The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. AE Burke) ) took the chair at 14:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
That the order of the day be referred to the Federation Chamber.
That further statements by indulgence in relation to the death of Robert Studley Forrest Hughes AO be permitted in the Federation Chamber.
Labor will end the so-called Pacific solution … because it is costly, unsustainable and wrong as a matter of principle.
That the House take note of the following documents:
Australian Human Rights Commission—An age of uncertainty—Inquiry into the treatment of individuals suspected of people smuggling offences who say that they are children—Report, July 2012.
Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1997 —Report on the funding agreement between the Commonwealth of Australia and Australian Livestock Export Corporation Limited for 2010-11.
Broadcasting Services Act 1992 —Digital television transmission and reception—Report, July 2012.
Medical Indemnity Act 2002 —Report by the Australian Government Actuary on the costs of the Australian Government’s Run-Off Cover Scheme for medical indemnity insurers for 2010-11.
Midwife Professional Indemnity (Commonwealth Contribution) Scheme Act 2010 —Report by the Australian Government Actuary on the costs of the Australian Government’s Run-Off Cover Scheme for midwife professional indemnity insurers for 2010-11.
Public Accounts and Audit—Joint Committee—Report 426: Ninth biannual hearing with the Commissioner of Taxation—Government response to recommendations 2 and 3.
Treaties—Joint Standing Committee—Report 100: Treaties tabled on 25 June 2008 (2)—Government response.
That:
(1) Mr Husic be discharged from the Selection Committee and that, in his place, Mr Hayes be appointed a member of the committee;
(2) Mr Symon be discharged from the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs and that, in his place, Ms Rowland be appointed a member of the committee, and
(3) Ms Rishworth be discharged from the Joint Standing Committee on the National Broadband Network and that, in her place, Ms Rowland be appointed a member of the committee.
The impact of the Government's serial failure for four years to protect Australia's borders from illegal boat arrivals.
That the business of the day be called on.
The House divided. [15:21]
(The Deputy Speaker—Ms AE Burke)
That business intervening before order of the day No. 28, government business, be postponed until a later hour this day.
Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2012-2013
Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2012-2013
Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2012-2013
Clean Energy (Excise Tariff Legislation Amendment) Bill 2012
Financial Framework Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2012
Broadcasting Services Amendment (Improved Access to Television Services) Bill 2012
Clean Energy Legislation Amendment Bill 2012
Clean Energy (Customs Tariff Amendment) Bill 2012
Tax Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy and Medicare Levy Surcharge) Bill 2012
National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme) Bill 2012
Broadcasting Services Amendment (Digital Television) Bill 2012
Australian Human Rights Commission Amendment (National Children's Commissioner) Bill 2012
Antarctic Treaty (Environment Protection) Amendment Bill 2011
Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Stronger Super) Bill 2012
Superannuation Supervisory Levy Imposition Amendment Bill 2012
Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment Bill 2012
Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2012
Pay As You Go Withholding Non-compliance Tax Bill 2012
Income Tax (Managed Investment Trust Withholding Tax) Amendment Bill 2012
Tax Laws Amendment (Managed Investment Trust Withholding Tax) Bill 2012
Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (2012 Budget and Other Measures) Bill 2012
Tax Laws Amendment (2012 Measures No. 2) Bill 2012
Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2012
Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011
Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011
Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (R 18+ Computer Games) Bill 2012
Clean Energy Finance Corporation Bill 2012
National Vocational Education and Training Regulator (Charges) Bill 2012
Social Security Amendment (Supporting Australian Victims of Terrorism Overseas) Bill 2012
Parliamentary Counsel and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012
Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Amendment (Scheme Enhancements) Bill 2012
Paid Parental Leave and Other Legislation Amendment (Dad and Partner Pay and Other Measures) Bill 2012
Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Maintaining Address) Bill 2011
Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Protecting Elector Participation) Bill 2012
National Broadcasting Legislation Amendment Bill 2010
Migration Legislation Amendment (Offshore Processing and Other Measures) Bill 2011
The so-called Pacific solution is nothing more than the world's most expensive detour sign.
Labor will end the Pacific solution because it is costly, unsustainable, and wrong as a matter of principle.
No rational person—I would put it as highly as that—would suggest that in 10 or 20 years we will still be processing asylum seeker claims on Nauru.
No rational person … would suggest that in 10 or 20 years we will still be processing asylum seeker claims on Nauru.
Labor committed to abolishing the Pacific Solution and this was one of the first things the Rudd Labor Government did on taking office. It was also one of my greatest pleasures in politics.
That all words after "House" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:
":
(1) notes that the Government has accepted the Coalition’s policy of offshore processing of asylum seekers on Nauru and Manus Island; and
(2) calls upon the Government to implement the full suite of the Coalition’s successful policies and calls upon the government to immediately:
(a) restore temporary protection visas for all offshore entry persons found to be refugees;
(b) issue new instructions to Northern Command to commence to turn back boats where it is safe to do so;
(c) use existing law to remove the benefit of the doubt on a person's identity where there is a reasonable belief that a person has deliberately discarded their documentation; and
(d) restore the Bali Process to once again focus on deterrence and border security."
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.
We no longer have that requirement because we've got an alternative place, which is excised from our migration zone, Christmas Island.
I'm not sure how many refugees or survivors of torture Sarah—
has actually worked with over the years. I'm not sure how many people she's managed to get out of detention or the resources she's been able to generate.
I was the substantive author of a policy paper which became Labor's policy.
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.
To that end Labor has given the following commitments. 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—in money, in goodwill in our region and in division in our community. I would like briefly to take the House to the three principal problems with the so-called Pacific solution: costs, unsustainability and the fact that it delivers no outcomes.
Australians can feel confident that we have in place and will maintain strong border security measures.
… we're not recommending opening detention centres.
… The single most important priority in preventing people from risking their lives on dangerous maritime voyages is to recalibrate Australian policy settings to achieve an outcome that asylum seekers will not be advantaged if they pay people smugglers to attempt dangerous irregular entry into Australia instead of pursuing regular migration pathways and international protection arrangements …
… Incentives to use regular migration and protection pathways need to be complemented by policy measures that send a coherent and unambiguously clear message that disincentives to irregular maritime migration to Australia will be immediate and real.
… Other measures to discourage dangerous and irregular maritime voyages to Australia should include changes to family reunion arrangements as they relate to IMAs—
in Australia, a more effective focus on the return of failed asylum seekers to their home country and more sustained strategies for the disruption of people smuggling operations both in Australia and abroad. A thorough review of the efficacy of Australian processes for determining refugee status would also be timely.
