The SPEAKER (Mr Harry Jenkins) took the chair at 14:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
The consistent finding from this study is that much lower cost abatement could be achieved through broad, explicitly carbon-pricing approaches …
… we will end up reliant on imported steel, which will not only increase our carbon footprint but will transfer offshore our jobs, our wealth …
UNHCR would welcome approaches from any state contemplating becoming a party to the refugee convention, but UNHCR's Canberra office is not aware of any formal steps by Nauru in this respect …
Mr Abbott in 2009, the interview that was aired on Monday night, you said that if you want to put a price on carbon, why not do it with just a simple tax. How has your position on that changed now?
I was asked if, if you wanted to put a price on carbon—and I didn’t think we should put a price on carbon then …
An emissions trading scheme probably is the best way to put a price on carbon …
Still, a new tax would be the intelligent skeptic's way to deal with minimising emissions …
UNHCR had strong concerns about the Pacific solution …
… in our view, today's closure of the centre at Nauru signals the end of a difficult chapter in Australia's treatment of refugees and asylum seekers.
UNHCR was not involved and, indeed, distanced itself from any role in overseeing or managing the processing facilities on Nauru under the Pacific Solution.
A vast number of scientists, engineers and visionary businessmen are boldly designing a future based on low-impact energy pathways … a future in which substantial health gains can be achieved by eliminating fossil-fuel pollution …
We can understand the logic on the carbon tax and why the government regards it as a necessity …
A price on carbon … is widely recognised as being the most efficient and effective way of reducing emissions to meet this target.
That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Warringah moving immediately—That this House calls on the Prime Minister to explain why she continues to pursue a people swap policy with Malaysia when it is now abundantly clear that Nauru provides an immediate solution to deal with illegal arrivals that is cost effective, humane and proven. In particular:
(1) why would the Prime Minister send illegal arrivals to Malaysia:
(a) which hasn't signed the UN Convention Against Torture, rather than Nauru which has;
(b) which won't sign the UN Declaration on Refugees, when the Nauru Government announced yesterday that they will;
(c) where they would be detained and tagged, rather than Nauru where they would have the run of the island under an open processing centre regime;
(d) when she can't guarantee the standard and accessibility of medical care, when I have personally seen the hospital in Nauru and I can make this guarantee; and
(e) when she can't guarantee the access to school for the children, when I have personally seen the schools in Nauru and I can make this guarantee; and
(2) above all, why should the Australian taxpayer be forced to pay over $300 million for a new processing facility in Malaysia when they have already funded one in Nauru that could be rapidly re-opened for a fraction of the cost and has been proven to work.
I accept that the Government has lost track. We will get back on track. I have taken control—
for precisely that purpose.
I also think that if you want to put a price on carbon, why not just do it with a simple tax? Why not ask motorists to pay more, why not ask electricity consumers to pay more, then at the end of the year you can take your invoices to the tax office and get a rebate? It would be burdensome, all taxes are burdensome, but it would certainly change the price of carbon, raise the price of carbon, without increasing in any way the overall tax burden.
Inevitably, we'll have a price on carbon. We'll have to.
That the motion (Mr Abbott's) be agreed to.
That the House take note of the following documents:
Australian National University—Report for 2010.
Defence Force Discipline Act 1982 —Judge Advocate General—Report for 2010.
That:
(1) the House invite the Rt Hon John Key, Prime Minister of New Zealand, to attend and address the House on Monday, 20 June 2011, at 2.30 p.m.;
(2) unless otherwise ordered, at the sitting of the House on Monday, 20 June 2011:
(a) the sitting commence at approximately 2.30 p.m. when the proceedings shall be welcoming remarks by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition and an address by the Prime Minister of New Zealand, after which the sitting of the House automatically shall be suspended until the ringing of the bells and that so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the order of business for the remainder of the sitting prior to 8 p.m. being as follows:
(i) documents;
(ii) Ministerial Statements;
(iii) notices and orders of the day, government business; and
(b) the provisions of standing order 257(c) shall apply to the area of Members' seats as well as the galleries;
(3) a message be sent to the Senate inviting Senators to attend the House as guests for the welcoming remarks by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition and address by the Rt Hon John Key, Prime Minister of New Zealand;
(4) unless otherwise ordered, the House, at its rising, adjourn until Tuesday, 21 June 2011 at 12 noon and at this sitting of the House:
(a) government business have priority from 12 noon until 2 p.m.;
(b) during the period from 12 noon until 2 p.m. any division on a question called for in the House, other than on a motion moved by a Minister, shall stand deferred until the conclusion of the discussion of a matter of public importance; and
(c) during the period from 12 noon until 2 p.m. if any Member draws the attention of the Speaker to the state of the House, the Speaker shall announce that the House shall be counted at the conclusion of the discussion of a matter of public importance, if the Member then so desires; and
(5) any variation to this arrangement be made only by an action by the Speaker or by a motion moved by a Minister.
