with some modifications. The tax relief will permit eligible entities to roll-over unrealised gains or losses on revenue and capital assets and allow the transfer of realised revenue losses and capital losses. This will ensure that certain tax considerations are not an impediment to superannuation funds seeking to merge and consolidate in response to the Stronger Super reforms, which will deliver benefits to members from the efficiency generated by the reforms.
Schedule 2 amends the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 to introduce a registration regime for auditors of self managed superannuation funds.
It delivers on a key part of the Government's 23 June 2012 announcement of a new SMSF auditor registration framework.
The Government's Super System Review found that while some approved auditors are subject to minimum competency standards through their professional association, not all approved auditors are subject to the same minimum competency standards, nor are they subject to the same enforcement actions.
The Self managed Superannuation Fund (SMSF) sector is the largest sector in the superannuation industry at some $400billion. The members of these funds are advised by a range of experts including lawyers, financial planners and accountants.
A key role is played by the 11,000 or so SMSF auditors. They play a vital role in maintaining the integrity of a major sector of the superannuation system. Each year, SMSF trustees are required to appoint an approved auditor to audit the financial reports and the operations of the fund. The auditor is required to assess the fund's overall compliance with the law and the fund's financial statements.
The annual audit provides assurance to the Government and the general public that SMSFs are complying with the sole purpose test, something that is particularly important given the amount of retirement savings held in SMSFs.
The amendments will introduce a registration regime for SMSF auditors, where auditors will be required to meet initial and ongoing requirements relating to their qualifications, competency and independence.
Transitional arrangements are being developed as part of the Regulations to give recognition to highly experienced, competent auditors, including registered company auditors.
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission will be the registration body for SMSF auditors and will be responsible for setting competency standards and taking enforcement action against auditors who have not met their obligations. The Australian Taxation Office will monitor auditor's compliance with relevant standards and refer any non compliant auditors to Australian Securities and Investments Commission for consideration of enforcement action.
SMSF auditor registration will increase the assurance that can be placed in the SMSF audit by ensuring that SMSF auditors are competent to detect and report contraventions of the superannuation law.
The legislation has been put together in consultation with members of the Joint Accounting Bodies.
Schedule 3 amends the tax law to expand the existing reporting obligation for superannuation providers. Under the revised obligations, superannuation providers will be required to provide statements for all members who held an interest in the superannuation plan at any time during a reporting period, not just those for whom contributions are received as is presently the case.
These amendments will allow the ATO to display more comprehensive superannuation information to individuals and facilitate the consolidation of inactive accounts with a low balance. To the extent that this enables individuals to locate lost accounts, it will help improve individuals' retirement savings.
Schedule 4 of the Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Capital Gains Tax Relief and Other Efficiency Measures) Bill 2012 amends the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SIS Act) and the Retirement Savings Accounts Act 1997 (RSA Act) to improve the quality of information in the superannuation system, and facilitate fully effective e commerce.
As part of the Government's SuperStream package of reforms, a number of measures were announced to improve the efficiency of the superannuation system. The Government legislated standards for superannuation transactions in June this year, and this legislation will ensure the effectiveness of these standards.
It has been estimated that the Australian superannuation industry processes more than 100 million transactions annually. The potential gains to the system from effective e-commerce in superannuation are significant.
Currently poor member information quality leads to difficulties in allocating contributions, unnecessary duplicate accounts and a large amount of lost and unclaimed superannuation.
This legislation supports the industry in achieving the goals of effective e-commerce and improving information quality. The Commissioner of Taxation will provide two key services:
It is estimated that the SuperStream proposals could save the industry and, therefore, members of superannuation funds up to $1 billion per year. Much of the benefit of these savings should flow through to members in the form of lower fees and charges.
SUPERANNUATION AUDITOR REGISTRATION IMPOSITION BILL 2012
This bill provides for the imposition of fees relating to approved auditors of self managed superannuation funds.
In recognition of the important role self managed superannuation fund auditors play in the regulatory arrangements for self managed superannuation funds, the Government accepted the recommendation of the Super System Review to establish a registration regime for approved self managed superannuation fund auditors.
Self managed superannuation funds auditor registration will increase the assurance that can be placed in the self managed superannuation fund audit by ensuring that self managed superannuation fund auditors are competent to detect and report contraventions of the superannuation law.
This bill imposes some fees to help recover costs of establishing the self managed superannuation fund auditor registration regime.
Approved self managed superannuation fund auditors will be required to pay fees for certain things as part of the registration process. It is expected that applying for registration will cost $100, undertaking a competency exam will also cost $100 and submitting an annual statement to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission will cost $50. Approved self managed superannuation fund auditors will be liable for additional fees if they do not submit their annual statements on time or fail to notify the Australian Securities and Investments Commission of certain matters on time. The amount of these fees will depend on how late the statement or information is provided to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.
Certain searches of the Register of Approved self managed superannuation fund Auditors and Register of Disqualified self managed superannuation fund Auditors that the Australian Securities and Investments Commission keeps may also be subject to fees. These fees are based on cost recovery and will depend on the resources required to find information for the requested search. However, online searches of the register will be free.
Full details of this bill are contained in the explanatory memorandum.
Freedom of Information Amendment (Parliamentary Budget Office) Bill 2012
Law Enforcement Integrity Legislation Amendment Bill 2012
Superannuation Legislation Amendment (New Zealand Arrangement) Bill 2012
That these bills may proceed without formalities, may be taken together and be now read a first time.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION (PARLIAMENTARY BUDGET OFFICE) BILL 2012
This Government has established the Parliamentary Budget Office – an independent and non-partisan institution which will strengthen Australia's fiscal and budget frameworks.
The Parliamentary Budget Office's functions include: preparing budget analyses and policy costings on requests by individual senators and members; preparing submissions to inquiries of Parliamentary Committees; and, at its own initiative, conducting and publishing research on the budget and fiscal policy settings.
With the creation of the Parliamentary Budget Office all senators and members, for the first time, have access to independent and non partisan budget analyses and policy costings over the entire course of the three year electoral cycle.
A key element of the new arrangements are that outside of the caretaker period for a general election a senator or member can request that the Parliamentary Budget Office's services be provided on a confidential basis for policy costings.
The Parliamentary Budget Office is already an exempt agency under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act). However, the FOI Act does not currently provide a specific exemption for documents relating to requests from the Parliamentary Budget Office that may be held by departments and other agencies.
As a result, requests for information made to agencies by the Parliamentary Budget Office, and information provided to the Parliamentary Budget Office by agencies, may not be as fully protected from release under the FOI Act as they ought to be to give effect to the Parliamentary Budget Office's special position.
In addition, FOI requests may be made to agencies for the sole purpose of finding out whether or not the Parliamentary Budget Office has received a confidential request in relation to a particular matter. A response from an agency that documents could not be released because a relevant exemption applied would in effect confirm the existence of the documents and the fact that a confidential request had been made to the Parliamentary Budget Office.
Procedures and protocols between the Parliamentary Budget Office and departments have been established but this bill takes a further step in clarifying the appropriate protections.
The bill amends the FOI Act to provide an exemption for information held by departments and agencies that relates to a confidential request to the Parliamentary Budget Office. This will ensure that the integrity of the Parliamentary Budget Office's processes in these matters which are critical to the successful operation of the Parliamentary Budget Office will not be undermined.
The bill also amends section 25 of the FOI Act to provide that an agency is not required to give information as to the existence or non-existence of a document where it is exempt under the new provisions.
The bill also contains a consequential amendment to section 34 of the Privacy Act 1988. Section 34 of the Privacy Act 1988 provides that the Commissioner in carrying out functions under the Privacy Act 1988, for example investigating an act or practice of an agency that may be a breach of privacy, must not give a person any information as to the existence or non-existence of a document where it is exempt under the FOI Act.
It is proposed to amend section 34 to refer to the new Parliamentary Budget Office exemption, reflecting the amendment to section 25 of the FOI Act and ensuring that Parliamentary Budget Office documents are confidential.
Given the importance of this issue and the Parliamentary Budget Office's independence and integrity, it is proposed that the bill will operate retrospectively from the day after introduction.
The work of the Parliamentary Budget Office is undertaken for the benefit of the Parliament. These reforms are critical to the success of the independent Parliamentary Budget Office. They will enhance the operation of the Parliamentary Budget Office for senators and members from all political parties.
The establishment of the Parliamentary Budget Office has strengthened Australia's fiscal and budget frameworks by providing non-partisan and independent information to the Parliament on the budget, fiscal policy and financial implications of proposals.
These reforms will protect the confidentiality of the Parliamentary Budget Office's work and ensure that it will operate as it was intended when the Parliament expressly exempted the Parliamentary Budget Office from the FOI Act.
LAW ENFORCEMENT INTEGRITY LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2012
The vast majority of Commonwealth law enforcement officers are good, honest hardworking people.
But it is an unfortunate fact that criminals target law enforcement officers.
Organised crime groups actively target our law enforcement officers because of the nature of the work that they do—and because of their access to sensitive information.
It happens all around the world.
There is no place for corruption in the public sector.
That is why the Minister for Justice has bought this legislation forward.
That’s why the Minister for Justice has made it one of his top priorities.
Where we find corruption, we have to weed it out.
This bill is an important step in this process.
It will give our law enforcement agencies more power to prevent corruption, and increase the tools and the powers they have to weed it out where they find it.
The bill contains three key measures:
1. It introduces targeted integrity testing for the Australian Federal Police, Australian Crime Commission and the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service Officers suspected of corrupt conduct;
2. It doubles the number of law enforcement agencies covered by the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity; and
3. It strengthens the powers of the Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service to deal with suspected corruption.
I will outline each of these measures.
Integrity Testing
First, integrity testing.
An integrity test is an operation designed to test whether an official will respond to a simulated or controlled situation in a manner that is inconsistent with an agency’s standards of integrity.
Examples of integrity testing include:
Officers in State police forces are subject to integrity testing.