On current plans, asylum seekers will not be housed at RAAF Scherger; nor will an immigration detention centre be built at RAAF Scherger.
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.
There's no point getting on a boat because your claim won’t be processed, but we will continue to work through with Malaysia, and it’s also very clear to Australians we’ve been in discussions with PNG.
The Navy has turned back four boats to Indonesia. They were in sea-worthy shape and arrived in Indonesia. It has made a very big difference to people-smuggling that that happened. … And we think turning boats around that are seaworthy, that can make the return journey, and are in international waters, fits in with that.
I speak of the claim often made by Opposition politicians that they will, and I quote: "turn the boats back." This needs to be seen for what it is. It's a shallow slogan. It's nonsense.
The proposal in this document, Labor’s policy, is that a unauthorised arrival who does have a genuine refugee claim would in the first instance get a short Temporary Protection Visa.
The Rudd Government is proud of its reforms in abolishing temporary protection visas …
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.
Turning back irregular maritime vessels carrying asylum seekers to Australia can be operationally achieved and can constitute an effective disincentive to such ventures …
… but only in circumstances where a range of operational, safety of life, diplomatic and legal conditions are met …
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 fact is we’ve been fighting about this issue for too long. While politicians fight, people die. That’s not good enough. The people of Australia want us to fix this.
Labor committed to abolishing the Pacific Solution and this was one the first things the Rudd Labor Government did on taking office. It was also one of my greatest pleasures in politics.
It is … about having an uncompromising view about the fundamental right of this country to protect its borders, it’s about this nation saying to the world we are a generous open hearted people taking more refugees on a per capita basis than any nation except Canada, we have a proud record of welcoming people from 140 different nations. But we will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come. And can I say on this point what a fantastic job Philip Ruddock has done for Australia.
One of the Australians told me that he looked face-to-face at a child who he could not rescue even though he could almost touch her …
Australia is a safe, prosperous and generous country. Our community has already been enriched by generations of immigrants and refugees who have made Australia their home.
As one of the key nations in the region who has signed the Refugee Convention it makes sense for Australia to lead the way and set the standard when it comes to resolving the humanitarian crisis on our doorstep.
It was clear to me from my visit that no organisation, despite what I am sure are their best intentions, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, is in a position to practically guarantee the welfare of those transferred to Malaysia under this proposed arrangement. This is the practical and unavoidable reality of this proposal.
I heard numerous stories of arrest and detention—despite having documentation—abuse in the workplace, violence and extortion. It would take anywhere between two weeks and two months to routinely get documented refugees out of the lock-up or a detention centre.
Mental health counsellors told me that the greatest cause of anxiety and depression for refugees living in Malaysia is fear driven by their vulnerability. A stay of around 4 to 5 years was the most common response from refugees I met, but for others their stay has been decades. For those who give up, their stay is permanent.
In short, given Malaysia's non-signatory status to the Refugee Convention, refugees' legal rights are arbitrary and the support they receive is completely voluntary.
For those who've come across the seas
We've boundless plains to share;
With courage let us all combine
To Advance Australia Fair.
Labor will end the Pacific solution, the so-called Pacific Solution—the processing and detaining of asylum seekers on the Pacific islands—because it is costly, unsustainable and wrong as a matter of principle.
Labor committed to abolishing the Pacific Solution and this was one the first things the Rudd Labor Government did on taking office. It was also one of my greatest pleasures in politics.
Melbourne Ports Labor MP Michael Danby said the 800-bed facility—which is currently empty—resembled a stalag, a German prisoner of war camp. "I think all of us from the delegation are frankly flabbergasted about the enormous expenditure of public money by the previous government on this," Mr Danby said from the island. "It just looks like an enormous white elephant."
Is it time we sought some truths regarding the impact of the carbon emissions tax?
Perhaps your readers would like to read a most illuminating article by senior writer, Greg Sheridan, published in The Weekend Australian on Saturday 7/7/12.
Sheridan makes some very salient points, backed by some expert opinion provided by Warwick McKibbin and Nicholas Linacre.
Firstly, the Gillard Government's own Productivity Commission has revealed that no economy anywhere in the world has produced a scheme like Australia's carbon tax. Specifically at $23 a tonne.
This is despite the Gillard government continually quoting schemes, such as in the EU and the US States, (California—yet to start, and the one in the north east), as if they have been in operation for considerable time and are reducing emissions. However, an expert in this field, such as the ANU's Warwick McKibbin, maintains that the downturn in the US economy has done more to reduce emissions than anything else, as has also been the case in Europe.
In fact, the US does not have a national carbon emissions reduction scheme. Its neighbour, Canada, says it will never have one. Another major economy, Japan, is coping with its internal disasters, while South Korea is yet to establish a scheme and even New Zealand has modified its low price scheme.
Another truth is that in Europe, for example, where some carbon credit trading exists, prices are very low, (about E5). Why then is Australia imposing such a burden on the economy with a high price in the form of a tax ($23 per tonne), as well as maintaining a floor price of $15 a tonne when the tax moves to a trading scheme?
Given some constraints in the Gillard scheme, Australian companies will seek to purchase cheaper permits overseas—
… World Bank expert, Nicholas Linacre, … suggests most low cost credits are coming out of China but are unacceptable to buyers due to the veracity of their schemes. Again, China, like the US, does not have a national scheme, but one restricted to a couple of provinces.
Little is also said about the developing world. For example, India, another looming economic giant, declared in March this year, it would not even consider scaling back more greenhouse gas emissions until after 2020—and then would do so only in exchange for Western dollars.
Finally, is there any truth to the notion that a market based system of trading credits actually reduces carbon emissions to impact on greenhouse gases?
Apparently not, according to Warwick McKibbin. The only evidence of this occurs in computer generated models supposedly replicating the real world, (and subject to numerous assumptions.)
The truth is, however, that through the Gillard Government's emissions trading scheme, a considerable burden is being placed on the economy in the form of a tax (to be followed by an elevated floor price), not replicated anywhere else in the world, not guaranteed to work, nor be effective in reducing greenhouse gases.
This scheme will have a serious impact on our future competitiveness in a free global market; and in the end, our standard of living.
This impost is a high price for Australians to pay for a political decision enabling the Gillard government to cling to power.
The changes afoot aren’t ideologically neutral: they’re particularly beneficial for populists and libertarians, and confronting for long-game reformers.
