The SPEAKER (Mr Harry Jenkins) took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
The SPEAKER: If the member for Braddon might permit me, might I say good morning to you all on this fine Tuesday morning.
Australian Energy Market Amendment (National Energy Retail Law) Bill 2011
Migration Amendment (Complementary Protection) Bill 2011
Schools Assistance Amendment Bill 2011
Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Child Care Financial Viability) Bill 2011
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Mining, Petroleum and Water Resources) Bill 2011
National Health Reform Amendment (National Health Performance Authority) Bill 2011
That the amendments be agreed to.
Extradition and Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation Amendment Bill 2011
That this bill be now read a third time.
Clean Energy Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Income Tax Rates Amendments) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Household Assistance Amendments) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Tax Laws Amendments) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Fuel Tax Legislation Amendment) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Customs Tariff Amendment) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Excise Tariff Legislation Amendment) Bill 2011
Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Import Levy) Amendment Bill 2011
Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Manufacture Levy) Amendment Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Unit Shortfall Charge—General) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Unit Issue Charge—Auctions) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Unit Issue Charge—Fixed Charge) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (International Unit Surrender Charge) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Charges—Customs) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Charges—Excise) Bill 2011
Clean Energy Regulator Bill 2011
Climate Change Authority Bill 2011
Steel Transformation Plan Bill 2011
The Australian Trade and Industry Alliance claimed manufacturers would be worse off than their European counterparts under an emissions trading scheme.
… 950,000 workers were employed by companies which would be exposed to the tax without compensation or government assistance.
… 14.6 million European manufacturing workers were protected through free carbon permits—
… the new data highlights the risk to manufacturing jobs posed by the carbon tax at a time when firms are already under severe strain as a result of the strength of the Australian dollar.
There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead.
I would rule out anywhere that is not a signatory to the Refugee Convention.
To sever Australia's alliance with the US, remove the spy base at Pine Gap—
To sever Australia's alliance with the US, remove the spy base at Pine Gap, introduce death duties and redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor.
… the people who still say that global warming isn't real are actually in the same boat with the flat earth society. They get together and party on Saturday nights with the folks that believe the moon landing was in a movie lot in Arizona.
I am writing to show our support for the Labor government to implement a carbon price and other measures for addressing climate change and transforming our economy away from reliance on fossil fuels. Please do not allow a fear campaign to weaken your resolve—stay firm and lets take Australia into a more sustainable future. I am sick of hearing from people who still think they are living in the 1980s—it's time to embrace the 21st century and build new industries. This is a key initiative I want from the Labor government that I voted for.
Almost 85% expect carbon tax will have a negative impact on business profitability
Over a third of retailers surveyed to shed staff as a result of lost trade
The vast majority of those who have spent their professional lives seeking to understand climate and the impacts of human activities on it have no doubt that average temperatures on earth are rising and the human-induced increases in greenhouse gases are making major contributions to these rises. They are supported in this by the learned academies of science … in all of the countries of scientific accomplishment.
You know, the whole hype that Tony Abbott has created about in his terms 'unimaginable you know cost impacts', of course is completely deceitful and untrue.
The concern he has generated about job security is also completely unfounded and untrue.
He has said that the entire coal industry will be destroyed. That's what he said!
He's forecast that entire towns and regions are going to be wiped off the map, that the manufacturing industry will die.
I mean, this is the most absurd hyperventilating tripe that I can remember in public life.
While gross domestic product has been growing at about 10 per cent during the past five years, Chinese consumption of coal has been increasing at about 17 per cent each year and coal production has been increasing by more than 20 per cent in the same period.
In this respect, the planned introduction of an emissions trading scheme will be a key test for both sides of the House. I believe this debate risks being hijacked by extremists who are intolerant of a range of legitimate views.
I believe an emissions trading scheme is one of the policy levers that can be used to change the energy mix in Australia.
… the judgment of history comes sooner than we expect.
Democracy is a universal value based on the freely expressed will of people to determine their own political, economic, social and cultural systems …
'It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.'
Who controls the past controls the future.
… we want to be able to enjoy a stable climate similar to that which our parents and grandparents enjoyed … we need … a safe climate for our future.
… paralysing stupidity, a mass of imbecile enthusiasms—one of those completely unquestioning, devoted drudges on whom…the stability of the Party depended.