This includes New South Wales, where testing was introduced following the Wood Royal Commission, and Queensland, where testing is conducted by the Crime and Misconduct Commission.
The Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity recommended the introduction of targeted integrity testing at a Commonwealth level last year.
The power of integrity testing is that it puts fear in the mind of the corrupt. It is a psychological war against corruption.
They will need to think twice before accepting a bribe from a criminal because that criminal could be an undercover police officer.
The Committee made a number of recommendations regarding the form that Commonwealth integrity testing should take—and safeguards that should be included. I thank them for their work.
The Government accepted these recommendations, and this bill gives effect to this.
Only senior officers of the Australian Federal Police, Australian Crime Commission and Customs will be able to authorise integrity tests.
The Integrity Commissioner will also be able to authorise integrity testing to support a corruption investigation.
An integrity test will only be able to be authorised where the senior officer has a reasonable suspicion that an offence, punishable by at least 12 months imprisonment, has been or is likely to be committed.
Integrity testing is not ‘entrapment’ or ‘inducement’.
The inherent principle of integrity testing is that there be clear and equal opportunity for a person who is subject to the test to pass the test or fail the test.
Entrapment is where a person is induced to commit an offence that they would not otherwise have committed.
Tests will be carefully designed and carried out in a way which upholds this distinction.
It is important that, in conducting integrity tests, law enforcement agencies have available to them the full suite of covert powers that they otherwise have at their disposal for investigating serious and organised crime.
This was also recommended by the Parliamentary Joint Committee as part of its inquiry.
For this reason the bill contains amendments to the controlled operations provisions in the Crimes Act and to the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act and Surveillance Devices Act to ensure these powers are available in an integrity testing context.
The use of these powers will remain subject to existing safeguards.
Expansion of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity’s jurisdiction
Second, doubling the number of law enforcement agencies covered by the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity.
The Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity was established in 2007 to detect, disrupt and deter potential corruption in Federal law enforcement agencies.
It currently oversights the Australian Federal Police, the Australian Crime Commission and Customs, and deals with corruption issues from the former National Crime Authority.
This bill extends the jurisdiction of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity to cover the Australian Transactions Reporting and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC), the CrimTrac Agency, and prescribed staff members in the Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry.
These law enforcement agencies should be subject to the additional oversight that the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity provides.
The work performed by these agencies also makes them a target of organised crime.
ACLEI’s new jurisdiction will commence on 1 July 2013 to enable appropriate compliance and administrative arrangements to be put in place prior to this occurring.
The Government will also provide the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity with additional resourcing to meet the costs of this expanded jurisdiction.
In February this year the Minister for Justice also commissioned a review of the first year of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity’s oversight of Customs.
The Government received the report from this review in April.
It recommended:
1. That ACLEI explore the scope for seconding suitably senior and experienced staff from law enforcement agencies to assure ACLEI maintains up-to-date major investigation experience and expertise
2. That the Integrity Commissioner continue to build an understanding among ACLEI staff of ACLEI’s role and the need to work jointly with other agencies
3. That ACLEI establish a regular forum for relevant Customs and ACLEI staff to meet to discuss integrity issues
4. That funding go towards completing ACLEI’s information management project within the next 12 months
5. That ACLEI work with Customs on communications and training strategies around increasing awareness of ACLEI’s role and improving lessons learned from current integrity investigations
6. Measures to refine ACLEI’s processes for managing and investigating integrity matters referred by law enforcement agencies.
The Government has agreed to all of the recommendations made in the report.
As a result of this review, the Government has also doubled the annual funding provided to the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity for its work in oversighting Customs, to allow it to undertake further significant activities in prevention and case work.
Strengthening of the powers of the Chief Executive Officer of Customs
Third, the strengthening of the powers of the Chief Executive Officer of Customs.
In February this year the Minister for Justice also wrote to the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police, the CEO of the Australian Crime Commission and the CEO of Customs and Border Protection outlining my expectations in detecting, disrupting and preventing corruption.
The Minister for Justice also asked for their advice about further action that needs to be taken to strengthen the corruption resistance of Commonwealth enforcement agencies.
The agencies have responded with the following anti-corruption measures.
The Australian Federal Police are:
The Australian Crime Commission is:
Customs and Border Protection has conducted a review of their integrity framework.
This was completed in June.
It recommended a range of reforms to strengthen Customs’ anti-corruption culture, prevent corruption and weed it out.
This includes:
This bill contains additional measures focused on improving the integrity culture within Customs.
Criminals and organised crime groups are always changing.
As they change, our law enforcement agencies need to change as well.
Customs and Border Protection are an important part of this.
Their work is just as important as the work done by the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission.
And they are just as likely to be targeted by organised criminals.
That is why it is essential that they have the same powers and tools to tackle corruption and weed it out.
This bill contains a series of measures to bring Customs and Border Protection’s powers to act against corruption and misconduct into line with the Australian Crime Commission and the Australian Federal Police.
This includes:
The Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission both currently undertake drug and alcohol testing.
Officers of Customs and Border Protection operate and respond in similar surroundings to officers of these agencies.
It is essential that they also be subject to the same standards of integrity.
Drug and alcohol testing will first focus on high-risk areas of Customs, including where officers perform similar functions to and work in close proximity to other law enforcement officers who are subject to drug and alcohol testing.
Officers that are under the influence of drugs or alcohol not only pose a safety risk to co-workers – they are also potentially a target for organised crime groups that are seeking to infiltrate law enforcement.
An officer using illicit drugs may be willing to undertake ‘favours’ for crime groups in return for the supply of illicit drugs.
Identification of this behaviour is an important part of improving corruption resistance and tackling organised crime.
The bill will also provide a new power for the CEO of Customs to make a declaration, following the termination of a staff member’s employment, that the termination was for serious misconduct.
The effect of this declaration will enable the terminated employee to be immediately removed from the workplace.
Judicial review will remain available to terminated officials under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act, whereby the Federal Court can consider the lawfulness of the CEO’s decision.
This power replicates powers currently available to the heads of the Australian Federal Police and Australian Crime Commission.
It is not a power that will be exercised lightly, and will be reserved for serious cases of misconduct.
The decision made by the CEO will follow assessment and advice from a panel independent of the CEO.
The bill will also provide an ability for the CEO of Customs to issue written orders to staff requiring them to report any suspected instances of misconduct.
It is important that law enforcement agencies develop a strong culture of resisting corruption.
Corruption can thrive in an environment where it is the norm to turn a blind eye to misconduct.
This measure will ensure that where an employee of Customs observes an incident which may involve misconduct, he or she is in no doubt as to what the appropriate action should be.
Conclusion
This is a major package of reforms to target corruption – and give our law enforcement agencies the power to prevent it from happening, and when it does happen – weed it out.
As I said earlier, there is no place for corruption in the public sector.
I choose these words carefully. There is a darker side of the human condition that is vulnerable to corruption. Our job is to make the public sector as corruption resistant as it can be.
That’s why the Government have made this a top priority.
This is the first tranche of reforms that the Government will bring forward.
There is more work to do.
The Government is working on those reforms now and will bring those reforms forward when they are finalised.
SUPERANNUATION LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (NEW ZEALAND ARRANGEMENT) BILL 2012
This bill amends various taxation and superannuation laws to introduce a voluntary scheme for Australians and New Zealanders to permit them to transfer their superannuation savings between Australia and New Zealand.
This new scheme will permit Australians and New Zealanders who have lived and worked in both countries to make the most of their retirement savings.
The Australian Government is committed to the closest possible relations with New Zealand. In 2009 the Government and the New Zealand Government signed a Memorandum of Understanding to develop a Trans-Tasman Retirement Savings Portability Scheme. The scheme is scheduled to commence on 1 July 2013 and is expected to assist the thousands of Australians and New Zealanders who move across the Tasman each year. The New Zealand Parliament passed the legislation necessary for the new scheme in 2010.
Currently, Australians and New Zealanders working in Australia must leave their superannuation behind when they permanently leave Australia.
More than 50,000 New Zealanders moved to Australia last year, while about 14,000 people left Australia permanently for New Zealand.
In 2007, a Working Group of Australian and New Zealand officials was established to investigate options for the portability of retirement savings between Australia and New Zealand.
On 16 July 2009, the Australian and New Zealand Governments jointly announced the scheme and signed a Memorandum of Understanding establishing the scheme and outlining its working arrangements.
Consistent with the Memorandum of Understanding, this bill will permit the transfer of retirement savings between APRA regulated Australian superannuation funds and New Zealand KiwiSaver schemes.
New Zealanders who move to Australia will be able to transfer their New Zealand retirement savings to Australia and add them to their Australian superannuation benefits.
Similarly, Australians moving to New Zealand, and New Zealanders returning home, will be able to take their Australian benefits with them, to consolidate with their New Zealand retirement savings.
As the scheme is voluntary, Australians and New Zealanders can leave their superannuation behind, if they wish.
Superannuation is to be transferred tax free between Australia and New Zealand, although New Zealand transfers into the Australian superannuation system are subject to the contributions cap arrangements, consistent with the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding.
In general, the tax and superannuation laws of the host country will apply to the transferred savings, with a couple of exceptions where source country rules will apply. These exceptions are designed to preserve unique features of each country’s retirement savings system.
The portability scheme enhances the development of a seamless trans Tasman labour market, by removing an impediment to labour mobility between the two countries.
The introduction of the scheme is an important step in our closer economic relations with New Zealand, and supports ongoing progress toward a single economic market. Both Governments are committed to this goal through the Australia New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement.
At a personal level, the scheme will enable Australians and New Zealanders to streamline their financial affairs when they move across the Tasman. Individuals will be able to consolidate their superannuation in their country of residence, and avoid paying unnecessary fees and charges on multiple accounts held in the two countries.
This is the first time an international superannuation portability scheme has been implemented in Australia and is another important Gillard Government measure to improve the efficiency of Australia’s world leading superannuation system.
Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum.
That the bills be listed on the Notice Paper as separate orders of the day.
Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission Bill 2012
Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (Consequential and Transitional) Bill 2012
It is important that a national regulatory system that promotes good governance, accountability and transparency for not-for-profit entities be introduced to maintain, protect and enhance public trust and confidence in the not-for-profit sector.
Much has been said about the need for reduction of red tape. That was very much the rationale that led a number of the various government inquiries to recommend a national regulator. You will have heard, I am sure, that there is still concern in many sectors that particular legislation that we are now dealing with does not bring about the reduction of red tape that was envisaged.
… sceptical about the wisdom of accepting an initial increase in red tape—
in the hope that it may be reduced in the future. The ACBC looks to the Commonwealth to obtain assurances from the states and territories and a published timeline committing to a reduction in red tape at the national level.
… remains concerned the legislation … does not reduce red tape and in fact increases red tape for the sector.
This is contrary to the stated objectives of the legislation.
The Government in the explanatory memorandum (some 325 pages) says it will consult with stakeholders and peak bodies yet as no analysis has been done of the small organisations to see if they are represented by peak bodies.
… that it will increase regulatory requirements, red tape on charities, concern that there is no clear evidence of achieving harmonisation with the states, no clear line of reporting, no clear definition of charities and unrelated business tax.
… all those concerns need to be ironed out first. The feeling is that the government is trying to push through legislation just to be able to say it has done something.
It is important to recognise that the introduction of any new reporting obligation on congregations, no matter how minor, will be another layer of legislative obligation and reporting for local members who are generally neither skilled nor trained for the burden.
… reducing red tape by reducing duplication of reporting requirements and assisting the efficiencies of the sector, however this will not occur without the involvement of the states and territories to align reporting requirements with the ACNC reporting framework.
HIA also considers that NFPs which are companies should continue to be regulated by ASIC.
Treating all NFPs in the same way as charities is inappropriate, as most NFPs are of a fundamentally different nature to charities. While both charities and NFPs are expected to act in the public interest, or in the interest of a section of the public, charities go further and receive and spend public donations, while NFPs do not.
A genuine process of broad consultation and proper use of the advisory mechanisms will yield good results that will meet the needs of the sector and the broader Australian community. Mission Australia would have concerns if the Government failed to properly commit to and resource this consultation process.
I am very concerned that what is put in some parts of the bill in fact will not support nor sustain a robust, vibrant and independent sector.
It concerns me massively that we might be the first country in the world to make being on a not-for-profit as a director more onerous than being on a for-profit.
… without State support and further progress through COAG, a less than optimal national regime would result with ongoing duplication and inconsistencies in regulatory treatment across jurisdictions.
Our overriding concern is that rather than reducing red tape and compliance burden, the ACNC—
will add another layer of compliance and that nothing will be taken away.
… ACF is concerned that rather than remove duplication, the ACNC Bills—
will duplicate reporting obligations.
There are already challenges associated with attracting board members to not-for-profit organisations and perhaps the bills would enhance this difficulty.
The bill in its current form will place responsibilities and penalties on not-for-profit and charity board members that would be greater than those found under Corporations Law.
… to make being on a not-for-profit as a director more onerous than being on a for-profit.
Requiring independent schools to report similar but different data to the ACNC is duplicating effort and adding to the red tape.
That the Senate take note of the document.
That the Senate take note of the document.
… it's all politics. Why is it UK agencies happy for their PM to meet Huawei CEO and huawei deliver their NBN for last 7 years?
The goal of the British government is to attempt to lessen the threat that Huawei products deployed in critical UK telecommunications infrastructure pose to the availability or integrity of UK networks.
For a variety of technical and economic reasons, evaluation programs as proposed by Huawei ... are less useful than one might expect. In fact, the programs may create a false sense of security that an incomplete, flawed, or misapplied evaluation would provide …
Unfortunately, given the complexity of the telecommunications grid, the limitations of current security evaluation techniques, and the economics of vendor-financed analyses provide a sense of security but not actual security.
Huawei did not fully cooperate with the investigation and was unwilling to explain its relationship with the Chinese government or Chinese Communist Party, while credible evidence exists that it fails to comply with US. laws.
As far as being the national champion, it is recognition. There is no title and no certificate; we have never been given a trophy. It is something the company is proud of in that it has gone from US$3,000 in 1987 to a US$40 billion revenue company now, and it is innovative.
Inserting malicious hardware or software implants into Chinese-manufactured telecommunications components and systems headed for US customers could allow Beijing to shut down or degrade critical national security systems in a time of crisis or war. Malicious implants in the components of critical infrastructure, such as power grids or financial networks, would also be a tremendous weapon in China's arsenal.
Malicious Chinese hardware or software implants would also be a potent espionage tool for penetrating sensitive U.S. national security systems, as well as providing access to the closed American corporate networks that contain the sensitive trade secrets, advanced research and development data, and negotiating or litigation positions that China would find useful in obtaining an unfair diplomatic or commercial advantage over the United States.
I reckon it does mentally and physically get you down. It gets to the stage where you can't think. It makes me want to burst into tears. It's very hard. It affects you very badly. You think of yourself as a failure. Sometimes you just want to go to sleep and never wake up.
You can't see straight. I've become suicidal over food. You don't have energy. You start getting stomach pains. You get to a point where you do not feel like eating anymore because you become nauseous and stressed. Sometimes you can go two or three days without eating.
I deliberately promoted Penny Wong into the pivotal position of Finance Minister, putting her at the centre of government decision-making and our economic team because I'm so admiring of her capabilities.
"Australia's support for population programs is based on a firm commitment to the basic right of individuals to decide freely the number and spacing of their children.
"Through our support for the United Nations Population Fund and the International Planned Parenthood Federation, Australia helps promote informed choice and better services for the millions of people who do not currently enjoy this basic right.
"We're … stepping up our direct support to family planning in our region, for example with support for a major population and planning project in Papua New Guinea which includes training for health workers, technical assistance and support for non government organisations.
"Access to family planning services benefits the health and survival of women and children. Early, frequent and prolonged childbearing is directly linked with poor health and continuing high infant and maternal mortality.
The Palestinian Non-Government Organisations Network described the actions of Shurat HaDin as 'an ongoing smear campaign targeting Palestinian civil society organisations seeking the implementation of international law and respect for human rights.
All organisations which have attempted to denounce Israel's human rights violations have been targeted,' the network noted.
Palestinians, particularly young Palestinians, exist in a dysfunctional economic environment with virtually no hope of employment or maintenance, let alone improvement, of their living standards. This is a breeding ground for despair and worse—while there is no hope among the young for jobs and the constructive development of their talents there will be no shortage of recruits for the martyrdom of the suicide bomber.
… the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends towards justice.
… recognise the ongoing injustice that has been done to the Palestinian people and aim to rectify that injustice in a way that will allow both Palestinians and Israelis to live in peace.
… the Australian government to halt military cooperation and military trade with Israel …
… the removal of existing Israeli settlers and Israeli security and military forces from the Palestinian territories.
Aid from the international community, including European governments, is wasted when aid-funded projects are demolished.
… … …
European governments can ensure that their citizens' money is going for good by calling on the government of Israel to end the demolition of aid projects and civilian infrastructure in Area C.
I wouldn't discount the fact that we might have armed UAVs thinking through our force structure review into the future.
… relevant authorities take a precautionary approach and continue to monitor research outcomes. Complying with standards relating to wind turbine design, manufacture, and site evaluation will minimise any potential impacts of wind turbines on surrounding areas.
The situation is further complicated by findings that people who benefit economically from wind turbines were less likely to report annoyance, despite exposure to similar sound levels as people who were not economically benefiting.
I can confirm that as far as we are aware, and based on discussions with our wind industry members, landholder contracts do not contain any clauses that would prevent or penalise a person for speaking publicly if they claim to be suffering health effects.
The Landlord may not conduct interviews with media organisations or other members of the public or issue press releases or other announcements unless the Tenant [Wind Developer] has first approved the content of the disclosure and has otherwise consented to the use of the Tenant's name in association with that disclosure.
The Confidential Information and any industrial or intellectual property rights of whatsoever nature in and to the Confidential Information are and will at all times remain the exclusive property of the disclosing party—
… and the party receiving such … Information … will have no right, title or interest to or in the Confidential Information otherwise than as permitted by the Discloser.
The Landowner acknowledges that the Black Springs Wind Farm will generate sound pressure levels which may exceed the guideline limits set out in clause 3.2 of this Deed, but will not exceed 50dB(A)—
By entering into this Deed the Landowner accepts that the—
… will generate sound pressure levels of a maximum 50dB(A) and consents to the proposed operation of the Black Springs Wind Farm despite its non-compliance with the Noise Guidelines sound pressure levels set out in clause 3.2 of this Deed.
The Landlord releases the Tenant (Developer) from any liability for loss, damage or injury occurring in the Premises or on the Land arising from the Tenant's breach of the Environmental Protection Act 1970 (Vic) due to noise emitted from the Wind Turbine Generators.
THE forensic examination of wind energy by Hamish Cumming was a long series of emails by an activist who is not a mechanical engineer. It is a flawed and amateur analysis that is riddled with errors and incorrect assumptions.
… not only did I graduate in Mechanical Engineering in 1983 at Victoria University, but I attained the highest marks for the Degree that year. I also did further studies in Marketing and Management, Accounting, Economics and Law. I have worked for four multinational companies and have done private contracting which together have taken me to 25 countries …
Our future lies in creating a high technology, high productivity economy; to innovate and to compete at the high-end of provision. To do so, the technical skills and scientific awareness of the entire workforce must be raised.
Dear Minister,
I am writing to ask that you undertake an inquiry into whether the Mayor of Wyong Doug Eaton and Councillor Greg Best misrepresented themselves to your department over a funding application by Wyong Shire council.
Mayor Doug Eaton is Chairman of Central Coast Group Training. Councillor Greg Best is the CEO of Central Coast Group Training which is a not for profit Group Training Company operating out of Tuggerah in my Electorate of Dobell.