I support the project for this rail link. I work in Macquarie and there really is not a good transport network to get to that area and the roads are very congested. To get there by train with the current rail links you need to take 3 trains to get to Macquarie Park (Parramatta > Strathfield, Strathfield > Epping, Epping > Macquarie Park) and the bus takes about 1 hr to get only 17kms … Car is the best option of about ½hr-45mins but petrol is so expensive and environmentally unfriendly exhaust fumes into the environment.
It is something that would make a great difference to me and my family (we live in Telopea and the trains come about once every 50 minutes in peak hour—then you change at Clyde—blah blah blah—I am sure you have heard it all before).
How many times in the last three years has the Treasury undertaken economic modelling, and on which issues has this modelling been undertaken.
Divisions across the department undertake a wide variety of economic and quantitative analysis, dealing with a wide range of issues that could be categorised as economic modelling. More formal and extensive modelling is undertaken principally by the Macroeconomic Modelling Division, Domestic Economy Division and Tax Analysis Division.
Treasury's Macroeconomic Modelling Division has undertaken extensive economic modelling on the impact of a carbon price. Economic modelling was released in October 2008 and reported in the Government's Australia's low pollution future: the economics of climate change report. Additional modelling was released in July 2011 and reported in the Government's Strong growth, low pollution: modelling a carbon price report. The Macroeconomic Modelling Division also maintains and develops a range of models which are used to help inform policy debate such as tax reform and assist in projecting aspects of the economy.
Treasury's Tax Analysis Division performs the key functions of revenue forecasting, developing cost estimates and distributional analysis, and undertaking other quantitative studies. Economic modelling plays a part in all these functions and, accordingly, amounts to a large part of the day to day activities of the division, rather than being some discrete exercise undertaken from time to time. The issues on which the modelling is undertaken cover the range of matters handled by the division.
Treasury's Domestic Economy Division maintains a range of models which are used to help forecast different aspects of the economy. These models are typically used heavily during forecasting rounds, particularly ahead of the Budget and MYEFO but, because they are being continuously updated and refined, are often run more frequently. These sectoral models complement other sources of information, such as information from business liaison, when producing the macroeconomic orecasts.
In addition, as part of the Review into the governance, efficiency, structure and operation of Australia's superannuation system, Treasury conducted modelling to estimate the possible long-run and short-run, direct and indirect impact of the review's recommendations on superannuation fees.
In respect of the recent Health and Hospitals Fund, Round 3, did her department receive any applications from the Dawson electorate; if so, (a) can she indicate what projects they were for, and (b) were any such applications rejected; if so, on what grounds.
I can advise that on 10 May 2011 the Australian Government announced that as part of the 2011-12 Federal Budget, funding of $3 million was being provided to Mercy Health for the expansion of the operating theatre at the Mater Misericordiae Hospital in Mackay. This project will increase the hospital’s surgical capacity and service provision to the wider Mackay region.
In respect of the GP Super Clinics Program, which (a) clinics, and (b) organisations, have been required to amend their operational plan at the request of the Commonwealth.
(a) and (b) The information requested relates to the business affairs of an organisation and its provision, as a response to the question, would be likely to damage the commercial interests of individuals or the organisation.
Which of the 64 GP Super Clinics have notified the Commonwealth in writing of a variation to works under their funding agreements which would or might reasonably be expected to have an effect on the: (a) price of the works, (b) timeframes for completion of the works, (c) date for practical completion of the works, (d) fitness of the works for the designated use, (e) project plan, (f) project budget, and (g) approvals obtained in relation to the works.
(a) to (g) The information requested relates to the business affairs of an organisation and its provision, as a response to the question, would be likely to damage the commercial interests of individuals or the organisation.
Which of the 64 GP Super Clinics have received consent in writing from the Commonwealth for a variation to works under their funding agreements.
The information requested relates to the business affairs of an organisation and its provision, as a response to the question, would be likely to damage the commercial interests of individuals or the organisation.
How many (a) tier 1, and (b) tier 2, GP Aged Care Access Incentive payments have been made to a GP Super Clinic under the Practice Incentives Program.
(a) and (b) Payments under the Practice Incentives Program General Practitioner Aged Care Access Incentive (PIP GP ACAI) are made to GPs, rather than to a practice participating in the PIP. As the Department holds PIP GP ACAI payment data according to GP provider numbers rather than PIP practice identification numbers, it is not possible to report on how many PIP GP ACAI payments have been made to a GP Super Clinic.
In respect of the Indigenous Health Incentive under the Practice Incentive Payment, how many (a) GP Super Clinics have received the registration payment, (b) registration payments have been made at a GP Super Clinic, and (c) outcomes payment (i) tier 1, and (ii) tier 2, have been made to a GP Super Clinic.
As at 26 June 2012, 26 GP Super Clinics were operational. Of these:
(a) 17 have received the Practice Incentives Program (PIP) Indigenous Health Incentive Sign-on Payment1;
(b) 12 have received PIP Indigenous Health Incentive Patient Registration Payments2;
(c) (i) 9 have received PIP Indigenous Health Incentive Tier 1 Outcomes Payments; and
(ii) 13 have received PIP Indigenous Health Incentive Tier 2 Outcomes Payments.
When registering for the PIP, GP Super Clinics are not required to identify as such and do not necessarily use their GP Super Clinic name for the purposes of the PIP. The Department has therefore where possible, matched the address of a GP Super Clinic to that of a practice participating in the PIP for the purposes of this analysis.
In (a) 2007-08, (b) 2008-09, and (c) 2009-10, (i) how many corporate credit cards were issued to departmental staff, and(ii) what was the total cost of all transactions made on these corporate credit cards.
Please refer to the answer provided to House of Representatives Parliamentary Question in Writing Nos 770 and 776. Detail relating to functions which were transferred from the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relation to the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education have been included in this response.
Can the Minister indicate whether any tenders were received for the roll-out of set-top boxes throughout Australia as part of the Household Assistance Scheme; if so, were any received; if so, can the Minister indicate by whom, and whether any of the prices tendered were less than the one selected?
I refer to your three questions on 8 February 2012, asking:
(1) Whether any tenders were received for the roll-out of set-top boxes throughout Australia under the Household Assistance Scheme?
(2) Can I indicate who submitted the tenders?
(3) Whether any of the prices tendered were less than the one selected?
The answers to these questions are as follows:
(1) Yes.