The need for a proven, more cost effective and more humane solution to address illegal arrivals to Australia.
I would rule out anywhere that is not a signatory to the refugee convention.
Well the Parliament of Nauru is deadlocked and obviously there isn't a functioning government …
A total of 1637 people were detained in the Nauru and Manus facilities, of whom 1153 … were ultimately resettled from ...
to Australia or other countries. Of those who were resettled … 705 … were resettled in Australia—
Well Nauru would be a very expensive option, a lot more expensive than this Malaysian arrangement …
The nature of symptoms shown maintains that the depression will produce an inevitable cycle of further deterioration. The most important symptoms in this regard are hopelessness, worthlessness, self-blame, cognitive impairment, withdrawal and sleep disturbance.
Instead, frustration and anger are turned inwards against themselves, and this is contributing to a risk of self-harm and suicide.
While the group considers the level of risk with regard to mental health, it is clear that the current environment and circumstances are dominant contributors to their condition.' It further goes on: 'The fact that the OPC operates as an open centre makes little difference to the mental health of residents. The mental health of the residents will continue to deteriorate rapidly while they remain in the OPC. These migrants have been suffering from their mental health cases for several years already and are deemed to be highly vulnerable to do self-harm if they continue to stay in the offshore processing centre in Nauru.
The IOM mental health team have given them all necessary services that they would be needing, but despite the availability of the advanced psychiatric medications frequent monitoring of behaviour and safety prevention provided these patients, and even the availability of a psychiatrist for 24 hours, are not enough to treat their mental health cases.
To us, it's a real commitment by Australia in burden-sharing with a country like Malaysia that is now coping with a large number of refugees and asylum seekers.
We think the agreement has the potential to enhance the protection for refugees in Malaysia, as well as the region as a whole.
If it realises more resettlement opportunities for refugees, this would be a positive outcome.
UNHCR had strong concerns about the 'Pacific Solution' …
… in our view, today's closure of the centre on Nauru signals the end of a difficult chapter in Australia's treatment of refugees and asylum seekers. Many bona fide refugees caught by the policy spent long periods of isolation, mental hardship and uncertainty – and prolonged separation from their families.
UNHCR was not involved and, indeed, distanced itself from any role in overseeing or managing the processing facilities on Nauru under the Pacific Solution. Recent media reports that the centre on Nauru was approved by and run under the auspices of the UN are factually incorrect.
Taxation of Alternative Fuels Legislation Amendment Bill 2011
That this bill be now read a second time.
An efficient and competitive energy sector is a key priority for the Government's strategic policy agenda. With advances in technology producing cleaner vehicle engines and with the continued emergence of alternative fuels, it is clear that Australia must have a more consistent and sustainable fuel tax regime. The existing arrangements have created taxation distortions in the fuel market leading to inefficient investments in fuel production and equipment and uncertainty for users of fuels.
… today I am announcing important long term reforms to the excise treatment of fuels. The reforms establish a broad sustainable taxation framework for fuels, by addressing a number of anomalies in the current fuel tax system and providing increased long term certainty for investors, while meeting Government commitments and providing time for industry to adjust.
The announcement of the measure in the 2004-05 Budget means that industry is aware of and has been expecting the proposed changes …
Significant deviations from the announced policy that impact on the tax liability of the affected industries may unsettle investment decision making.