Prior to the 2010 election Minister Anthony Albanese announced that Wyong Shire Council in partnership with Central Coast Group Training was to receive funding to establish a Jobs Skills Incubator in Wyong Township on property owned by Wyong Shire Council.
Since that time my office has been dealing with staff of Wyong Shire Council on the progress of their application. I became concerned when it became apparent that Council Staff were not aware of the progress of the application. Subsequently I became aware that Councillors Eaton and Best had met with officers of your department to discuss the progress of the application without the knowledge of relevant staff in Wyong Shire Council.
It appears that when Councillors Best and Eaton met with officers of your department the impression was given that Mayor Eaton was representing Wyong Shire Council and Councillor Best was representing Central Coast Group Training as the original partners in the application. They discussed with your department alternative funding for their preferred project. Council officers dealing with the application only became aware of this visit when they were informed by my office.
The facts are that Council and the CCGT are in disagreement about the model for the Skills Centre. The Mayor did not represent his Council's preferred position on the model for the Skills Centre.
As you know I have been a strong advocate for programs to deal with the issues of unemployment and disadvantage in my electorate. I work closely with many organisations across the Central Coast to look at ways in which we can improve education and the skills levels of job seekers especially young people. Wyong is a particularly disadvantaged area with high unemployment and high social disadvantage. It is essential to ensure that we support programs which directly address these issues.
I am writing to the General Manager of Wyong Shire Council and all Councillors to request that they conduct their own inquiry into this matter.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely
Craig Thomson MP
Member for Dobell
… one of approximately forty lawyers in New South Wales accredited by the Law Society of New South Wales as a specialist in Employment and Industrial Law. Chris has been in legal practice since 1988 and prior to that, served as a Commissioner of the Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales.
… a long pedigree with the labour movement, starting his working life as federal industrial organiser with the Australian Workers Union in the 1970s.
I was getting ready for school and about to wear my uniform when I remembered that our principal had told us not to wear uniforms and come to school wearing normal clothes instead. So I decided to wear my favourite pink dress. Other girls at the schools were also wearing colourful dresses. During the morning assembly we were told not to wear colourful clothes as the Taliban would object to that as well. So what should we do?
For this espionage, infidels gave her awards and rewards. And Islam orders killing of those who are spying for enemies. We targeted her because she would speak against the Taliban while sitting with shameless strangers and idealised the biggest enemy of Islam, Barack Obama. We did not attack her for raising her voice for education. We targeted her for opposing mujahideen and their war. Shariah says that even a child can be killed if he is propagating against Islam.
Achieve Universal Primary Education
Ensure that, by 2015, children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling.
... loped to the wicket, wrist cocked, arms flailing, face strained with emotion ... with his first and second fingers wrapped around the ball and the other fingers folded on to the palm of his vast hand, he bowled a leg break, a bosey and a top-spinner at disconcerting pace, turning the ball enough to find an edge or beat the bat, bouncing some deliveries like a tennis ball. He had an awkward stoop at the moment of delivery caused by bending his right knee. But there was remarkable rhythm in all the grotesque aspects of O'Reilly's delivery.
On the cricket field we had the greatest respect for each other. But off the field we had not much in common. You could say we did not like each other, but it would be closer to the truth to say we chose to have little to do with each other ... Don was a teetotaller, ambitious, conservative and meticulous. I was outspoken and gregarious, an equally ambitious young man of Irish descent.
As a writer on the game it has always been my one consuming resolve to tell my readers ... exactly what my personal reactions were to the events of the day. Not once did I ever spend time racking my brain on what was the nice thing to say or the thoughts I should not let come through on paper. In my opinion that would have been cheating.
He looked as if, under the necessary circumstances, he might have founded or sacked a city. It was a face and form as you might have seen in a picture of explorers or pioneers. At cricket he would have bowled till his boots burst and after. If only one cricket ball was left in the world, and that came to pieces in his hand, he would whiz down a leg-break with the largest fragment. He had the inspired joy of battle.
O'Reilly was a great man and a wonderful writer. A fierce patriarch from the deepest bush, he had red hair, Irish blood, a fondness for beer, a penetrating mind, unwavering contempt for one-day cricket and absolute faith that sooner or later leg spin would return.
As at 30 June 2012:
(1) Is it still planned to acquire 12 submarines as per the White Paper direction 'the Government takes the view that our future strategic circumstances necessitate a substantially expanded submarine fleet of 12 boats in order to sustain a force at sea' (Defence White Paper 2009, p. 64, paragraph 8.40)?
(2) What plans and strategies are in place to man the 12 future submarines given the great difficulty, in 2011-12, of manning and operating the current fleet of submarines?
(3) What is the expected cost of acquiring 12 future submarines, over the next: (a) 12 months; (b) 5 years; (c) 10 years; and (d) 15 years?
(4) What funding has been provided to assist in the planning for the 12 future submarines?
(5) When is it expected that the first pass approval will be provided to advance the purchase of the 12 future submarines?
(6) What are the expected through-life support and operating costs of a fleet of 12 future submarines over a 30 year operating period?
(7) When is it envisaged that the first of the 12 future submarines will be launched and fully operational?
(8) What is the expected cost per year of maintaining and operating the existing 6 Collins Class submarines until they are de-commissioned, broken down by year until 2025?
(9) What is the specific phasing-out program for the existing Collins Class submarines?
(1) Yes.
(2) Crewing requirements for the future submarines are yet to be determined and will depend on a range of factors that will be examined by the SEA1000 program. Appropriate crewing strategies will be developed as part of this process.
(3) Options are currently being developed and are yet to be considered by government.
(4) Funding allocated to date is $233.35 million.
(5) On current schedule, first pass approval is planned for late 2013 or early 2014.
(6) and (7) As a decision is yet to be taken on the platform to be acquired, this has not yet been determined.
(8) As detailed in the 10-year Budget maintained by Defence, the estimated costs of maintaining and operating the existing six Collins Class submarines until 2021-22 are as follows:
Estimated maintenance costs will range from $570m to $670m/year
Estimated Operating Costs will range from $200m to $230m/year
Estimated Total maintenance and operating costs will range from $770m to $900 m/year
Notes:
1. Maintenance costs cover all sustainment costs including: the conduct of all planned and corrective maintenance across the submarine fleet; inventory; the replacement of equipment becoming obsolete with age; maintenance of training equipment within the Submarine Training Systems Centre; upkeep of the Submarine Escape Training Facility; funding for the contracted submarine escape and rescue service; and participation in armaments cooperative programs with the United States Navy for ongoing joint development of the submarine combat system and heavy-weight torpedo.
2. In Service Support Contract costs will vary from year to year depending on the number of submarines in planned maintenance. The significant drop in costs in FY2015/16 reflects the lower number of planned submarine maintenance periods across that financial year.
3.Operating Costs for Submarines include: Relevant military employee costs across Defence and DMO; relevant civilian employee cost in Navy; and other operating costs including fuel and cost of sustaining explosive ordnance.
(9) The Collins class submarines have a design life of 28 years. The first submarine is currently planned to reach the end of its service life in 2026, with the final submarine planned to be withdrawn from service in 2031. A Service Life Evaluation Program (SLEP) is currently examining the possibility of a life extension for the Collins Class submarine.
Using a similar SLEP approach, other navies have successfully extended the design life of their submarine fleets; the United States Navy extended the life of the Ohio class submarine fleet from 30 to 40 years.
For the period 1 January to 30 June 2012:
(1) (a) How many training days have been allocated to Reserves in each state and territory; and (b) what is the budget allocation to provide these training days?
(2) (a) How many training days were actually used by Reserves in each state and territory; and (b) what was the actual expenditure to provide these training days ?
(1) (a) and (b) Army Reserve Training Days are not allocated per se, as differing ranks and trades have a different cost per day. An Army Reserve Training Salary budget is allocated to Commands and then to Units. For Financial Year 2011/12, Army's total Army Reserve Training Salary budget allocation was $130.783 million. The amount expended during the second half of the Financial Year 2011/12 was $65.657 million. It should be noted that the initial allocation at the beginning of Financial Year 2011/12 was $122.281 million which was continuously adjusted throughout the Financial Year in response to the dynamic budget prioritisation process.
(2) (a) Approximately 357,780 Army Reserve Training Days were used by Army on a National basis in the second half of Financial Year 2011/12.
(b) An approximation, based upon a pro-rata calculation of the number of Active Reserve personnel in each state, as at 30 June 2012, and the actual expenditure to provide those Army Reserve Training Days, is as follows:
Navy
(1) and (2) (a) and (b)
The information is provided for the 12 month Financial Year rather than just the 6 months as requested.
Navy Reserve Day Allocation by State FY 11/12 - does not include self funded positions in non-Navy Groups.
Air Force
(1) (a) and (b)
(2) (a) and (b)
Since becoming Minister for Defence, why has the Minister failed to provide: (a) any briefings to the Shadow Minister in relation to the numerous subject areas requested; and (b) answers to questions on notice within a reasonable timeframe?
(a) Defence is committed to providing Members and Senators information and briefings on a broad range of Defence issues. The table below lists the briefings provided to the Shadow Minister since September 2010, including briefings provided to Committees of which he is a member, as well as future scheduled briefings. It does not include information on other Public Hearings (including Senate Estimates) or visits to Defence Establishments.
(b) The Defence portfolio receives a large number of Questions on Notice from both Houses of Parliament and Committees, including pursuant to Committee hearings. Many of these questions relate to complex, highly technical national security issues which require significant effort to address.
It is important that responses to these questions provide correct information. Accordingly, it is important to take the necessary time to ensure the answers are correct.
In relation to the House of Representatives, in 2012 the Government has responded to 31 Questions on Notice relating to the Defence portfolio as at 15 October.
In relation to the Senate, in 2012 the Government has responded to 298 Questions on Notice relating to the Defence portfolio as at 15 October.