(2) The tenderers who submitted tenders for each switchover region to date are listed alphabetically below and are not listed in order of ranking:
Mildura
1 Australian Postal Corporation (Australia Post)
2 AG & LM Briant Electronics
3 AWA Ltd
4 Barnett, David Johnstone
5 Dick Smith Electronics Pty Ltd
6 Digital Broadband TV Installations Pty Ltd (Jim's Antennas National)
7 Grayling Electrical Pty Ltd
8 Hills Industries Limited (Techlife)
9 Johclax Pty Ltd and Trevor Wilkinson Video Services Pty Ltd (Deeper Image Television)
10 Mr Antenna (BSA Limited)
11 Service Stream Solutions Pty Ltd
12 Skybridge (Australia) Pty Ltd
Regional South Australia
1 Australian Postal Corporation (Australia Post)
2 BSA Networks Pty Ltd
3 Digital Broadband TV Installations Pty Ltd (Jim's Antennas National)
4 Hills Industries Limited (Techlife Solutions)
5 Satellite and Sound Pty Ltd
6 Skybridge (Australia) Pty Ltd
Regional Victoria
1 Australian Postal Corporation (Australia Post)
2 BSA Networks Pty Limited
3 D & R Smith Installations Pty Ltd
4 Hills Industries Limited (Techlife Solutions)
5 Mitchell Burich (T/A Jims Antennas)
6 Skybridge (Australia) Pty Ltd
Regional Queensland
1 AWA Limited
2 BSA Networks Pty Ltd
3 Hills Industries Limited (Techlife Solutions)
4 Skybridge (Australia) Pty Ltd
5 Westwell Australia Pty Ltd
Regional New South Wales
1 AWA Limited
2 BSA Limited
3 C&J Group Pty Ltd
4 Carbon Footprint
5 Col Groves Electrics Pty Ltd
6 Hills Holdings Limited (Techlife Solutions)
7 Kaz Electronics Pty Ltd
8 Kogan Technologies Pty Ltd
9 Prime Facility & Asset Management Pty Ltd (Prime Group)
10 Skybridge (Australia) Pty Ltd
(3) The department awards work based on an assessment of value for money in accordance with the Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines.
Was Mr Greg Medcraft's availability for his appointment (on 13 May 2011) as Chairman of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission verified before he was recommended to Cabinet, if so,
(a) on what date;
(b) by whom; and
(c) on what date did Mr Medcraft indicate he was available for this appointment.
(a), (b) & (c) The government was entitled to consult Mr D'Aloisio on which commissioners might be interested in taking on the chair role. Mr Medcraft indicated that he would be available to Mr D'Aloisio as did others through the course of the appointment processes.
In respect of departmental credit card use in (a) 2008-09, (b) 2009-10, and (c) 2010-11, (i) how many times has the use of a credit card breached departmental guidelines, (ii) what was the dollar value of each breach, and what sum was repaid in each instance, and (iii) were any employees disciplined for such breaches.
In all instances the breaches resulted from accidental use with all amounts repaid. Employees concerned were advised of their responsibilities as credit card holders and reminded of their obligations under the Chief Executive Instructions and Operational Guidelines.
In respect of departmental credit card use in (a) 2008-09, (b) 2009-10, and (c) 2010-11, (i) how many times has the use of a credit card breached departmental guidelines, (ii) what was the dollar value of each breach, and what sum was repaid in each instance, and (iii) were any employees disciplined for such breaches.
(a) Nil.
(b) There was only one breach of the credit card policy which occured in 2009-10.
The dollar value was $20.00 and was fully repaid. The staff member was required to repay the money and reminded of the credit card policy. No official discipline was taken.
(c) Nil.
What number of staff were employed by the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service under Outcome 1, programs 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5 during (a) 2006-07, (b) 2007-08, (c) 2008-09, (d) 2009-10, (e) 2010-11, and (f) 2011-12.
(a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f) The below table provides details of Full Time Equivalent staff (FTE) by program for the period 2007-08 to 2011-12. Results for 2011-12 financial year are based on actual FTE to the end of February 2012 and forecast FTE for the remaining months of the 2011-12 year. 2006-07 information was not available.
For (a) 2006-07, (b) 2007-08, (c) 2008-09,(d) 2009-10, (e) 2010-11, and (f) 2011-12, and over the forward estimates, what number of staff were engaged, and what sum of funding was allocated to (i) risk assessment, (ii) operational activity responding to threats and suspected breaches at the national border, (iii) investigation and prosecution related to breaches of the border, (iv) intelligence and targeting activities for the identification of people and goods of interest, and (v) evaluation and deployment of detection technologies, under Outcome 1, Program 1.3 of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service.
(a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f) Program 1.3 – Border Protection and Enforcement, largely covers our Enforcement and Investigations and Intelligence and Targeting Divisions. It does not include cargo inspection activities, including inspection and examination of air, sea and mail cargo which is undertaken by the Cargo Division and reported under Program 1.2 – Trade Facilitation.
The tables below outline the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service's estimated resourcing and Full Time Equivalents (FTE) staffing numbers for each of the requested activities undertaken under Program 1.3 – Border Protection and Enforcement. We have utilised data from the agency's Budget and Resource Management Framework which aligns generally, although not exactly, with the requested categories.
Prior to 2009-10 Customs and Border Protection reported on an outputs basis, rather than Programs, as per the Portfolio Budget Statements (PBS). It is not possible to provide accurate details of FTE staff or funding on a detail basis for these years as there was no framework in place at the time to capture this data at the level required. In 2009-10 a new costing methodology was introduced which allows analysis at this level to be undertaken. As a result of the limitations noted above, we are unable to accurately provide reliable results for the years prior to 2009-10.
Similarly, we have been unable to provide accurate cost figures, at the level required, for the forecast years 2012-13 through 2014-15 as Customs and Border Protection is still undertaking its internal budgeting and business planning processes.
What processes do air couriers use to electronically report to the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service on risk analysis and assessment of any shipment they are carrying.
All cargo reporters, including air couriers are required under Customs legislation to electronically report particulars of all goods they have arranged to be carried on an aircraft and are to be unloaded in Australia.
Air couriers submit electronic reports (Air Cargo Report) to Customs and Border Protection through the Integrated Cargo System (ICS) not later than two hours prior to the arrival of the aircraft at the first airport in Australia. Information in this report is used by Customs and Border Protection to conduct initial risk analysis and assessments.
Under what circumstances is Australia Post required to report, in advance, to the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (Customs), any shipment of any items they are due to carry; and is Australia Post required to report to Customs, what it is shipping.