The use of natural gas is less polluting than the use of coal and oil. A major benefit is that natural gas is some 65 to 70 per cent less greenhouse gas intensive than either brown or black coal. Another decided advantage of gas is that it contains far fewer particulates and other elemental contaminants than either coal or oil. As a consequence natural gas can be used as an alternative fuel for transportation in the form of either compressed natural gas or liquefied natural gas, especially in heavy transport such as public buses or road freight carriers that can use centralised refuelling points.
Although the taxation based advantage of alternative fuels will be reduced, the tax changes continue to provide support to the alternative fuels industry in recognition of the potential environmental, fuel security and regional benefits that these industries can generate.
The objective of the LPG Vehicle Scheme is to increase the use of LPG is a transport fuel. The Scheme provides grants for:
the LPG conversion of a registered vehicle; or
the purchase of a new LPG vehicle (this includes vehicles fitted with LPG at the time of manufacture and vehicles fitted with LPG after manufacture but prior to first registration).
The introduction of excise on LPG is at total odds with the Government's policy on energy security and carbon reduction. Why tax an alternative fuel that will underpin our future energy needs, and is cleaner and greener than petrol and diesel?
LPG is a cheaper, greener alternative fuel choice the taxi industry. A taxi powered by LPG emits up to 13% less carbon emissions—
than a petrol-run taxi. It is also up to 50% cheaper than petrol at the bowser.
… … …
If the excise is introduced many jobs in the tax industry could be lost. The increase in costs to many of our passengers will be unbearable. Our drivers and fleet operators will not be able to afford to absorb such a price hike either.
Many taxi licence owners and fleet operators feel they were 'duped' into converting the vehicles to LPG and opting to use the greener gaseous fuel to run their business. The Government encouraged LPG conversions with rebates and other incentives. When taxi fleet operators opted to for LPG, they did so in good faith. They believed they were doing the right thing by environment, their business and customers.
… … …
If a carbon tax is imposed, a further 4.5 cents per litre would be added to the cost of LPG—a double whammy for those who can least afford it.
We strongly believe that any excise will hurt the taxi industry, bring the LPG industry to its knees, and will hurt other industries and small businesses that rely on LPG.
That this bill be now read a second time.
That this bill be now read a third time.
Excise Tariff Amendment (Taxation of Alternative Fuels) Bill 2011
That this bill be now read a third time.
Customs Tariff Amendment (Taxation of Alternative Fuels) Bill 2011
That this bill be now read a third time.
Energy Grants (Cleaner Fuels) Scheme Amendment Bill 2011
(1) Clause 2, page 1 (line 9) to page 2 (line 6), omit subclauses (1) and (2), substitute:
This Act commences, or is taken to have commenced, on 30 June 2011.
That the amendment (Mr Macfarlane's) be agreed to.
That this bill be now read a third time.
Education is simply the soul of a society as it passes from one generation to another.
Lifelong member of the Labor Party and Trotskyist. Bookseller. Bibliophile. Historian. Union agitator. Anti-censorship battler. Bohemian. Irish Catholic. Polemicist.
I deliberately came in a couple of minutes late when the debate on ASIO started, and sat quietly when Lionel Murphy moved for reform of ASIO.
Then I moved from the floor for the abolition of this repressive instrument of the bourgeois state, which caused a certain amount of consternation, and I made a fiery speech in support of my motion.
Lionel Murphy, the left parliamentarian who was moving the formal proposal for the reform of ASIO, was a bit startled, and then rather angry, and Clyde Cameron and Egerton were also pretty irritated. However, my oratory was reasonably persuasive. One funny feature of the vote was that Gough Whitlam was out of the room, talking in the corridor, when the debate took place. He came back into the conference room for the vote, took a cursory look around, saw some people he identified with voting for my amendment, and not entirely realising what was being discussed, he voted for my amendment, which was carried by one vote.
There was much consternation, and Cameron and Egerton, who were the managers of the conference, ran around in a bit of a flap. Eventually they moved for the recommittal of my amendment, which was then lost by a few votes. So, for all of 45 minutes, abolition of ASIO was federal Labor Party policy.
The plains are all awave with grass,
The skies are deepest blue;
And leisurely the cattle pass
And feed the day long through;
But when we sight the station gate,
We make the stockwhips crack,
A welcome sound to those who wait
To greet the cattle back:
The ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Anna Burke) took the chair at 16:00.
Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012
The benefits of management should exceed the costs of implementing control.
As part of an integrated pest animal management program, commercial harvesting may offset management costs.
Labor believes that these programs are invaluable to the ex-service community.
Well trained and supported ESOs and individuals contribute greatly to improving the operation of DVA—and they also provide a saving to government through their work.
In recognition of this fact, Labor will commit an additional $8 million to support ex service organisations to provide essential services for their members.
"I'm always pleased when I turn off …
"You never feel completely safe on that road."
"So there is no justification for this action. There is no excuse to shut Bathurst down."
"For Rex to say that it is all down to the loss of the federal rebate scheme, I don’t think is right, because they already got rid of the Cobar and Bourke runs very early on [when it was only touted that the scheme would go]. And if they are worried about capacity then look at bringing back the 19-seater.
"All it is is talk. They … really have no issues here."
The subsidy only amounts to a few dollars a ticket. Airlines will not keep going just because there is a subsidy.
If people don't use it, it won't survive even with government subsidies …
Further to the answer to question in writing, will he provide an update on the answer in respect of annual Official Development Assistance eligible expenditure by other government departments.
Details of Official Development Assistance (ODA) eligible expenditure by Other Government Departments from 2008-09 and 2009-10 financial years are presented in Table 1. This table updates the information provided to you in response to your question of 16 June 2008.
Table 1- ODA eligible expenditure by Other Government Departments 2007-08 to 2009-10
Source: AusAID Statistical Database
*includes Debt relief to Iraq
**Preliminary results from most recent OGDs Survey
In respect of the Home Insulation and Green Loans programs, has an analysis and/or modelling been undertaken by or on behalf of the Government to examine the extent to which these programs (a) would reduce, or (b) have reduced, Australia’s carbon dioxide/greenhouse gas emissions; if so, when and by whom, and will he provide a summary of the findings.
Analysis and modelling has been undertaken to determine the impact of the Home Insulation Program on Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions as part of the 2010 emissions projections. The results of the modelling were released in the report Australia’s Emissions Projections on 9 February 2011. This modelling was undertaken by SKM-MMA and ACIL Tasman. The modelling and analysis estimated that the program will reduce emissions by 2.4 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (Mt CO2-e) in 2010-11, coinciding with the first full year of benefits to the 1.2 million homes insulated, and will result in cumulative emissions reductions of more than 14 Mt CO2-e in the period to 2020.
Modelling and analysis of the impact of the Green Loans program on greenhouse gas emissions has not yet been undertaken, pending the completion of an evaluation of the program’s outcomes.
(1) In respect of the Australian Standard Geographical Classification (ASGC)—Remoteness Areas (RA), will there be a limit by (a) number, (b) dollar value, or (c) share of available funding, to Medicare rebates available for online consultations for patients living in: (i) non-capital city RA1, (ii) capital city RA1, (iii) RA2, (iv) RA3, (v) RA4, and (vi) RA5.
(2) In respect of the ASGC—RA, will there be a limit by (a) number, (b) dollar value, or (c) share of available funding, to the $35 million telehealth training initiative for health professionals in: (i) non-capital city RA1, (ii) capital city RA1, (iii) RA2, (iv) RA3, (v) RA4, and (vi) RA5.
(1) No. Rebates will be available for patients in inner Metropolitan areas and rural and regional areas.
(2) No.
What number of projects have been funded by the Government’s $35 million telehealth training initiative which commenced in January 2011:
The funding available to support training and supervision for health professionals using online technologies is $32.1 million.
Negotiations to fund projects are underway with a number of organisations to best target the type of training needed to support and encourage the uptake of online health service provision. In seeking the views of the health professions involved, including consumers, the Department has consulted with the organisations represented by the Telehealth Advisory Group to provide advice and feedback that will enable the Department to meet the training needs of this initiative. At the current time, negotiations are ongoing.
(1) How many personal staff are employed by the Minister.
(2) What is the (a) total cost, and (b) breakdown of costs, of all capital works and acquisitions in the Minister's private office since 3 December 2007.