I know it was not everyone who thought it was such a great thing to save the rainforests, but I make this prediction here today: when we are all dead and buried and our children's children are reflecting on what was the best thing the Labor Government in New South Wales did in the 20th century, they will come up with the answer that we saved the rainforests.
Australia's health care system is in a shambles. The real villain is Labor's doctrinaire commitment to a universal government health insurance system, Medicare. By discouraging self-provision, by increasing health funding from the taxpayer and removing disincentives to overuse of medical services, Medicare has created a system obsessed with cost at the expense of quality, security and comfort.
'We'll all be rooned,' said Hanrahan,
'Before the year is out.'
If there is still no global agreement by 2020 Australia will have remained competitive while reducing emissions by five per cent; avoided tens-of-billions-of-tax, yet still be in a good position to assess the way forward from there.
On the other hand, Hansen never appeared on ABC television. He had only two interviews on Radio National (one on a program that goes to air at 10pm) and three mentions in online coverage. The extent of Hansen's ABC presence was five appearances in total, compared to 47 for Monckton.
Ring not only denies any human role in climate change but purports to use astrology to predict weather and earthquakes. In former times he was a clown, magician and author of the book Pawmistry: How To Read Your Cat's Paws .
While scientists have been accused of being on a funding gravy-train, independent journalist Graham Readfearn has also turned the spotlight on Plimer's growing personal wealth—about $920,000 in the in the past two years alone, he asserts—from fees and share sales related to his "role as a director and chairman with several mining companies …"
In a smaller poll of 140 members, conducted after the release of the government's carbon tax package on July 10, about 60 per cent of respondents described it as good economic policy.
More than 80 per cent of respondents who expressed a view said they didn't think the Coalition's approach to reducing carbon emissions was a sound economic proposal.
Of the 928 papers reviewed, 75 per cent explicitly—
endorsed the consensus position on climate change and 25 per cent took no position … Another study surveyed 3146 earth scientists asking them whether they thought human activity was a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures. The table below—
shows that 97.5 per cent of climatologists that actively publish articles in peer-reviewed journals answered yes.
Australia will be hotter in coming decades
Australian average temperatures are projected to rise by 0.6 to 1.5 ºC by 2030. If global greenhouse gas emissions continue—
warming is projected to be in the range of 2.2 to 5.0 ºC by 2070.
In Australia compared to the period 1981-2000, decreases in rainfall are likely in the decades to come in southern areas of Australia during winter
Climate change is real
Our observations clearly demonstrate that climate change is real.
The authorities must take advantage of the favourable economic situation to pursue long term structural reforms, including those that favour output involving less CO2 emissions.
Last year, a record 30.6 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide poured into the atmosphere, mainly from burning fossil fuel—a rise of 1.6Gt on 2009, according to estimates from the IEA regarded as the gold standard for emissions data.
… would mean around a 50% chance of a rise in global average temperature of more than 4C by 2100
… … …
… disaster could yet be averted, if governments heed the warning. "If we have bold, decisive and urgent action, very soon, we still have a chance of succeeding …
Yet even now politicians in each of the great powers are eyeing up extraordinary and risky ways to extract the world's last remaining reserves of fossil fuels—even from under the melting ice of the Arctic.
If we cut emissions today, global temperatures are not likely to drop for about a thousand years.
The Howard Government … proposed an emissions trading scheme because this seemed the best way to obtain the highest emission reduction at the lowest cost.
My views on climate change—the need for a carbon price, the fact that market-based mechanisms are the most efficient ways of cutting emissions—
my views are the same today as they were when I was part of John Howard’s cabinet, and those views were held by the Howard government.
… inevitably we will have a price on carbon … we will have to …
I also think that if you want to put a price on carbon why not just do it with a simple tax …
I don't think we can say that the science is settled here.
… whether carbon dioxide is quite the environmental villain that some people make it out to be is not yet proven.
There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement.
This is the critical decade. Decisions we make from now to 2020 will determine the severity of climate change our children and grandchildren experience.
All credible studies show strong employment growth under a pollution price and in the transition to a low carbon economy. It’s estimated we’ll see an additional 1.6 million jobs between now and 2020 whilst cutting pollution by at least 159 million tonnes.