In relation to Questions from Committees or arising from Committee hearings, Defence took on notice 49 questions on the day and 222 questions in writing from Senators following the 2012 Budget Estimates hearings in May, for a total of 271 questions. In total, these 271 questions compromised 569 sub questions.
Of the 271 Questions on Notice:
As at 16 October, responses to all 271 questions have been provided to the Committee, in advance of the forthcoming Supplementary Budget Estimates hearings.
Of the 271 questions, the majority, 262, were lodged by 5 October.
The 271 Questions on Notice from the May Budget Estimates hearings was an increase from February's Additional Estimates hearing where Defence received 219 Questions on Notice.
(1) Is the Minister aware that Federal funding towards the Orange pipeline project in Central West New South Wales will have a direct impact on the population of threatened fish species recognised to be of national environmental significance.
(2) Can details be provided of any investigation or review the departmental Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Unit has conducted into the environmental assessment report prepared for the project, including: (a) the outcome of any investigation or review process; and (b) how the project is being tracked by the department.
(3) Has the department had any contact with the project proponents or the consent authorities; if so, what was the nature of that contact.
(4) Will the Government undertake to maintain the allocated $20 million funding for a broader regional solution to Orange City water supply security that does not include the pipeline project
(1) The Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (the department) is currently assessing the proposed Orange pipeline project under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). This assessment includes consideration of the EPBC Act listed threatened Trout Cod.
(2) The proposal is being assessed under the EPBC Act through an accredited assessment of the NSW assessment process (Part 3A of the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979). The department recently conducted an adequacy review of the draft NSW Environmental Assessment document. The Environmental Assessment is on public exhibition until Monday 15 October 2012.
(3) Yes. As part of its consideration of the proposal, the department has been in contact with the Orange City Council in their role as the proponent for the project, and with the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure, who is the state consent authority.
(4) The Australian Government will only consider whether it is appropriate to contribute funding for alternative water supply options for Orange if construction of the Macquarie to Orange pipeline is not approved.
With reference to reports citing information provided by the European Commissioner for enlargement and neighbourhood policy, that Israel has destroyed development projects in Palestine worth €49.2 million over the past decade, €29.4 million of which was funded by the European Union or its member states: can details be provided of the purpose and value of any Australian-funded projects in Palestine that have been destroyed by Israel.
(a) No Australian funded projects in Palestine have been destroyed by Israel.
(b) Australian Government is aware of reports that demolition orders were issued in June 2012 against approximately 50 structures in Susiya village, South Hebron.
wo of these structures are tents funded by AusAID through a $2,500 grant to ActionAID Australia under the Australia NGO Cooperation Program in 2011
Australia has expressed concern to the Israeli authorities about the proposed demolitions and is committed to working with the Israeli authorities to find a solution which avoids demolition of these structures.
With reference to the appointment of Mr John McCarthy as ambassador to the Holy See: were any other candidates considered for the position; if so, who?
Yes, other candidates were considered. We do not discuss the details of potential candidates for HOM appointments.
(1) What was the total expenditure by Australia Post on: (a) the sponsorship of; and (b) hospitality at, the 2012 Olympic Games in London.
(2) Can a list be provided detailing all functions and events hosted by Australia Post in London during the Games, including: (a) where each function was held; and (b) the stakeholders and others invited to each event.
(3) Can a detailed breakdown of costs be provided for the total expenditure on: (a) travel; and (b) accommodation, by Australia Post for its chief executive officer and all other employees and representatives in regard to the Games.
(4) What airline was used by Australia Post representatives for travel to and from London.
(5) At what locations did Australia Post representatives stay in London, including the cost per night of each hotel.
(6) Did Australia Post employ any contractors to assist with the sponsorship and hosting of events in relation to the Games; if so, can a list be provided detailing each organisation and the total cost of those services.
(1) By way of background, Australia Post has a long and proud association with the Australian Olympic Team having sponsored them for five out of the six most recent Olympics. Hospitality is one of the benefits derived from sponsorship of the Olympics. Details of Australia Post's sponsorship arrangement with the Australian Olympic Committee are commercial-in-confidence.
Engaging in corporate hospitality by entertaining clients is a common activity in companies across a range of industries. Australia Post operates in an incredibly competitive landscape, particularly in the area of parcel delivery, competing against Toll, UPS, DHL and TNT to name but a few. UPS is a major global sponsor of the Olympics.
Australia Post monitors the benefits gained from all of its sponsorship activities, including new business that is generated, to ensure that it receives maximum return on investment, consistent with proper commercial practice. The total costs of the sponsorship and hospitality are less than the direct revenue derived from the sponsorship and significantly less than the total benefits generated by the sponsorship.
Specific benefits generated by Australia Post's association with the London Olympics include:
(2) Australia Post invited key customers and corporate partners to Olympic sporting events (eg swimming and athletics). Australia Post also co-hosted an event with Qantas at Hampton Court Palace. Specific details about individual events and invitees, who constitute Australia Post's major customer base, are commercial-in-confidence.
(3) 11 Australia Post staff members attended the Olympic Games, including three Australia Post staff members who worked in the Athletes' Village Post Office delivering mail to the Australian Olympic team. Approximate costs for accommodation and airfares are:
(4) Qantas.
(5) Australia Post's hotel base in London was the Sofitel St James. This is the same hotel used by other Australian corporate sponsors such as Qantas. Approximate costs per person, per night were $400 including taxes and breakfast. This was a premium rate due to the Olympic Games.
(6) Cartan Global was employed to manage the logistics for Australia Post's presence at the Olympic Games. The cost of this service is commercial-in-confidence.
With reference to the answer provided to question on notice no. 1880 (Senate Hansard , 23 August 2012, proof p. 94) in which it was advised that the Prime Minister (Ms Gillard) undertook a range of official duties on 3 April 2012, and an Acting Prime Minister was not appointed:
(1) Has the Prime Minister, or the Prime Minister's office, been made aware of the AM program on 4 April 2012, in which Alexandra Kirk stated ''Julia Gillard's office says it wasn't able to contact her last night for comment''.
(2) Is the statement made by Ms Kirk correct; if so, why was the Prime Minister unable to be contacted; if not, has any action been taken to correct the statement.
(1) No.
(2) Not applicable.
With reference to the Commonwealth Ombudsman's report Child Support Agency [CSA], Department of Human Services: Responding to allegations of customer fraud (Report No. 12/2008), which made five recommendations in relation to customer fraud that were accepted by the then General Manager of the CSA:
(1) Have the five recommendations been fully implemented.
(2) For each year since the publication of the report, how many matters have been referred to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions under sections 159 or 159A of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989.
(1) Yes.
(2) No matters have been referred to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions under sections 159 or 159A of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989.
With reference to the closure of the Ethiopia-Australia Intercountry Adoption Program, and the fact that, according to freedom of information documents, the decision not to renew the program was made prior to 20 January 2012:
(1) On what basis did the department arrange a trip to Ethiopia and communication about that trip in April 2012, despite the decision to close the program having already been made.
(2) Why did the department not complete the files that were in country and provide a 12 month wind-down of the program.
(3) Why was the program not suspended given that, for example, one file was called to leave Australia for Ethiopia in November 2011 despite the program's imminent termination.
(4) Given the department's confirmation that refunds will be provided to affected families for the overseas component of the adoption application, whilst uncertainty remains as to whether state departments will reimburse costs and fees associated with assessments, has the department conducted any follow-up with state departments in order to ensure that families are reimbursed for total fees paid; if not, what steps will the department take to ensure that state departments reimburse families.
(5) In regard to the administration of the program in Tigray:
(a) why did the department arrange for a female representative to hold discussions concerning community programs and suitable orphanages in Tigray, despite known gender-equality issues in the region;
(b) was this situation sensitively handled and did the Australian representative speak Tigrian; and
(c) why did the department not employ advisors with the necessary cultural needs experience in Ethiopia.
(6) Why is Australia's performance in intercountry adoption processes comparatively poor, despite fees being significantly higher than in other countries.
(7) Why does Australia spend more money, yet apparently accomplishes less, than other countries in relation to intercountry adoptions, and has the department considered that an independent not-for-profit organisation, with accountability to the department, may be better positioned to run the program.
(1) There was no decision to close the Program before 20 January 2012. I made an in-principle decision to close the Program on 24 April 2012 and the final decision on 12 June 2012. The Department's pre-scheduled delegation visit to Ethiopia from 27 April to 11 May 2012 reassessed the ongoing viability of the Program, and confirmed that ongoing challenges remained which meant that the Program could not continue to operate.
(2) I considered the possibility of 'completing' the files that were in Ethiopia at the time of closure; that is, matching Ethiopian children to Australian prospective adoptive parents before closing the Program. However, this was not appropriate for a number of reasons. First, as no children had been referred to the Program for intercountry adoption at that time, this approach would have created pressure for children to be located who were of ages and characteristics matching those of children for which files in Ethiopia were approved.
In addition, there were a number of resource intensive steps, each with its own challenges, which would have needed to be completed before the Program could operate, even to process a limited number of files. These steps included:
Given lengthening waiting times and the continued uncertainty in the Ethiopian adoption process, I could not justify taking those steps.
(3) My in-principle decision to close the Program was made on 24 April 2012. Prior to that decision, my Department continued to manage the Program as usual.
In late 2011, it was agreed by the Australian Government and all State and Territory Central Authorities that a temporary halt on sending new files to Ethiopia was necessary because of the number of families travelling to Ethiopia to complete the adoption process at the same time.
In mid-January 2012, the Department (in consultation with the Australian Representative) came to the view that it would not be possible to continue the 12-month orphanage agreement with Tesfa Elderly and Children Support Organisation (Tesfa), which meant that the halt would remain in place while arrangements were explored with potential new orphanages.
(4) Prospective adoptive parents paid fees to their relevant State or Territory Central Authority for work undertaken in relation to their applications. When I wrote to the State and Territory ministers on 25 June 2012 advising them of my decision to close the Program, I urged them to consider whether those fees were capable of being refunded. Ultimately, however, the decision to refund fees rests with those State and Territory ministers. I understand that, in some cases, refunds have been approved or other fees have been waived.