(1) The employment of staff under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 is administered by the Department of Finance and Deregulation. On 22 February 2011, the Department tabled with the Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee a list of Government Personal Staff Positions as at 1 February 2011.
(2) The cost of capital works and acquisitions for ministers ' offices is shared by the Department of Parliamentary Services (DPS), Department of Finance and Deregulation (DoFD) and home departments in line with Appendix 2 of Supporting Ministers, Upholding the Values . The Special Minister of State will accordingly respond on behalf of all ministers in respect of costs incurred by the DPS and DoFD. I am advised that the costs incurred by Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations and Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs are as follows:
(1) How many personal staff are employed by the Minister.
(2) What is the (a) total cost, and (b) breakdown of costs, of all capital works and acquisitions in the Minister’s private office since 3 December 2007.
(1) The employment of staff under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 is administered by the Department of Finance and Deregulation. On 22 February 2011, DoFD tabled with the Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee a list of Government Personal Staff Positions as at 1 February 2011.
(2) The cost of capital works and acquisitions for ministers’ offices is shared by the Department of Parliamentary Services (DPS), Department of Finance and Deregulation (DoFD) and home departments in line with Appendix 2 of Supporting Ministers, Upholding the Values. The Special Minister of State will accordingly respond on behalf of all ministers in respect of costs incurred by the DPS and DoFD.
I am advised that the costs incurred by the Attorney-General’s Department are approximately as follows:
ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
MINISTER’S OFFICE
(1) How many personal staff are employed by the Minister.
(2) What is the
(a) total cost, and
(b) breakdown of costs, of all capital works and acquisitions in the Minister's private office since 3 December 2007.
(1) The employment of staff under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 is administered by the Department of Finance and Deregulation (DoFD). On 22 February 2011, DoFD tabled with the Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee a list of Government Personal Staff Positions as at 1 February 2011.
(2) The cost of capital works and acquisitions for ministers' offices is shared by the Department of Parliamentary Services (DPS), DoFD and home departments in line with Appendix 2 of Supporting Ministers, Upholding the Values. The Special Minister of State will accordingly respond on behalf of all ministers in respect of costs incurred by the DPS and DoFD.
I am advised that the costs incurred by the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency are as follows:
Note that I was appointed the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency on 11 September 2010. As such, no data is provided for the period prior to this date.
In the calendar years 2009, 2010 and 2011 (to date), within our Foreign Aid Budget, how many tertiary scholarships were awarded to (a) Indonesian citizens, (b) Indonesian public servants, and (c) people residing in Java.
Within the foreign aid budget, the Australian Government offers long-term and short-term awards, administered under the Australia Awards.
Long-term Australia Awards are tertiary scholarships for study towards undergraduate and post-graduate qualifications. In the calendar years 2009, 2010 and 2011, Indonesian citizens were awarded a combined total of 1,041 long-term Australia Awards, including 688 public servants and 617 residents of Java.
Short-term Australia Awards include fellowships and professional development programs at a range of organisations, including tertiary institutions. Short-term awards do not necessarily result in a formal qualification. In the calendar years 2009, 2010 and 2011, Indonesian citizenswere awarded a combined total of 362 short-term Australia Awards for placement at tertiary institutions. This includes 210 public servants and 207 residents of Java.
The majority of Australia Awards awarded to Indonesia are administered by the Australian Agency for International Development, with the remainder administered by the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.
The yearly breakdowns of the long and short-term Australia Awards are shown below:
(1) When he decided on 12 November 2009 to approve the extradition of Australian citizen Mr Charles Zentai to the Republic of Hungary, was he aware of the following information that had been provided to his department and office, that the: (a) Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (CDPP) had advised the Australian Federal police (AFP) that there was no evidence to support a charge against Mr Zentai of a war crime (or any other crime); (b) CDPP and the AFP had decided not to prosecute Mr Zentai for the alleged war crime, although if there had been sufficient evidence to support a charge, it would have been open to the Australian authorities to charge Mr Zentai and have him tried in Australia, rather than extradite him; and (c) Republic of Hungary only wanted Mr Zentai to be extradited for questioning, as no charge has been laid against him.