Australia Post does not carry or arrange the carriage of inbound international mail. It is arranged by foreign postal services. Australia Post is responsible for arranging the carriage of outbound international mail.
All international mail is reported to Customs and Border Protection at the 'receptacle' level (by bag or air unit load device) by the operator of the vessel or aircraft carrying the mail.
Australia Post does operate some import and export cargo services that are subject to full cargo reporting requirements, which requires the details of all individual items they are importing into Australia to be reported to Customs and Border Protection. This activity represents a small proportion of overall activity undertaken by Australia Post.
In 2003, Australia Post and seven other national postal operators established the Kahala group to explore new integrated business models. The group now has 10 members comprising: Australia Post, China Post, Correos, Hong Kong Post, Japan Post, Korea Post, La Poste, Royal Mail, Singapore Post and the US Postal Service.
In recent years, the group has focussed on new logistics frameworks that can be applied to the processing of parcels and Express Mail Service (EMS) items. The group is currently working on electronic reporting for EMS and parcels between group members. It is anticipated that implementation will commence in 2013.
(1) Were (a) standard, or (b) express, mail items used to allegedly import up to 220 Glock Pistols into the Sylvania Waters Post Office, and were any private air couriers believed to have been used by the alleged syndicate to smuggle these weapons and/or their components.
(2) What type of mail items were allegedly used to import 140 Glock magazines into the Sylvania Waters Post Office, in particular, were they (a) standard, or (b) express, mail items, and were any private couriers for such shipments used by the alleged smuggling syndicate.
(1) (a) No.
(b) No.
The consignments arrived via air cargo, not through the International Mail Gateway facilities. They were sent via air couriers, either express or premium express, and via air freight as general cargo.
(2) (a) No.
(b) No.
The consignments arrived via air cargo, not through the International Mail Gateway facilities. They were sent via air couriers, either express or premium express, and via air freight as general cargo.
In (a) 2006-07, (b) 2007-08, (c) 2008-09, (d) 2009-10, (e) 2010-11, and (f) 2011-12, for how many (i) days, and (ii) hours per day, were colour x-ray scanners used at Sydney’s Kingsford Smith Airport for the screening of air cargo consignments, and how does this compare with the rates of this practice for each financial year of the Howard Government.
Since 2004, colour x-ray scanners have been available 365 days per year, 24 hours a day (at the premises of the four international Cargo Terminal Operators and one express carrier), located at Sydney’s Kingsford Smith Airport1 for the screening of air cargo. Prior to this, black and white x-ray capability was available.
_______________
1 Within the designated s.15 airport (the area appointed by the CEO as the area designated as an international airport and published in the Gazette) as identified in the Customs Act 1901.
(1) In (a) 2005-06, (b) 2006-07, (c) 2007-08, (d) 2008-09, (e) 2009-10, (f) 2010-11, and (g) 2011-12, how many international mail items have arrived by air as (i) Australia Post standard mail, (ii) Australia Post express mail, and (iii) private couriers.
(2) For each mail item category in part (1), how many items were inspected, and of these, in how many cases were prohibited items detected.
(3) What is the five year projection for the number of incoming international mail items arriving by air as (a) Australia Post standard mail, (b) Australia Post express mail, and (c) private couriers.
(1) Volumes
(i) and (ii) The following information was provided by Australia Post through the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy:
Standard Mail Items includes both letters and parcels. In recent years there has been a continuing and sustained increase in parcels. From a border risk perspective, parcels currently pose a much higher risk than letters. On this basis, Customs and Border Protection increased the number of parcels subject to inspection in 2011-12 and reduced the letters inspected.
(iii) Articles classified as International Mail can only be transported between members of the Universal Postal Union (UPU). Australia Post is the only Australian member of the UPU and no other entity (including private couriers) may process international mail in Australia.
(2) Inspections
The term inspection includes any combination of x-ray, detector dogs, trace detection or physical inspection.
For postal articles, Customs and Border Protection records inspection activity in two categories:
The number of articles inspected for each category of international mail is as follows:
Table Two – Inspection Volumes International Mail—2005/06 to February 2012
The number of detections (including quarantine referrals) found in international mail and air cargo are as follows:
Table Three– Detections in International Mail—2005/06 to February 2012
The key to the increase in the number of successful detections is the implementation of an intelligence-led approach by Customs and Border Protection.
In 2010-11 using this intelligence-led approach, Customs and Border Protection made 41,499 detections of prohibited items in international mail compared to just 23,085 detections in 2006-07.
This represents an 80 % increase in detections in international mail from 2006-07 to 2010-11.
(3) Forecasts
(a) and (b) The following information was provided by Australia Post through the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy:
(c) Articles classified as International Mail can only be transported between members of the Universal Postal Union (UPU). Australia Post is the only Australian member of the UPU and no other entity (including private couriers) may process international mail in Australia.
In (a) 2005-06, (b) 2006-07, (c) 2007-08, (d) 2008-09, (e) 2009-10, (f) 2010-11, and (g) 2011-12, on how many occasions have weapons or weapons components been intercepted and seized in air and sea cargo, or mail parcels arriving by sea or air at the point of Australian Customs and Border Protection Service screening.
Customs and Border Protection record and report on weapons and firearms separately as these are differentiated in separate sections of legislation.
'Weapons' include (but are not limited to) items of warfare, bladed weapons, laser pointers, electric shock devices and crossbows.
'Firearms' include (but are not limited to) rifles, handguns and firearms and are controlled under different legislation to weapons.
Number of weapons detained and seized in air cargo, sea cargo and international mail.
Customs and Border Protection detains (intercepts) prohibited items at the border. On presentation of an appropriate import permit, detained items are able to be released. If the importation is not permitted or a permit is not presented, the item is seized.
Table One—Number of weapons detained and seized in air cargo, sea cargo and international mail – 2005/06 to March 2012
# Data not available
Number of detained (intercepted) undeclared firearms + in air cargo, sea cargo and international mail.
Undeclared firearms are where firearms are imported into Australia and are detected and identified by Customs and Border Protection as prohibited or restricted goods, and where they have not been declared to Customs in accordance with the import requirements. Some of these detained (intercepted) firearms may subsequently be released on presentation of a valid import permit.
Table Two—Number of detained (intercepted) undeclared firearm detections+ in air cargo, sea cargo and international mail – 2005/06 to February 2012
+This data does not include commercial importations of firearms.