(5) My Department is confident that the Program's Australian Representative, an Ethiopian born in the Tigray region, fluent speaker of Tigrain, Amharic and English, holder of an Associate Degree of Law and former judge of ten years in Addis Ababa, competently performed her role.
The Australian Representative was also assisted by the Program's Africa Advisor, Dr Tsegaye Berhe. For 30 years, Dr Tsegaye was the Director of Child and Family Affairs for the Ethiopian Orthodox Church and is well-versed in issues of child welfare. Dr Tsegaye's role as Africa Advisor involved providing specialist advice and consultation on Ethiopian intercountry adoption and related matters and administrative support services to the Australian Representative.
To the best of my Department's knowledge, the existence of any gender equality issues in the Tigray region did not adversely affect the Australian Representative's performance of her role.
(6) The decrease in intercountry adoption in Australia reflects a worldwide downturn of 36% since 2004, with a reduction in the worldwide number of intercountry adoptions from 43,142 in 2004 to 27,552 in 2010 (International Social Service). The United States, the largest 'receiving country' of children through intercountry adoption, experienced a decline of 52% in intercountry adoptions between 2004 and 2010 (United States Department of State). During the same period, Australian intercountry adoptions fell by 40%, an overall reduction in number from 370 in 2003-04 to 222 in 2009-10 (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare).
Australian families typically pay two kinds of adoption fees – State or Territory processing fees paid directly to the Australian State or Territory Central Authority that is assessing the family and preparing their application, and country program fees set by, and paid to, the overseas body which is facilitating the adoption. The latter vary between country programs and range from less than US$1000 up to US$15,000 depending on the country program.
The cost of undertaking an intercountry adoption varies widely throughout the world, with some costing up to AU$60,000. There is no indication that the fees charged by Australia's States and Territories are markedly higher than other countries' fees.
(7) This option was considered in 2009. This included consideration of alternative models for the operation of intercountry adoption in Australia, including a review of the advantages and disadvantages of a State or national-based system of accreditation for non-government bodies. The Community and Disability Services Ministers' Advisory Council agreed to retain the existing model of intercountry adoption service delivery at that time.
(1) Can details be provided of all actions currently being taken by the department, directly or through third parties, that are intended to: (a) protect the Greater Bilby from feral cats and other pests in Queensland; and (b) protect the habitat of the Greater Bilby in Queensland.
(2) What is the Federal Government doing to engage the broader Queensland community in protecting the Greater Bilby and its habitat.
(1) A national recovery plan for the greater bilby was adopted under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) in 2007 and is currently being revised.
Within Queensland, the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection and the Department of National Parks, Recreation, Sport and Racing are the lead agencies responsible for coordinating the implementation of on-ground actions identified in the national recovery plan.
Predation by feral cats is recognised as a key threatening process under the EPBC Act. A threat abatement plan for predation by feral cats was made to provide national action, guidance and coordination to abate the threat from feral cats on biodiversity.
The Australian Government has recognised that the greatest need in feral cat control is for a broad-scale, cat-specific toxic bait for use in conservation areas. The Curiosity® feral cat bait has been developed and is currently undergoing field trials to gather the necessary efficacy data to register the bait. The government has committed $3.96 million to this project between 1996 and 2012. Once registered and commercialised the Curiosity® feral cat bait will be available to conservation managers.
Threat abatement plans have also been developed for other feral animals that pose a threat to the greater bilby, including foxes and rabbits.
A large part of the greater bilby's Mitchell Grassland habitat in the Channel Country of outback Queensland is included in Astrebla Downs National Park.
At Currawinya National Park an area of 25 square kilometres is protected within an electrified boundary fence built with donations from a not for profit organisation the 'Save the Bilby Fund' and with assistance from the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service. It is the only site in Queensland where the greater bilby has been reintroduced into the wild.
There are 19 projects totalling over $5.5 million over the past 5 years of the Caring for our Country initiative that directly address threat abatement issues, these were funded through various Business Plans.
Regional funding is provided for the 3 Natural Resource Management Regions, an investment of nearly $20 million over the past 5 years. A significant proportion of this would be used to address threat abatement activities.
(2) In addition to the above, a specific objective identified in the national recovery plan for the greater bilby is to inform and involve the community and all stakeholders in the recovery process.
Community engagement in greater bilby protection is actively being pursued by the 'Save the Bilby Fund'.
With reference to the Dateline report 'The Last Frontier' broadcast on 21 August 2012, and the response of the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) Ombudsman to a formal complaint:
(1) What were the specific findings of the SBS Ombudsman.
(2) How were these specific findings acted upon by SBS.
(3) Were viewers informed that 'the totality of the report was inaccurate and misleading', as noted in the SBS Ombudsman's response; if not, why not.
(1) Two formal complaints have been finalised by the SBS Ombudsman. The complainants were Ta Ann Tasmania and Hydro Tasmania. The SBS Ombudsman's responses to each complaint are set out below. SBS notes that the SBS Ombudsman's responses have been published by SBS on the Dateline program website and are also available on the Ta Ann Tasmania and Hydro Tasmania websites
Ta Ann Tasmania – The SBS Ombudsman reported:
"I write in response to your formal complaint dated 23 August 2012 in relation to the Dateline report The Last Frontier broadcast on 21 August 2012.
"After a review of the program against the provisions of Code 2.2 (Accuracy, Impartiality and Balance) of the SBS Codes of Practice, and considering your complaint, the program was found to have breached the provisions of the code.
"The report was found to be inaccurate in two of three areas identified in your complaint.
"First, Mr Rolley did not say the words attributed to him about plantation and regrowth timber. Secondly, as you know, there is a difference between a contract to log, that is go into an area and fell trees, and a contract for the supply logs from trees felled (logged) by others. In this case, Forestry Tasmania supplies Ta Ann Tasmania (a manufacturing company) with already felled timber, which Ta Ann Tasmania processes to produce a range of timber products. It is inaccurate, and in breach of Code 2.2, to say that Ta Ann Tasmania is a logging company.
"I find that the report that 50 workers were retrenched was not inaccurate, being an accurate reflection of what was said by Mr Rolley. It is not inaccurate to say that Ta Ann Tasmania
"retrenched 50 Tasmanian workers" when Ta Ann Tasmania's executive director said that "we've had to sack 50 people".
"On balance the report breached Code 2.2 with respect to accuracy, balance and impartiality. Put shortly, the program did not include accurate and balancing material that was available and did not include a response from Ta Ann on key questions. It unduly favoured the views critical of Ta Ann (both Ta Ann Tasmania and Ta Ann Holdings Berhad, the Malaysian company) and "Hydro Tasmania over both the facts and appropriate balancing views. In addition the relationship between Hydro Tasmania and with Sarawak Energy Berhad (SEB) was misreported and misrepresented. I consider that the totality of the report was inaccurate and misleading.
"On 28 August 2012 The Executive Producer of Dateline , Peter Charley, informed you that a change would be made to the program and transcript in relation to the removal of the words "and regrowth". However, SBS now considers that in light of this finding that it will broadcast a correction and apology onDateline 4th September 2012. The wording of the correction is a management matter and not a duty of the SBS Ombudsman."
Hydro Tasmania – The SBS Ombudsman reported:
"I write in response to your formal complaint dated 27 August 2012 in relation to the Dateline report The Last Frontier broadcast on 21 August 2012.
"After a review of the program against the provisions of Code 2.2 (Accuracy, Impartiality and Balance) of the SBS Codes of Practice, I found that the program was inaccurate as identified in your complaint.
"The statements made about the role of Hydro Tasmania are not accurate. The annual reports of Hydro Tasmania for 2009 to 2010 and 2010 to 2011 are available online. The annual reports reveal that Hydro Tasmania's connection with the Sarawak Energy Board is that Hydro Tasmania provides consultancy and training services through its consulting services business, Entura. That was not correctly and fairly reported.
"Further, the totality of the report was inaccurate and misleading. On balance I find that the report breached Code 2.2 in respect of accuracy, balance and impartiality. The relationship between Hydro Tasmania and with Sarawak Energy Berhad was misreported and misrepresented.
"Put shortly, the program did not include accurate and balancing material that was available, and unduly favoured the views critical of Ta Ann (both Ta Ann Tasmania and Ta Ann Holdings Berhad, the Malaysian company) and Hydro Tasmania over both the facts and appropriate balancing views.
"SBS's apologises to Hydro Tasmania for the impact of this breach of the SBS Codes of Practice. In light of this finding SBS will broadcast a correction and apology on Dateline 4th September, 2012. The wording of the correction is a management matter and is not a duty of the SBS Ombudsman."
(2) Dateline accepted that there were inaccuracies in the report and issued an apology on air on theDateline program on SBS ONE on 4 September 2012 (see below). The apology was also published on theDateline website.Dateline has modified the program in response to issues raised in the complaints, including removing or correcting the errors.
On 4th September 2012, Dateline issued the following on air and online clarification and apology regarding this story:
"Two weeks ago, Dateline broadcast a story on the construction of hydro-electric dams in the Malaysian state of Sarawak.
Dateline accepts the report overplayed the role of Hydro Tasmania in the dam building projects.
The same program contained a story on the company Ta Ann Tasmania.
The story quoted the company's executive director, Evan Rolley, as saying that 'Forestry Tasmania doesn't have enough plantation and regrowth timber to fulfil the Ta Ann contract'.
In fact, in his interview, Mr Rolley only referred to plantation timber.
Dateline also used the term 'logging' to describe Ta Ann Tasmania's activities. The company is not a logger, but a timber manufacturer.
Dateline apologises to Hydro Tasmania and to Ta Ann Tasmania for these inaccuracies."
(See: http://www.sbs.com.au/ Dateline /story/related/aid/629/id/601522/n/The-Last-Frontier)
(3) SBS issued an apology and clarification on-air on 4 September 2012. Dateline also published the SBS Ombudsman's responses to the two formal complaints on its website.