Even the coal industry is expected to see between 10,000 and 16,000 new mining jobs above 2008 levels.
Dear Joanna Gash,
Hi. I am John, a 16 year old boy. I am writing to you as I have a traineeship on a dairy farm at Milton and think that the carbon tax will not be fair on farming with all the prices that will be going up. We have also been hit with the milk price also.
We work very hard. It is a 7 day week, 365 days a year and out in all weather. But we love our jobs and would like to keep it. But if there is no help for what farmers that are left we could all be out of work and that would be hard as I have just started my life in the work force and want to keep my job as a dairy worker.
Thank you.
… no country currently imposes an economy-wide tax on greenhouse gas emissions or has in place an economy-wide ETS.
I have been very upfront about why I think a carbon tax isn’t the most sensible thing for Australia.
If we cut emissions today, global temperatures are not likely to drop for about a thousand years.
… … …
If the world as a whole cut all emissions tomorrow the average temperature of the planet is not going to drop in several hundred years, perhaps as much as a thousand years because the system is overburdened with CO2 that has to be absorbed and that only happens slowly.
… millions of Australians will be better off receiving more in assistance than what will be required by them to deal with any price impacts.
There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead.
… the Prime Minister has never seen a tax she didn’t like and never had a tax she wouldn’t hike.
I am trying to give her—
the chance to give this country a border protection policy. The ball is in her court, I hope she’ll return it.
I'd be talking to the Liberals about getting Nauru to work. I think that's the only sustainable position.
… provides more protection for asylum seekers than the two Government versions and it is less likely to be the subject of complex judicial proceedings.
Our short advice is as follows. In the light of—
Plaintiff M70 we do not have reasonable confidence on the material with which we have been briefed that the power conferred by s 198A could currently be exercised to take asylum seekers from Australia to either Nauru or to PNG for determination of their refugee status.
Stable policy and certainty is crucial to all long-term infrastructure investments.
There's very much a higher premium now before legislation has been passed. But then once legislation goes through, I think in most people's minds that premium will reduce. That means the legislation needs to go through.
Project financing in Australia has become a bit more problematic. We're a bit of an anomaly globally. The only thing we could put it down to was we were having one of the most ferocious debates in the world on a price of carbon.
We're actually out on the ground, we're doing programs, we're doing community sports days, community days, all about our people living healthier lifestyles and living longer. I'd love—
to come up here … I think he'd change his words pretty quick.
That the House take note of the following document:
Privacy Act 1988 —Report on the operation of the Act for 2009-10—Correction.
The loss of confidence in Australia's border protection system.
Now, from our point of view, we’ve said … that the regional processing centre would need to be, for the sake of decency, at a country which is a signatory to the Refugee Convention.
… from our point of view, we’ve said … that the regional processing centre would need to be, for the sake of decency, at a country which is a signatory to the Refugee Convention.
The Left of the Party does not believe we should go back to Howard-era politics.
Look, this business of requiring that they sign the Convention is simply a furphy …
Look, this business of requiring that they sign the Convention is simply a furphy—
We say that asylum seekers should be treated the same regardless of how they land. We say that they should be dealt with fairly, swiftly and on Australian soil.
For at least a decade the Coalition's position has been crystal clear.
The Coalition’s position for at least a decade has been—
'we will determine who comes to our country and the circumstances in which they come'.
The so-called Pacific solution is nothing more than the world's most expensive detour sign. It does not stop you getting to Australia; it just puts you through a detour on the way while Australian taxpayers pay for it and pay for it.
Labor will end the so-called Pacific solution—the processing and detaining of asylum seekers on Pacific islands—because it is costly, unsustainable and wrong as a matter of principle.
The so-called Pacific solution—stripped of the other policies that the government has scrambled around and tried to put in place since the Tampa —is really no more than the processing of people offshore in third countries.
It is a policy that Labor does not support, because it achieves nothing and costs so much in so many ways …
The major Labor policy commitment in my portfolio was to end the former Howard Government's discredited Pacific Solution. That was a shameful and wasteful chapter in Australia's immigration history.
The Pacific Solution was rightly criticised for seeking to shift our international responsibilities onto developing countries—when we should have been standing up and shouldering those responsibilities ourselves.