# Data not available
Customs and Border Protection advise that 85 per cent of gun and gun part seizures come from intelligence provided by law enforcement agencies before the parcel or container even arrives in Australia. Since the implementation of a risk-based, intelligence-led approach to intervention across the end to end cargo process in 2009, Customs and Border Protection's detections at the border have increased significantly. The figures above demonstrate the importance of an intelligence-led approach to detecting prohibited items at the borders.
(1) In (a) 2005-06, (b) 2006-07, (c) 2007-08, (d) 2008-09, (e) 2009-10, (f) 2010-11, and (g) 2011-12, what number of staff were employed at the Clyde International Mail Centre by (i) Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (Customs), (ii) the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS), and (iii) Australia Post.
(2) How many staff currently at the Clyde International Mail Centre, are employed by (a) Customs, (b) the AQIS, and (c) Australia Post.
(3) What is the average length of employment at the Clyde International Mail Centre.
(4) How many staff left their employment at the Clyde International Mail Centre in the calendar years (a) 2008, (b) 2009, (c) 2010, and (d) 2011.
(5) What is the breakdown of those who departed by agency, namely (a) Customs, (b) the AQIS, and (c) Australia Post, and the reasons for their departure, namely (i) transfer, (ii) redundancy, or (iii) dismissal.
(6) Have any persons who have worked at the Clyde International Mail Centre in the past five calendar years been investigated, charged or dismissed for any offences or inappropriate behaviour that may have comprised the security of the operations of that facility; if so, how many have been investigated charged and/or dismissed.
(7) Would the scanning of mail items at the Clyde International Mail Centre detect the presence of any metals and plastics contained in them.
In the below answers, Customs refers to the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service and
DAFF refers to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry which includes the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS).
(1)—
* As of 24 April 2012
^ As of 27 March 2012
+ As of 29 February 2012
(2) The number of staff currently employed at the Clyde International Mail Centre is as follows:
* As of 24 April 2012
^ As of 27 March 2012
+As of February 2012
(3) The average length of employment at the Clyde International Mail Centre is as follows:
(4)
(5)—
(6) Australian Customs and Border Protection Service
No.
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
No.
Australia Post
No.
(7) The Border Agencies' scanning technology at the Clyde International Mail Centre allow for the detection and differentiation of a number of materials—including metals and plastics. This scanning technology is complemented by intelligence-led intervention, trace detection and physical examination.
What is Australia Post's involvement in the screening of post articles for the purpose of satisfying Australia's security and quarantine requirements, and which agency determines whether a particular post article is 'low risk' or below the 'low value' threshold.
Australia Post's role within the international gateway is to handle international mail, including sorting and presenting the mail according to requests by border agency officers from the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (Customs and Border Protection) or the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF). Australia Post is also required to open specific articles for examination by border agencies when requested under their direction and supervision.
Customs and Border Protection and DAFF officers determine the risk rating of items in accordance with their risk-assessment practices. Customs and Border Protection is responsible for assessing items for revenue purposes, including those that meet the low value threshold.
In respect of Government's adoption of Recommendation 7.2 of the Productivity Commission Report Economic Structure and Performance of the Australian Retail Industry (9 December 2011), (a) when will the taskforce commence its investigation into low value parcels, (b) is the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service or the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service represented on this taskforce, and (c) when is this taskforce expected to report.
(a) The investigation commenced after the Assistant Treasurer, the Hon Bill Shorten endorsed the Terms of Reference for the Low Value Parcel Processing Taskforce (the Taskforce) on 16 January 2012. The taskforce delivered its interim report on 30 March 2012.
(b) No, the Taskforce is made up of independent experts. However the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service hosts and chairs the Secretariat which supports the Taskforce.
(c) The final report from the taskforce is due to Government by no later than July 2012.
Is it Australia Post policy to transfer all mail items upon arrival in Sydney Airport to the Clyde International Mail Centre for screening by the Australian Customs and Border Protection Services or the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service, before those mail items are distributed to the postal network; if so, are there any exceptions to this practice, if so under what circumstances are exceptions made.
Yes, it is policy for all airmail items received from Sydney Airport to be screened at Clyde Gateway Facility. There are no exceptions to this policy.
(1) What process does Australia Post use for licensing Post Office Agents and monitoring compliance of these agents within the terms of their licenses, and are there any exceptions to these processes, if so what are they.
(2) Why might a license be withdrawn, and what number of licenses were withdrawn in the calendar years (a) 2009, and (b) 2010, in what locations were these agencies, and for what reason were their licenses withdrawn.
(3) What number of licenses in the calendar years (a) 2007, (b) 2008, (c) 2009, (d) 2010, and (e) 2011, were charged with offences relating to the operation of their franchise.
(1) By way of background, the Licensed Post Office (LPO) Agreement is an indefinite term agreement subject to either party having the right to terminate the license/licensor relationship.
Australia Post appoints the Licensee:
Licensees agree to, among other obligations, comply with:
Australia Post and Licensees are also subject to the requirements of the Franchising Code of Conduct.
Initial Licensee Assessment
This assessment process involves:
Ongoing Licensee Suitability
In accordance with recently amended Anti-Money Laundering and Counter Terrorism Financing legislation, existing licensees and key personnel will have a current Police Character Check as at 31 October 2012 (these are being done progressively from May to October 2012) and undergo mandatory 3-year checks thereafter.
In addition, the ongoing suitability of the individual or licensee entity to be "licensed" to provide products and services on behalf of Australia Post will continue to be monitored through compliance with the following:
Policies and Procedures
The operation of the LPO is governed by:
Licensee Employees
It is a requirement that the licensee conduct an appropriate Police Character Check on employees that the licensee engages at the LPO.
Australia Post conducts Police Character Checks for any nominated manager at a LPO and approves all such appointments.
Training Accreditation
Licensees are required to ensure that staff in their outlet undertake a range of mandatory training at prescribed intervals. Depending on the specific training package, this may be undertaken on an annual basis, or every two years. A centralised database is maintained of training certification for LPOs.
Current mandatory training requirements (subject to change as determined by Australia Post) are:
Site Visitation
LPOs are subject to periodic site visitations associated with:
Financial and Transactional Integrity
A range of monitoring and reporting tools are utilised to oversee the financial/transactional integrity of LPOs. This includes ongoing exception based transactional analysis and the monitoring of outlet cash levels. Site financial and operational compliance audits are also undertaken as a result of the exception based transactional analysis/cash level monitoring.
Legislative Compliance
Licensees are required to ensure their compliance with all relevant state and federal legislative requirements in addition to their other specific obligations under the terms of the LPO Agreement.