With reference to the answer provided to question no. 49, taken on notice during the 2012-13 Budget Estimates hearing of the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee: How much was the artist’s performing fee that was paid to the Elder who performed the ceremony.
A fee of $550 was paid to the Yuggera Aboriginal Corporation for Cultural Services.
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department's budget of: (a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend; (b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and (c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
(1) (a) The effect on the Department's 2012-13 budget of the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend is $0.9 million.
(b) The effect on the Department's 2012-13 budget of the 2.5 per cent additional efficiency dividend is $2.6 million.
(c) No effect.
(2) All areas of the Department will consider a range of options to manage their activities within budget including:
(3) This information is available in the 2012-13 Portfolio Budget Statements (page 48 refers) as published on the Department's website.
(4) (a) This information is available in the 2012-13 Portfolio Budget Statements (page 26 refers) as published on the Department's website.
(b) Please refer to answer (2) above.
(5) (a) No voluntary redundancies are expected in 2012-13.
(b) No involuntary redundancies are expected in 2012-13.
(6) The current distribution of full time equivalent staff across classification bands at 30 September 2012 is provided in the following table:
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department's budget of: (a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend; (b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and (c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed. (Being answered by POSD)
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands. (Being answered by POSD)
(1) (a) $2.1 million
(b) $3.7 million
(c) Not applicable
(2) The Treasury is continuing to pursue efficiencies to meet its budget including through printing, publications, consultants, contractors and travel.
(3) About 74 per cent.
(4) (a) The Treasury will reduce staff through natural attrition. See page 26 of the 2012-13 Portfolio Budget Statements.
(b) The Treasury will continue to look at efficiencies to reduce the need for consultants and contractors.
(5) None.
(6) The distribution of full-time equivalent (FTE) staff by classification bands as at 30 June 2012:
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department ' s budget of: (a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend; (b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and (c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
(1) (a) and (b) The impact of the original 1.5 per cent and the additional 2.5% efficiency dividends on the former Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research in 2012-13 are $3.3 million and $8.3 million respectively. The funding that transferred from the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations as a result of the machinery of government changes in December 2011, was net of the efficiency dividend impact, therefore it is not possible to accurately quantify the impact of the efficiency dividend over the forward estimates. It is estimated to be in the order of $20 million from 2012-13 to 2015-16 or $5 million per year.
(1) (c) The impact on the department in 2012-13 from other savings measures announced in the 2012-13 Budget papers is $0.156 million
(2) The Department will in the first instance seek to manage the impacts of the efficiency dividends through further cost savings and natural attrition in staffing levels. The Department will continually seek to find further reductions in discretionary expenditure.
(3) Staff costs represent 58 per cent of total departmental expenditure.
(4 ) ( a) The net movement in staff is expected to be around 150 staff due mainly to natural attrition. (b) Whilst reductions in consultants and contractors are expected for the financial year, at this stage the exact impact is yet to be determined.
(5) If required, the Department will seek to redeploy staff across the organisation where possible, hence voluntary or involuntary redundancies are not planned for at this stage.
(6) Due to System limitations, the Department is only able to provide the headcount figures of staff across band classifications as at 30 June 2012.
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department's budget of:
(a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend;
(b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and
(c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers?
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department?
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs?
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided?
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed?
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands?
(1) (a) As determined by the Department of Finance and Deregulation (DoDF) and shown in the Portfolio Budget Statements 2011-12, table 11, page 28, the temporary increase in the efficiency dividend from 1 to 1.5 per cent resulted in Defence handing back $30.4 million in the 2012-13 financial year.
(b) As determined by DoFD and shown in the Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements 2011-12, table 12, page 21, the one-off 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend resulted in Defence handing back $60.4 million in the 2012-13 financial year.
(c) Other savings measures introduced at the 2012-13 Budget are:
These measures are published in table 15, page 29 of the Portfolio Budget Statements 2012-13.
(2) The Secretary and CDF have instituted ongoing budget management discussions with all Group Heads and Service Chiefs to ensure:
(3) In the 2012-13 financial year, including Defence Operations, Employee expenses account for 42.9 per cent of the total Defence budget. Key 2012-13 Cash Budget Statistics are published on page 2 of the Portfolio Budget Statements 2012-13.
(4) (a) and (b) There is an estimated net increase of 19 in average staffing levels from the 2011-12 actual achievement to the 2012-13 Budget Estimate, broken down by ADF +642, partially offset by a decrease in APS staff of -623. In respect of contractors, there is an estimated increase of 24 from the 2011-12 actual achievement to the 2012-13 Budget Estimate. Defence does not track the number of consultants employed as these are hired based on contract value.
(5) (a) The Defence budget position requires a reduction to its APS workforce of 1,000 over the next two financial years. Defence is managing this reduction through natural attrition, close management of recruitment, reductions in non-ongoing employment and a targeted voluntary retrenchment (VR) program. Defence is reviewing work priorities to ensure it can meet the Government's requirements. It is unknown at this point in time how many VRs will be required to meet the reduction requirement.
The Strategic Reform Program will require a number of change management activities to enable the required saving to be achieved. As a result, some employees may be without an ongoing role in the new organisational structure. In these situations Defence's focus is to reassign employees. Where reassignment within Defence is unable to be achieved, consistent with the Defence enterprise agreement, a voluntary retrenchment package may be offered.
As at 24 September 2012, 229 VR packages have been offered and 109 accepted by Defence APS employees during financial year 2012-13.
(b) There will be no involuntary retrenchments (IR) as a result of the Defence Targeted VR Program.
Defence's priority is, where possible, to reassign employees to a role at their substantive level that is commensurate with the employee's skills and experience. If an employee cannot be reassigned to another position then the focus will be on redeployment training. In the unlikely event this is not successful the employee may be declared excess to Defence's requirements and a VR offer will be made.
If the employee declines the VR offer it may result in an involuntary retrenchment.
As at 24 September 2012 no involuntary retrenchments have occurred during financial year 2012-13.
(6)
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department's budget of: (a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend; (b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and (c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
(1) The net impact of the efficiency dividend on the department for 2012-13 was a reduction of $8.166m: $3.040m is attributable to the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend and $5.126m is attributable to the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend.(2) The department adopted an internal budget strategy that complied with the Government's expectation of no forced redundancies. Targeted savings from contractors and consultants, international and domestic travel, hospitality and entertainment, media and advertising, printing and publication expenditure and delivery of training was also included in the department's budget. Voluntary redundancies were offered and contracts for non-ongoing employees were not renewed beyond 30 June 2012 where appropriate. A rigorous recruitment process was put in place which applies to every vacancy within the department. When a vacancy occurs it is to be filled from within the department if possible, prior to external recruitment action being commenced.
(3) Employee expenses accounts for 64.14% of the 2012-13 budgeted expenses.
(4) A net reduction in (a) staff and (b) consultants and/or contractors expenses is included in the approved 2012-13 budget for the department. The amount of the reduction cannot be specifically quantified.
(5) (a) 24
(b) none
(6) The table at Attachment A details the current full-time equivalent staff distribution across classification bands.
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department's budget of: (a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend; (b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and (c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
(1) (a)
(b)
(c) While no other savings measures were introduced for Finance for the 2012-13 Budget, in response to my announcement on 25 September 2012, Finance is further containing air travel as far as practical and identifying further savings in contractors and consultants, recruitment advertising and printing costs (by making greater use of online publications).
(2) Through targeting non-staff areas, natural attrition and through structural changes, without the need for a round of either compulsory or voluntary redundancies.
(3) 34.3%
(4) Total staff numbers are expected to reduce as follows:
Total Departmental contractor expenses are expected to decrease as follows:
Total Consultants are expected to reduce as follows:
(5) Finance is not planning a round of voluntary or involuntary redundancies.
(6) Actual full-time equivalent staff across classification bands as at
30 September 2012 (excluding casual staff):
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department's budget of:
(a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend;
(b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and
(c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in:
(a) staff; and
(b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many:
(a) voluntary redundancies; and
(b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
(1)
(2) Measures and strategies currently being considered and implemented by the department to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets include:
- A net reduction in ASL of 111 in 2012-13 (67 through corporate rationalisation; 44 in policy areas; transfer of staff into vacant import clearance activities in airports).
- A reduction in supplier costs (20 per cent in media, travel, official hospitality and consultants; 10 per cent in all other supplier categories such as training, rent and depreciation).
(3) The percentage of total expenditure represented by staff costs is 68.44 per cent.
(4) (a) A net reduction in staffing of 111 ASL in 2012-13 is expected.
(b) In 2012-13, DAFF has budgeted for a net reduction in consultants and other temporary or contract staff of $4.762m.
(5) (a) There are no voluntary redundancies planned in 2012-13.
(b) There are no involuntary redundancies planned in 2012-13.
(6)
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department's budget of:
(a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend;
(b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and
(c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in:
(a) staff; and
(b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many:
(a) voluntary redundancies; and
(b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
(1) The net financial effect on the Departments' 2012-13 budget of:
(a) the original 1.5 percent efficiency dividend was $0.160 million
(b) the additional 2.5 percent efficiency dividend was $2.095 million
(c) other saving measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget paper was $0.127 million
(2) The Department has set a balanced budget for 2012-13, which is regularly analysed and reported to senior management for their information and review. The Department will undertake budget reviews as required during 2012-13 to ensure the Department operates within budget.
(3) In 2012-13, staff costs represent approximately 65 percent of budgeted expenditure.
(4) The Department expects a small reduction in staff numbers in 2012-13. It is not possible to quantify at this time whether or not the Department will reduce its engagement of consultants, and/or contractors in 2012-13.
(5) In 2012-13, the Department is not expecting to execute any voluntary or involuntary redundancies.
(6) Current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands as at 30 September 2012 is as follows:
Classification Band
Substantive
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department ' s budget of: (a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend; (b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and (c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
Please refer to the answer provided to the Senate Question on Notice 2171.