The closure of Nauru and Manus Island…Of course they had basically—what shall we say—outlived their need…I don't think we need to again have Nauru and Manus Island operating, because we've got of course Christmas Island.
That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the member for Menzies speaking in reply to the ministerial statement for a period not exceeding 10 minutes.
Clean Energy Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Income Tax Rates Amendments) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Household Assistance Amendments) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Tax Laws Amendments) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Fuel Tax Legislation Amendment) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Customs Tariff Amendment) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Excise Tariff Legislation Amendment) Bill 2011
Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Import Levy) Amendment Bill 2011
Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Manufacture Levy) Amendment Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Unit Shortfall Charge—General) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Unit Issue Charge—Auctions) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Unit Issue Charge—Fixed Charge) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (International Unit Surrender Charge) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Charges—Customs) Bill 2011
Clean Energy (Charges—Excise) Bill 2011
Clean Energy Regulator Bill 2011
Climate Change Authority Bill 2011
Steel Transformation Plan Bill 2011
I also want to be very clear with Australians about what pricing carbon does. It has price impacts. It's meant to. That's the whole point.
… the true cost of carbon pollution needs to be attached to its production and use …
… carbon emissions need to have a price.
And it is price that changes behaviour.
We have made our position very clear. We have ruled it out.
The carbon price will impose a $40 billion cost on the generation sector, most of which will be passed on to electricity customers;
Wholesale electricity prices will almost double to $100/MWh by 2020, according to ACIL Tasman;
Despite the $40 billion cost, the carbon price will produce relatively little change in emissions from the generation sector. Modelling for Treasury forecasts that the carbon price may reduce emissions from this sector by as little as 10 million tonnes by 2020. Existing State schemes can deliver similar abatement at a much lower cost;
The starting price of $23/tonne is far higher than carbon prices elsewhere in the world. As high as it is, the carbon price is still less than half the $60 price required to prompt switching from coal to gas-fired generation, according to Treasury estimates;
Applying a high carbon price now puts Australia far ahead of other countries. The Productivity Commission has confirmed that, without a carbon price, Australia is already "in the middle of the pack" in terms of climate change action;
On Treasury figures, there will be a major wealth transfer from Australia with businesses buying 94 million international permits in 2020 at a cost up to $3.7 billion. This will call into question the capacity of governments to continue to compensate households and trade exposed industries;
The absence of clear emissions caps to 2020 denies investors the certainty they need to make the long-term investments needed for energy security;
The narrow scope of the plan (only 62 per cent of Australia's emissions are captured) imposes a heavy burden on covered sectors and risks seeing expensive abatement in covered sectors made meaningless by uncontrolled emissions growth elsewhere;
Restricting business' access to least cost abatement (e.g. restrictions on buying overseas permits) will force up costs for no environmental benefit;
Unlike the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS), the Clean Energy Future plan will force up electricity prices by requiring generators to buy permits in advance, sometimes years in advance, for electricity covered by future contracts.
While brown-coal-fired generators receive $5.5 billion in compensation for asset value losses, other coal-fired businesses, including businesses owned by Australian taxpayers, will receive virtually nothing. Public enterprises in New South Wales, Queensland and West Australia will lose $4 to $5.5 billion in asset value;
The policy prevents an open, competitive auction for plant closures. Arbitrary eligibility conditions rule out the possibility of obtaining formal and cheaper abatement; and
The measures announced to support energy security offer no genuine assistance for most generators.
… as long as our primary energy sources are fossil fuel based, all our best efforts to reduce consumption will not deliver a net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and will have a negative economic impact.
Well certainly what we rejected is this hysterical allegation that somehow we are moving towards a carbon tax … We certainly reject that.
… I have previously stated my view that mainstream science is right in pointing to high risks from unmitigated climate change. I have also said that economic growth and a healthy climate are not mutually exclusive.
I have some concerns about the proposed carbon tax and in its current form I do not think the tax and associated policies are in Australia’s best interest.
First, I have deep reservations about Australia being a world leader in this area when it represents less than 2% of global CO2 emissions. Should we be proposing a scheme when much of the world has yet to commit to a carbon price?