Included within these legislative requirements for the licensee are:
(3) The following table details the number of licensees charged with offences relating to the operation of their franchise during the years in question:
(1) What is the average duration, in days in 2012, for mail items to be distributed into the postal network from Sydney Airport from the time of their arrival, including the screening processes.
(2) How does this figure compare with that for the calendar years (a) 2007 (b) 2008 (c) 2009 (d) 2010 and (e) 2011.
(1) Mail is screened at the Sydney Gateway Facility and released to Australia Post on the same day if the aircraft lands prior to 11am and on the following day if the aircraft lands after 11am. Once released to Australia Post, mail is subject to normal delivery standards.
(2) These standards have been in place since 2003.
(1) What is the average duration (in days) for undertaking the screening process of mail items at the Clyde International Mail Centre from their arrival at the centre to their departure.
(2) How does this figure compare with that for the calendar years (a) 2007, (b) 2008, (c) 2009, (d) 2010, and (e) 2011.
(1) Mail is screened at the Sydney Gateway Facility and released to Australia Post on the same day if the aircraft lands prior to 11am and on the following day if the aircraft lands after 11am. Once released to Australia Post, mail is subject to normal delivery standards.
(2) These standards have been in place since 2003.
Is the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity currently investigating any matters in respect of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service; if so, what is the nature of the investigations, and when did they commence.
Commencing 1 January 2011, the law enforcement-related aspects of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service were added by Regulation to the jurisdiction of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (ACLEI). By subsequent amendment to the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006, commencing 6 December 2012, Customs and Border Protection was added to ACLEI’s jurisdiction on a whole-of-agency basis.
ACLEI advises that, as at 22 March 2012, seven corruption issues relating to Customs and Border Protection were being investigated by the Integrity Commissioner. Four of these investigations were commenced on 10 January 2011. The others were commenced on 16 March 2011, 1 September 2011 and 21 October 2011, respectively.
Each investigation concerns either information or an allegation that a staff member or members may have engaged in conduct that involves an abuse of office and/or conduct that, having regard to the duties and powers of a staff member, may involve corruption of any other kind. Since these investigations are current, it would not be appropriate to comment further.
On 30 March 2012 I announced that the Federal Government will introduce legislation to conduct targeted integrity tests on Commonwealth officers suspected of corruption.
This includes officers from the Australian Federal Police, the Australian Crime Commission and the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service.
Integrity tests are covert operations designed to test whether a public official will respond to a simulated situation in a manner that is illegal or would contravene an agency’s standard of integrity.
Examples of integrity testing include:
Under the legislation the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity and agencies including the Australian Federal Police, the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service and the Australian Crime Commission will have the power to conduct targeted integrity testing.
The Integrity Commissioner or the head of the agency will be responsible for authorising integrity tests.
The Integrity Commissioner will have overall oversight of the integrity testing system and will be made aware of all integrity tests being undertaken by agencies.
Oversight will be provided by the Commonwealth Ombudsman and the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity.
Employee representatives are also being consulted on the development of the system to ensure appropriate safeguards are in place.
This legislation will build on the powers that the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity already has which include:
On 28 April 2012, I announced further reform to make law enforcement more corruption resistant:
1. Doubling of the number of enforcement agencies oversighted by Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity. New agencies to be oversighted by ACLEI are:
2. Doubling of resources available to ACLEI to oversee the Customs and Border Protection Service (Customs).
3. A series of new measures the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission are undertaking and the extension to Customs of the same integrity powers as the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission. These include:
Is it current policy of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (Customs) to regularly rotate staff working in front line international (a) mail, (b) air freight, and (c) sea freight/cargo, screening areas; if so, (i) how often are staff rotated, and (ii) what is the longest time period that a single Customs employee has been continually employed on mail/freight/cargo screening duties.
Customs and Border Protection has an organisational mobility policy, the Mobility Practice Statement that facilitates the movement of personnel between work areas. Mobility processes are conducted at a regional level to meet Customs and Border Protection’s operational requirements.
Since re-institution of the policy in August 2011, mobility processes have been conducted in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and South Australia. The policy specifies that mobility processes will be undertaken in each region at the discretion of the respective Regional Senior Management Group (RSMG) and will be driven by identified business requirements and employee considerations.
Customs and Border Protection does not record data in a way that would readily allow answers to be provided on the length of service of individuals in particular work areas. To attempt to provide this level of detail would involve an unreasonable diversion of resources.
Is it the current policy of Australia Post to rotate staff involved in the transfer of international mail from Kingsford Smith Airport to the Clyde International Mail Centre; if so, (i) how often are staff rotated, and (ii) what is the longest period that a single Australia Post employee has been continually employed on mail/freight/cargo screening duties.
(i) Yes, there are 330 Postal Transport Officer (PTO) positions at Sydney Transport Facility who work to a 24-hour rotating roster. It takes approximately 2.5 years to go through the roster once and the PTO's duties may include the transfer of mail from the airport to the mail centre.
(ii) 53 years.
In respect of the National Secondary School Computer Fund, to date, (a) how many laptops have been installed, (b) what proportion (as a percentage) of these are still in service, (c) how does the Government monitor the failure rate of this equipment, (d) who provides funding for the repair and maintenance of this equipment, (e) what criteria are being used to define the success (or otherwise) of this program, and (f) when will the outcome of this program be reported on.
(a) As at 29 May 2012, a total of over 957,000 computers had been installed under the National Secondary School Computer Fund (the Computer Fund).
(b) and (c) The purchasing ,management and maintenance of ICT equipment under the Computer Fund is taking place at a state, sector or school level. Consistent with the Digital Education Revolution (DER) National Partnership and Funding Agreements, government and non government education authorities provide bi-annual reports to the Australian Government on the number of computers each school receives on a six monthly basis. The July 2012 Progress Reports are currently being received and assessed.
In addition to formal Progress Reports, the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) also monitors implementation of the Computer Fund through its engagement with education authorities on an as needs basis. In the event of reports that there were, for example, instances of non-compliance with the DER National Partnership or Funding Agreements or systemic problems associated with the deployment of devices, DEEWR would seek an explanation from the education authority involved. DEEWR is aware of individual instances of equipment failure but not of any systemic problems.
Government and non-government education authorities are responsible for achieving and maintaining the one to one computer to student ratio (1:1 ratio) for all Australian schools with students in Years 9 -12. Where computers are taken out of service, for example for maintenance purposes, it is the responsibility of the relevant education authorities to ensure that students are not unduly disadvantaged and that they continue to have access at a 1:1 ratio.