(2) If so, did he consider this information before approving Mr Zentai’s extradition to Hungary, and what were his reasons for making the determination.
(3) If not, was he made aware of this information after the Hon. Justice Neil McKerracher set aside, in December 2010, the Minister’s determination to extradite Mr Zentai to Hungary, and why did the Minister then authorise an appeal against Justice McKerracher’s decision?
(1) As set out in the judgment of His Honour Justice McKerracher in Zentai v Honourable Brendan O’Connor (No 3) [2010] FCA 691, prior to making a surrender determination in respect of Mr Zentai, the Minister was provided with a submission (annexing relevant documentation) prepared by the Attorney-General’s Department. The submission discussed advice provided by the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions to the Australian Federal Police on evidentiary issues relating to the allegations against Mr Zentai and also discussed the basis on which the Republic of Hungary sought Mr Zentai’s extradition. As the issues raised by the honourable member are the subject of proceedings currently before the Full Court of the Federal Court, it is not appropriate to comment further.
(2) The submission prepared by the Attorney-General’s Department referred to in response to Question (1) above was before the Minister at the time he determined that Mr Zentai was to be surrendered to Hungary to face prosecution for a war crime. In view of the issues raised in litigation presently before the Full Court of the Federal Court in this matter, it is not appropriate to comment further.
(3) The decision of Mr Justice McKerracher of 2 July 2010 raises significant and complex issues for the administration of Australia’s extradition scheme. It is appropriate that an appeal be pursued.
(1) Has he ever suggested to the Hungarian authorities that they conduct their questioning of Mr Charles Zentai in Australia; if so, what was their response; if not, why not, particularly given (a) the age and health of Mr Zentai, (b) fact that the Hungarian authorities have said they only want Mr Zentai for questioning; and (c) Mr Zentai has stated that he is prepared to co-operate with investigators and answer questions under oath.
(1) The Republic of Hungary made a formal request under the Treaty on Extradition between Australia and the Republic of Hungary for the extradition of Mr Zentai to face prosecution for a war crime. Australia has an obligation to consider that request in accordance with the Treaty and the Extradition Act 1988.
(1) What total cost has the Government incurred to date (including departmental personal time and cost) in seeking to extradite Mr Charles Zentai to the Republic of Hungary, and what total estimated cost will be incurred in appealing the decision of the Hon. Justice Neil McKerracher.
(1) As at 20 April 2011, the approximate amount of costs billed to the Commonwealth relating to litigation in the matter of Mr Zentai’s extradition is $505,400 (including GST and disbursement). This figure includes costs of approximately $247,000 incurred in earlier proceedings instituted by Mr Zentai challenging various aspects of the extradition process, including the constitutionality of the Extradition Act 1988. Mr Zentai was unsuccessful in those proceedings. The Australia Central Authroity for extradition in the Attorney-General’s Department does not maintain records of the time particular officers spend on particular matters.
As at 20 April 2011, the approximate amount of costs billed to the Commonwealth in the appeal proceedings is $105,400.
In respect of the Passenger Movement Charge:
(a) what total sum of money is forecast to be collected in (i) 2010-11, (ii) 2011-12, (iii) 2012-13, and (iv) 2013-14;
(b) what proportion of money collected is returned to consolidated revenue, and
(c) of the proportion of money collected that is not returned to consolidated revenue, on what programs will it be expended in (i) 2010-11, (ii) 2011-12, (iii) 2012-13, and (iv) 2013-14, and for each program, what sum of money will be expended each year.
(a) What total sum of money is forecast to be collected in
(i) 2010-11, (ii) 2011-12, (iii) 2012-13, and (iv) 2013-14
The total sum of money forecast to be collected for each year, as detailed in the 2011-12 Portfolio Budget Statements, is as follows:
(i) 2010-11 is $630.6m
(ii) 2011-12 is $670.6m
(iii) 2012-13 is $712.3m
(iv) 2013-14 is $755.7m
(b) What proportion of money collected is returned to consolidated revenue.
All Passenger Movement Charge revenue is returned to consolidated revenue.
(c) Of the proportion of money collected that is not returned to consolidated revenue, on what programs will it be expended in (i) 2010-11, (ii) 2011-12, (iii) 2012-13, and (iv) 2013-14, and for each program, what sum of money will be expended each year.