These sentiments echo those of Nobel prize winner, Michael Spence. In his book, “The Next Convergence”,—
Michael makes the point that countries should coordinate plans so nations and regions do not suffer competitive disadvantages. It is also surely imprudent to introduce new taxes when there is so much global uncertainty and confidence is faltering.
… Julia Gillard fronted the media yesterday spruiking the benefits of the controversial carbon tax, looming large in the background was the metaphorical rhinoceros.
Their influence over the Federal Government should not be underestimated, particularly when the Prime Minister herself promised in the election campaign there would be no carbon tax on her watch.
… … …
Once again families who strive hard to better themselves and try to build a future, are targeted by a government that claims to represent workers.
… … …
But it appears the only certainty will be that household costs will keep rising, with more jobs on the line. That's for certain.
Navigation Amendment Bill 2011
(1) Schedule 1, page 11 (after line 6), after item 29, insert:
29A At the end of paragraph 132(6)(b)
Add “and”.
29B Paragraph 132(6)(c)
Repeal the paragraph.
That this bill be now read a third time.
Parliamentary Service Amendment (Parliamentary Budget Officer) Bill 2011
(2) Schedule 1, item 16, page 8 (lines 14 to 29), omit section 64F, substitute:
64F Information gathering powers and secrecy
(1) The Parliamentary Budget Officer has the powers and obligations set out in Schedule 2.
(2) A person who has obtained information in the course of performing a function of the Parliamentary Budget Officer has the obligations set out in clause 4 of Schedule 2.
(3) Schedule 1, item 16, page 9 (line 22), omit "; and".
(4) Schedule 1, item 16, page 9 (lines 23 to 25), omit paragraph 64H(3)(d).
(5) Schedule 1, item 16, page 9 (lines 26 and 27), omit the note.
(6) Schedule 1, item 16, page 10 (lines 10 and 11), omit "publicly announced".
(7) Schedule 1, item 16, page 10 (line 25), omit "publicly announced".
(8) Schedule 1, item 16, page 11 (line 20) to page 12 (line 31), omit sections 64L and 64LA, substitute:
64L Public release of policy costings
(1) The Parliamentary Budget Officer must publicly release a policy costing if requested to do so by:
(a) if the costing was requested under subsection 64H(2)—the Senator or Member who made the request; or
(b) if the costing was requested under subsection 64J(2)—an authorised member of the Parliamentary party that made the request; or
(c) if the costing was requested under subsection 64J(5)—the independent member who made the request.
(2) The Parliamentary Budget Officer must not otherwise publicly release a policy costing.
64LA Public release of responses to other requests by Senators or Members
(1) The Parliamentary Budget Officer must publicly release a response to a request under paragraph 64E(1)(c) if requested to do so by the Senator or Member who made the request.
(2) The Parliamentary Budget Officer must not otherwise publicly release a response to a request under paragraph 64E(1)(c).
64LB Public release of submissions and other work
The Parliamentary Budget Officer must ensure that the following are made publicly available:
(a) requests by Parliamentary committees referred to in paragraph 64E(1)(d), and the submissions prepared in response to those requests;
(b) the results of any work done in the performance of the functions of the Parliamentary Budget Officer under paragraph 64E(1)(e).
(9) Schedule 1, item 16, page 13 (lines 1 to 7), omit section 64M, substitute:
64M Disclosure of personal information
A requirement to publish under this Division does not authorise the disclosure of personal information (within the meaning of the Privacy Act 1988 ) without the consent of the individual concerned.
(10) Schedule 1, item 16, page 15 (line 27) to page 16 (line 14), omit section 64U.
(11) Schedule 1, item 16, page 16 (line 15) to page 17 (line 6), omit section 64V.
(12) Schedule 1, page 20 (after line 20), at the end of the Schedule, add:
19 At the end of the Act
Add:
Schedule 2—Information gathering powers and secrecy
Note: See section 64F.
1 Relationship of information gathering powers with other laws
The operation of clause 3:
(a) is limited by laws of the Commonwealth (whether made before or after the commencement of this Act) relating to the powers, privileges and immunities of:
(i) each House of the Parliament; and
(ii) the members of each House of the Parliament; and
(iii) the committees of each House of the Parliament and joint committees of both Houses of the Parliament; but
(b) is not limited by any other law (whether made before or after the commencement of this Act), except to the extent that the other law expressly excludes the operation of clause 3.