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department's budget of: (a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend; (b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and (c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
(1) The net financial effect on the department's budget is as follows:
(a) $1.040m
(b) $2.809m
(c) $0.523m for 15 per cent reduction to the departmental resource component for new measures.
(2) The Department has not identified any specific strategy to implement savings from the efficiency dividend targets. The Department faces a significant decline in operating funding from 2011-12 to 2012-13 due to the closure of a range of energy efficiency programs administered by the Department. The Department is currently working to reduce its workforce by around 33% by June 2013. This will be achieved through natural attrition, review of existing contracts, increased opportunities for flexible working arrangements and voluntary redundancies. The supplier expenses associated with supporting a larger workforce will commensurably reduce. Given the size of the downsizing exercise faced by the Department, the impact of the increase in efficiency dividend is not being considered separately.
(3) Staff costs represent 58% of the Department's budget in 2012-13 as reported in the Department's 2012-13 Portfolio Budget Statements.
(4) (a) $32.6 million
(b) $7.3 million
(5) (a) 48
(b) nil
(6) The current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across the classification bands as at 13 September 2012 are as follows:
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the departments budget of: (a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend; (b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and (c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
The Minister is supported by the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Please refer to the Minister representing the Prime Minister's response to Senate Question 2169.
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department ' s budget of: (a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend; (b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and (c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department?
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs?
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
Please refer to the answer provided to the Senate Question on Notice 2171.
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department's budget of: (a) the original 1.5 per cent (b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and (c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department?
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs?
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands?
(1) (a) The original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend has reduced the department's operating appropriation by approximately $55 million in 2012-13.
(b) The additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend has reduced the department's operating appropriation by $92 million in 2012-13 (the department's Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements 2011-12, page 17).
(c) The department's operating appropriation in 2012-13 has been reduced by $2.540 million for the following measures (see 2012-13 Budget Paper No. 2):
Further information on these measures can be found in the 2012-13 Budget Paper No. 2.
(2) The department's Executive Committee has oversight of and monitors the department's financial position. Monthly reports are provided to the Executive Committee on expenditure and forecasts against budget.
(3) The department estimates that 63.1 per cent of total expenses budget is represented by staffing costs in 2012-13. The percentage equates to the proportion of total budgeted employee expenses ($2.789 billion) to the total expenses budget ($4.423 billion) as per the department's Portfolio Budget Statements 2012-13 (page 38).
(4) (a) A net reduction in staff is expected for the financial year.
*Note - ASL is the average number of employees receiving salary/wages over the reporting period, with adjustments for casual and part-time employees to show the full-time equivalent (FTE). Therefore ASL is the average paid FTE for the financial year. ASL is a different calculation to the FTE figure reported in question 6.
(b) A net reduction in contractor and consultant costs is expected for the financial year, however, the department is unable to quantify the reduction in financial terms at this time.
(5) (a) As at 4 October 2012, there have been 358 voluntary redundancies in the 2012–13 financial year. At this stage the number of voluntary redundancies expected in the remainder of the financial year is unknown.
(b) The department does not expect any involuntary redundancies in the 2012-13 financial year.
(6) The current distribution of full-time equivalent (FTE) staff across classification bands for the Department of Human Services is listed in Table A below. This table is as at 30 June 2012 and based on employees FTE substantive classification as at this date.
Table A – Staff by Substantive Classification and FTE** as at 30 June 2012
**Note - Full Time Equivalent (FTE) definition used is based on Full-Time Equivalent employees for the reporting period. Part-time employees are converted to full-time equivalents. This includes employees on leave without pay and secondment. FTE is a different calculation to the ASL figure reported in question 4.
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the departments budget of: (a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend; (b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and (c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
The Minister is supported by the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Please refer to the Minister representing the Prime Minister's response to Senate Question 2169.
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department's budget of: (a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend; (b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and (c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
Please refer to the Minister for Finance and Deregulation's response to Question No 2184.
With reference to the announcement by the Australian High Commissioner to Malaysia that Lynas Corporation has submitted an application to the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA), to import radioactive waste from Malaysia:
(1) What is the status of the application.
(2) On what date was the application received.
(3) On what grounds and under what legislative provisions can nuclear waste be imported to Australia.
(4) If ARPANSA grants approval for the importation of radioactive waste from Malaysia, will Western Australia be forced to accept that waste; if so, on what grounds.
(1) The application from Lynas Corporation to import radioactive waste from Malaysia is currently under consideration by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA). ARPANSA requested more information from Lynas Corporation on 2 April 2012. Lynas Corporation has yet to respond and the application cannot progress until the requested information is received.
(2) The application was received on 30 March 2012.
(3) Regulation 4R of the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956 (the Regulations) prohibits the importation into Australia of a radioactive substance unless the Chief Executive Officer of ARPANSA (the CEO) or the Minister for Health gives permission in writing. Before issuing an import permit the CEO will satisfy himself that the State or Territory where the radioactive substance will be imported into will grant any required authorisation to the consignee to deal with the radioactive substance under that State or Territory’s radiation protection legislation.
(4) The application that was received by ARPANSA is to import the material to South Australia. If the South Australian regulator refuses to grant any required authorisation to the consignee to deal with the material, or if the CEO finds the application deficient in any other aspect relevant to the CEO’s regulatory powers, the CEO would not issue the import permit. The CEO will then, under subregulation 4R(3) of the Regulations, refer the application to the Minister for Health, who may, under subregulation 4R(4) grant, or refuse to grant, the permission.
(1) What are the rehabilitation obligations of Christmas Island Phosphates (CIP) in regard to the areas it has mined or re-mined.
(2) What is the existing mine completion criteria for Christmas Island.
(3) Will CIP be required to produce a mine closure plan within the next 12 months.
(4) If CIP is required to produce a mine closure plan, what consultation processes are occurring to determine post-mining land use.
(5) Will CIP be subject to the Mining Rehabilitation Fund levy.
(6) What documentation and monitoring data is available on the rehabilitation performance of CIP to date.
(1) Rehabilitation on Christmas Island is undertaken by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, through its Parks Australia Division. CIP has undertaken rehabilitation works in the past but is not currently doing so.
CIP's rehabilitation obligations are set out in its Mining Lease dated 4 August 1997 and Appendices, including the Environmental Management Plan 1996 (currently being updated). These include the following requirements:
Payment of a conservation levy to be used by Parks Australia for the purpose of minesite rehabilitation. (Mining Lease clause 4.1)
Allow the Commonwealth access to the Leased Land to enable rehabilitation or to inspect rehabilitation work carried out by CIP (Mining Lease clause 9.2 and 9.3)
Retain sufficient backfill material to be used by the Commonwealth and the Lessees for rehabilitation. Backfill material shall be C Grade phosphate rock. (Mining Lease clause 12.1)
Review rehabilitation plans and sufficiency of stockpiles of backfill material annually. (Mining Lease clause 12.2)
Provide machinery and equipment not required for current mining operations, with operators, for carrying out rehabilitation work for the Commonwealth at reasonable arms-length commercial rates. (Mining Lease clause 13)
Parks Australia's rehabilitation work is undertaken in accordance with the Christmas Island Minesite to Forest Rehabilitation Program. Since the beginning of this program in 1989 Parks Australia has been rehabilitating approximately 10-15 hectares per year. The focus of the program is to restore tropical rainforest, and to protect Abbott's booby nesting sites (Abbott's booby is an endangered seabird that nests in the canopy of Christmas Island rainforest and nowhere else).
(2) Mine completion criteria is not specified in CIP's mining lease or environmental management plan. However, the Director of National Parks has recently finalised with the Department of Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport (which administers the mining lease) a Christmas Island Mine site to Forest Rehabilitation Plan 2012-2020. Additionally, an eight year Memorandum of Understanding (for 2012-2020) has been negotiated by the Director of National Parks and the Department of Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport to complement the 2012-2020 rehabilitation plan.
(3) No.
(4) Under the current lease, CIP is able to apply for an extension to the lease if new markets or technology makes further mining viable. The department is unaware whether CIP intends to apply for such an extension. Mine closure planning and community consultation would form part of any lease renegotiation.
(5) The Mining Rehabilitation Fund Bill 2012 (WA) is currently undergoing Western Australian Parliamentary process. The department has not been advised how this legislation will apply to CIP.
(6) The Attorney-General's Department (then responsible for administration of the lease) in 2008 commissioned a report on the extent of possible rehabilitation of mined areas, based on the availability of soil for rehabilitation and current rehabilitation methods. This report found that a further 235 ha of previously degraded land would be able to rehabilitated.
Historical phosphate mining accounts for most of the currently disturbed areas and CIP is not obliged to rehabilitate all of these areas. Apart from its obligation to pay a conservation levy for rehabilitation, CIP has in the past carried out some rehabilitation itself. The company commissioned an assessment of its minesite revegetation activities in 2009. Between 2001 and 2008 CIP rehabilitated 26.22 ha including pinnacle fields (6 totalling 19.44 ha), stockpile bases (4 totalling 5.64 ha) and a chalk pit (1.14 ha).
In relation to the Office of Best Practice Regulation:
(1) For the period between December 2007 to date, how many Prime Minister's exemptions were applied for and not granted, and for each exemption not granted, what were they and when did it occur.
(2) In relation to regulatory impact statements, since July 2011, how many Prime Minister's exemptions has the department or any agencies under the Minister's portfolio: (a) applied for; and (b) received .
(3) Since July 2011, how many instances of non-compliance have there been with the Government's regulatory impact assessment framework.
(4) How many post-implementation reviews has each department or any agencies under the Minister's portfolio conducted since July 2011.
(5) How many post-implementation reviews is the department or any agencies under the Minister's portfolio expected to conduct in the coming 36 months.
(6) What are these post-implementation reviews and when are they expected to be completed.
(1) Applications for Prime Minister's exemptions are not made to the Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR).
(2)-(6) Information regarding Prime Minister's exemptions, non-compliance and post-implementation reviews is listed on the OBPR website and in the Best Practice Regulation Reports, released annually.