See answer to (b).
Using the first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scenario (A1F1—business as usual), with the exception of Australia being the only country to act on emissions (resulting in a 50 per cent reduction in CO2 by 2050 which is sustained to 2100), (a) how much lower are global average temperatures estimated to be by 2100 than if Australia had not acted, and (b) what is this abatement expected to cost Australia annually.
The Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency advises that:
Assuming that (a) the entire globe takes action on reducing CO2 emissions and as a result such emissions are halved by 2050, and (b) this level of emissions is sustained beyond 2050: (i) how many degrees lower is the expected global average temperature expected to be than if Australia alone had not acted; and (ii) what is this abatement expected to cost Australia annually.
The Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency advises that:
If, as posited by the honourable member, Australia alone did not act to reduce emissions it would be possible that other countries would adopt policies that would impact adversely on Australia's economy. The cost of this to a small, open economy like Australia could be considerable.
Since the inception of the Digital Education Revolution program, by electorate, how many (a) students are, or have been, eligible to receive a Commonwealth-funded computer, and (b) of the students in part (a) have received their computer as at 23 March 2011.)
(a) The Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations used information collected through a Preliminary Survey conducted in early 2008 to establish that approximately 780,000 computers would be required to achieve a one to one student to computer ratio in Years 9 to 12. Since the Preliminary Survey, there has been some movement in the number of computers required as a result of:
The total number of computers now required is 786,848. This figure has not been broken down by electorate.
(b) The list below outlines the total number of computers installed by electorate as at 31 March 2011.
Will the Minister rule out the rollout of the National Broadband Network by overhead cable in the electorate of Bradfield; if not, (a) in which locations is it proposed that overhead cables will be rolled out in Bradfield, and (b) will the Minister arrange for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of NBN Co., or an executive who reports directly to the CEO, to attend a community meeting in Bradfield to explain to its constituents the details of the proposed network rollout, and to receive any community feedback on this; if not, why not.
(1) The location of overhead and underground cabling will be determined by NBN Co Limited (NBN Co) on an area-by-area basis. Factors that will influence whether overhead or underground cabling will be used include availability of existing infrastructure and the completion of Definitive Agreements between NBN Co and with Telstra which will provide NBN Co with access to Telstra's underground pit and pipes.
(2) NBN Co's Corporate Plan indicates that 75 per cent of the network will be deployed underground. NBN Co has attended community meetings in first release sites to discuss details of the proposed network rollout and receive community feedback. NBN Co will contact residents and property owners in Bradfield when the NBN rollout commences in that area.
In respect of the introduction of a personally controlled electronic health record,
(a) what sum of funding has been allocated for the introduction of a personally controlled electronic health record, and in which years, and
(b) what measurable outcomes will be achieved with this funding, and
(c) what key performance indicators, benchmarks and deadlines are being monitored in this expenditure.
(a)
(b) The investment over two years will fund the core national infrastructure, standards and tools to provide all Australians with the ability to choose to register for a secure PCEHR from July 2012.
(c) A summary of key milestones and timeframes are listed in the publication A National Health and Hospital Network for Australia’s Future: Delivering the Reforms in the table below:
Has his department and/or AusAID provided any briefings to members of the Australian Greens party and/or Independent Members of Parliament; if so, how many and on what dates.
The department does not centrally maintain records of briefings provided to individual Members of Parliament. The department regularly provides assistance, including briefings, to Members of Parliament who travel overseas. To provide the information sought would entail a significant diversion of resources and I do not consider the additional work can be justified.
Does the Keith District Hospital receive support under the Multi-purpose Services program; if so, what sum; if not, why not?
The Keith District Hospital is not a Multi-Purpose Service. As such, it does not receive Australian Government funding for this purpose.
Further to her answer to question in writing No. 199 (House Hansard, 10 May 2011, page 59), are there records within her department or office that provide the basis for which the then Prime Minister made the claims in his press statement on 7 April 2009; if so, can she indicate what those records show.
My department and office have been unable to locate any records relating to the basis for the figures in the former Prime Minister’s press statement made on 7 April 2009.