2 Purpose for which information gathering powers may be used
The powers under clause 3 may be used for the purpose of, or in connection with, a function given to the Parliamentary Budget Officer by this Act.
3 Power of Parliamentary Budget Officer to obtain information
(1) The Parliamentary Budget Officer may, by written notice, direct an employee of an Agency to do all or any of the following:
(a) provide the Parliamentary Budget Officer with any information that the Parliamentary Budget Officer requires;
(b) attend and give evidence before the Parliamentary Budget Officer or an authorised officer;
(c) produce to the Parliamentary Budget Officer any documents in the custody or under the control of the employee.
Note: A proceeding under paragraph (1)(b) is a judicial proceeding for the purposes of Part III of theCrimes Act 1914 . The Crimes Act prohibits certain conduct in relation to judicial proceedings.
(2) The Parliamentary Budget Officer may direct as follows:
(a) that information or answers to questions be given either orally or in writing (as the Parliamentary Budget Officer requires);
(b) that information or answers to questions be verified or given on oath or affirmation.
The oath or affirmation is an oath or affirmation that the information or evidence the person will give will be true, and may be administered by the Parliamentary Budget Officer or by an authorised officer.
(3) An employee of an Agency commits an offence if:
(a) the employee is given a direction under this clause; and
(b) the employee does not comply with the direction.
Penalty: 30 penalty units.
(4) A determination under section 71 may prescribe scales of expenses to be allowed to persons who are required to attend under this clause.
(5) In this clause:
Agency has the same meaning as in the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997.
authorised officer means a person who:
(a) is an official within the meaning of the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997; and
(b) is authorised by the Parliamentary Budget Officer, in writing, to exercise powers or perform functions under this clause.
4 Confidentiality of information
(1) A person commits an offence if:
(a) the person discloses information; and
(b) the information was obtained by the person in the course of performing a function of the Parliamentary Budget Officer given by this Act or any other Act; and
(c) the information is disclosed otherwise than in the course of performing a function given to the Parliamentary Budget Officer by this Act or another Act.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 2 years.
(2) Subclause (1) does not prevent the Parliamentary Budget Officer from disclosing particular information to the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police if the Parliamentary Budget Officer is of the opinion that the disclosure is in the public interest.
5 Sensitive information not to be disclosed
(1) The Parliamentary Budget Officer must not include particular information in a policy costing, response or submission, or in any document publicly released by the Parliamentary Budget Officer, if:
(a) the Parliamentary Budget Officer is of the opinion that disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest for any of the reasons set out in subclause (2); or
(b) the Attorney-General has issued a certificate to the Parliamentary Budget Officer stating that, in the opinion of the Attorney-General, disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest for any of the reasons set out in subclause (2).
(2) The reasons are the following:
(a) it would prejudice the security, defence or international relations of the Commonwealth;
(b) it would involve the disclosure of deliberations or decisions of the Cabinet or of a Committee of the Cabinet;
(c) it would prejudice relations between the Commonwealth and a State;
(d) it would divulge any information or matter that was communicated in confidence by the Commonwealth to a State, or by a State to the Commonwealth;
(e) it would unfairly prejudice the commercial interests of any body or person;
(f) any other reason that could form the basis for a claim by the Crown in right of the Commonwealth in a judicial proceeding that the information should not be disclosed.
(3) The Parliamentary Budget Officer cannot be required, and is not permitted, to disclose publicly or to:
(a) a House of the Parliament; or
(b) a member of a House of the Parliament; or
(c) a committee of a House of the Parliament or a joint committee of both Houses of the Parliament;
information that subclause (1) prohibits being included in a policy costing, response or submission, or in any document publicly released by the Parliamentary Budget Officer.
(4) In this clause:
State includes a self-governing Territory.
… the importance of the PBO having access to Executive agency data, at no cost, as without this data, the PBO 'would be limited to using publicly-available information, and what agencies are willing to provide'.
There will always be a large asymmetry of information between the government and such bodies—no matter how well they are resourced. This creates a special duty to give such bodies full access in legislation to all relevant information in a timely manner.
The purpose of the Parliamentary Budget Office is to inform the Parliament by providing, in accordance with this Division, independent and non‑partisan analysis of the budget cycle, fiscal policy and the financial implications of proposals.
… provide the Parliamentary Budget Officer with any information that the Parliamentary Budget Officer requires—
… attend and give evidence before the Parliamentary Budget Officer or an authorised officer.
… produce to the Parliamentary Budget Officer any documents in the custody or under the control of the employee.
While the precise nature and functions of each of these bodies differs, a key feature is that they share an independence from the executive branch of government.
It seems to me that the Parliamentary Budget Office in New South Wales can get access to the sort of information from government agencies that anyone would be able to get under FOI in New South Wales.
Is that good enough for a Parliamentary Budget Office?
I do not think so, because the parliament is the grand inquisition of the nation, is scrutinising the operations of government on behalf of the people to use very broad terms and has both the rights and powers to have information to inform it to do that job properly.
A Senator or a Member of the House of Representatives may request the Parliamentary Budget Officer to prepare a costing of a policy or a proposed policy.
In the interests of efficiency and consistency, it is envisaged that an MOU will initially be developed with the Departments of Finance and Deregulation (Finance) and the Treasury (Treasury) and that other agencies would use this agreement as necessary.
Provisions would need to be made to allow agencies to refuse requests on the same grounds that documents can be exempted under the FOI Act and for the review of those decisions.
That the House do now adjourn.
Parliamentary Service Amendment (Parliamentary Budget Officer) Bill 2011
64F Information gathering powers and secrecy
(1) The Parliamentary Budget Officer has the powers and obligations set out in Schedule 2—
Provisions would need to be made to allow agencies to refuse requests on the same grounds that documents can be exempted under the FOI Act and for the review of those decisions.
This would include commercially valuable information
… information produced for the purpose of deliberative processes or the national economy…
(3) Schedule 1, item 16, page 9 (line 22), omit "; and".
(4) Schedule 1, item 16, page 9 (lines 23 to 25), omit paragraph 64H(3)(d).
(5) Schedule 1, item 16, page 9 (lines 26 and 27), omit the note.
(6) Schedule 1, item 16, page 10 (lines 10 and 11), omit "publicly announced".
(7) Schedule 1, item 16, page 10 (line 25), omit "publicly announced".
(8) Schedule 1, item 16, page 11 (line 20) to page 12 (line 31), omit sections 64L and 64LA, substitute:
64L Public release of policy costings
(1) The Parliamentary Budget Officer must publicly release a policy costing if requested to do so by:
(a) if the costing was requested under subsection 64H(2)—the Senator or Member who made the request; or
(b) if the costing was requested under subsection 64J(2)—an authorised member of the Parliamentary party that made the request; or
(c) if the costing was requested under subsection 64J(5)—the independent member who made the request.
(2) The Parliamentary Budget Officer must not otherwise publicly release a policy costing.
64LA Public release of responses to other requests by Senators or Members
(1) The Parliamentary Budget Officer must publicly release a response to a request under paragraph 64E(1)(c) if requested to do so by the Senator or Member who made the request.
(2) The Parliamentary Budget Officer must not otherwise publicly release a response to a request under paragraph 64E(1)(c).
64LB Public release of submissions and other work
The Parliamentary Budget Officer must ensure that the following are made publicly available:
(a) requests by Parliamentary committees referred to in paragraph 64E(1)(d), and the submissions prepared in response to those requests;
(b) the results of any work done in the performance of the functions of the Parliamentary Budget Officer under paragraph 64E(1)(e).
(10) Schedule 1, item 16, page 15 (line 27) to page 16 (line 14), omit section 64U.
(11) Schedule 1, item 16, page 16 (line 15) to page 17 (line 6), omit section 64V.
(9) Schedule 1, item 16, page 13 (lines 1 to 7), omit section 64M, substitute:
64M Disclosure of personal information
A requirement to publish under this Division does not authorise the disclosure of personal information (within the meaning of the Privacy Act 1988 ) without the consent of the individual concerned.
(12) Schedule 1, page 20 (after line 20), at the end of the Schedule, add:
19 At the end of the Act
Add:
Schedule 2—Information gathering powers and secrecy
Note: See section 64F.
1 Relationship of information gathering powers with other laws
The operation of clause 3:
(a) is limited by laws of the Commonwealth (whether made before or after the commencement of this Act) relating to the powers, privileges and immunities of:
(i) each House of the Parliament; and
(ii) the members of each House of the Parliament; and
(iii) the committees of each House of the Parliament and joint committees of both Houses of the Parliament; but
(b) is not limited by any other law (whether made before or after the commencement of this Act), except to the extent that the other law expressly excludes the operation of clause 3.
2 Purpose for which information gathering powers may be used
The powers under clause 3 may be used for the purpose of, or in connection with, a function given to the Parliamentary Budget Officer by this Act.
3 Power of Parliamentary Budget Officer to obtain information
(1) The Parliamentary Budget Officer may, by written notice, direct an employee of an Agency to do all or any of the following:
(a) provide the Parliamentary Budget Officer with any information that the Parliamentary Budget Officer requires;
(b) attend and give evidence before the Parliamentary Budget Officer or an authorised officer;
(c) produce to the Parliamentary Budget Officer any documents in the custody or under the control of the employee.
Note: A proceeding under paragraph (1)(b) is a judicial proceeding for the purposes of Part III of theCrimes Act 1914 . The Crimes Act prohibits certain conduct in relation to judicial proceedings.
(2) The Parliamentary Budget Officer may direct as follows:
(a) that information or answers to questions be given either orally or in writing (as the Parliamentary Budget Officer requires);
(b) that information or answers to questions be verified or given on oath or affirmation.
The oath or affirmation is an oath or affirmation that the information or evidence the person will give will be true, and may be administered by the Parliamentary Budget Officer or by an authorised officer.
(3) An employee of an Agency commits an offence if:
(a) the employee is given a direction under this clause; and
(b) the employee does not comply with the direction.
Penalty: 30 penalty units.
(4) A determination under section 71 may prescribe scales of expenses to be allowed to persons who are required to attend under this clause.
(5) In this clause:
Agency has the same meaning as in the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997.
authorised officer means a person who:
(a) is an official within the meaning of the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997; and
(b) is authorised by the Parliamentary Budget Officer, in writing, to exercise powers or perform functions under this clause.
4 Confidentiality of information
(1) A person commits an offence if:
(a) the person discloses information; and
(b) the information was obtained by the person in the course of performing a function of the Parliamentary Budget Officer given by this Act or any other Act; and
(c) the information is disclosed otherwise than in the course of performing a function given to the Parliamentary Budget Officer by this Act or another Act.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 2 years.
(2) Subclause (1) does not prevent the Parliamentary Budget Officer from disclosing particular information to the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police if the Parliamentary Budget Officer is of the opinion that the disclosure is in the public interest.
5 Sensitive information not to be disclosed
(1) The Parliamentary Budget Officer must not include particular information in a policy costing, response or submission, or in any document publicly released by the Parliamentary Budget Officer, if:
(a) the Parliamentary Budget Officer is of the opinion that disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest for any of the reasons set out in subclause (2); or
(b) the Attorney-General has issued a certificate to the Parliamentary Budget Officer stating that, in the opinion of the Attorney-General, disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest for any of the reasons set out in subclause (2).
(2) The reasons are the following:
(a) it would prejudice the security, defence or international relations of the Commonwealth;
(b) it would involve the disclosure of deliberations or decisions of the Cabinet or of a Committee of the Cabinet;
(c) it would prejudice relations between the Commonwealth and a State;
(d) it would divulge any information or matter that was communicated in confidence by the Commonwealth to a State, or by a State to the Commonwealth;
(e) it would unfairly prejudice the commercial interests of any body or person;
(f) any other reason that could form the basis for a claim by the Crown in right of the Commonwealth in a judicial proceeding that the information should not be disclosed.
(3) The Parliamentary Budget Officer cannot be required, and is not permitted, to disclose publicly or to:
(a) a House of the Parliament; or
(b) a member of a House of the Parliament; or
(c) a committee of a House of the Parliament or a joint committee of both Houses of the Parliament;
information that subclause (1) prohibits being included in a policy costing, response or submission, or in any document publicly released by the Parliamentary Budget Officer.
(4) In this clause:
State includes a self-governing Territory.
That this bill be now read a third time.