(d) The Australian Government recognises that there are additional costs associated with the implementation of the Computer Fund. In that context, the Government has provided additional funding of $807 million to support the installation and maintenance of computers purchased under the Computer Fund.
(e) and f) In line with the DER Evaluation Strategy, a mid-program review is currently underway, with consultations occurring during May-July 2012. The Department expects to receive the final report by September 2012. Once the report has been finalised and its contents examined the Department will undertake to release relevant findings within three months of its completion.
In respect of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) ingredient of the Solomon Islands aid program, does the AFP internally advertise expressions of interest, if so, (a) how, and (b) what measures have been undertaken to ensure (i) enhanced consultation with the Solomon Islands Ministry and Police personnel, and (ii) that a proportion of AFP personnel sent to the Solomon Islands has recent front line policing experience.
Does the AFP internally advertise expressions of interest: Yes, for selected roles requiring specialised skill sets. For general policing roles members of the Mission Component (i.e. the permanent deployable pool of experienced staff) are selected and deployed based on field of expertise.
(a) How: The AFP advertises Expressions of Interest (EOI) for mission roles openly through internal communication channels such as all staff emails or via the AFP's intranet. A selection process is undertaken in accordance with internal governance documentation (Australian Federal Police Commissioners Order on Selection for Vacant Roles (CO7)).
(b) What measures have been undertaken to ensure:
(i) Enhanced consultation with the Solomon Islands Ministry and Police personnel: AFP personnel in the Solomon Islands are deployed through the multi-national Participating Police Force (PPF), the policing component of the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI). The PPF Commander (an AFP member) also performs the role of Deputy Commissioner Royal Solomon Islands Police Force (RSIPF). There is a great deal of engagement between the PPF and the RSIPF both at the executive level and at the rank and file level with PPF members working along side RSIPF members in an 'advisor' role, often as a one on one counterpart arrangement. The PPF remains engaged with the Solomon Islands Government Ministry for Police, National Security and Correctional Services, in partnership with the RSIPF Commissioner.
The transition plan for the PPF was developed in consultation with the RSIPF including identification of key roles and areas of responsibility where an advisory capacity was seen as appropriate. The PPF structure, which is the catalyst for any internal opportunities, has been developed to complement the new RSIPF revised structure.
(ii) That a proportion of AFP personnel sent to the Solomon Islands has recent front line policing experience: Selection processes for mission roles, either through an EOI process or through selection from the Mission Component, ensure that contemporary front line policing experience is delivered in mission roles.
Mission Component members rotate between mission deployment and Australia based deployments. Whilst in Australia they perform a variety of front line roles to ensure contemporary experience is maintained.
RAMSI has embarked on a process of drawdown which commenced in 2010 and as a part of this drawdown the PPF has been transitioning from front line policing to capacity development. This transition requires a broad range of both policing and non-policing skill sets, in a variety of traditional and non traditional policing functions. The PPF ensures that the correct balance of skill sets from the AFP and all other contributing nations continues to meet the ongoing requirements of the RSIPF.
Since 1 January 2008, has the Minister's department contracted Skills Training Australia Pty Ltd, 92 Copeland Street, Liverpool, NSW, to conduct training; if so, for each type of training, what (a) was the purpose, (b) was the duration, (c) sum was charged per participant, and (d) oversights (if any) occurred on the specified outcome, duration and delivery.
The Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education has not contracted Skills Training Australia Pty Ltd during the period in question.
Since 1 January 2008, has the Minister's department contracted Skills Training Australia Pty Ltd, 92 Copeland Street, Liverpool, NSW, to conduct training; if so, for each type of training, what (a) was the purpose, (b) was the duration, (c) sum was charged per participant, and (d) oversights (if any) occurred on the specified outcome, duration and delivery.
Since 1 January 2008 the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy has not contracted Skills Training Australia in NSW to conduct any form of training.
Since 1 January 2008, has the Minister's department contracted Skills Training Australia Pty Ltd, 92 Copeland Street, Liverpool, NSW, to conduct training; if so, for each type of training, what (a) was the purpose, (b) was the duration, (c) sum was charged
No, the above Minister's department has not contracted with Skills Training Australia Pty Ltd, 92 Copeland Street, Liverpool, NSW between 1 January 2008 and 8 May 2012.
Since 1 January 2008, has the Minister's department contracted Skills Training Australia Pty Ltd, 92 Copeland Street, Liverpool, NSW, to conduct training; if so, for each type of training, what (a) was the purpose, (b) was the duration, (c) sum was charged per participant, and (d) oversights (if any) occurred on the specified outcome, duration and delivery.
Please refer to the answer provided to House of Representatives Parliamentary Question in Writing No. 972.
Since 1 January 2008, has the Minister's department contracted Skills Training Australia Pty Ltd, 92 Copeland Street, Liverpool, NSW, to conduct training; if so, for each type of training, what (a) was the purpose, (b) was the duration, (c) sum was charged per participant, and (d) oversights (if any) occurred on the specified outcome, duration and delivery.
Since 1 January 2008, the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency has not engaged Skills Training Australia Pty Ltd to conduct training.
Since 1 January 2008, has the Minister's department contracted Skills Training Australia Pty Ltd, 92 Copeland Street, Liverpool, NSW, to conduct training; if so, for each type of training, what (a) was the purpose, (b) was the duration, (c) sum was charged per participant, and (d) oversights (if any) occurred on the specified outcome, duration and delivery.
Please refer to the answer provided to House of Representatives Parliamentary Question in Writing No. 972.
Would he consider reforming the cider taxation from the ad valorem Wine Equalisation Tax to a volumetric excise rate equivalent to that applied to Ready to Drink, if so, has he considered the impact such reforms would have on,
(a) Australian cider manufacturers, in particular, small-business cider manufacturers, and
(b) the local primary industry and, in particular, Australian pear and apple growers.
As stated in the Government's tax forum discussion paper released on 28 July 2011, the Government has committed not to change alcohol tax in the middle of a wine glut and while there is an industry restructure underway. Consistent with this, no changes to the taxation of cider were announced in the 2012-13 Budget.
In respect of the media statement: 'Australia to assist Pacific and developing nations to attend crucial Rio+20 Conference' (12 April 2012), and Australia's contribution to the Participation Trust Fund; (a) who are the trustees or guardians, (b) who will decide on the grants, (c) what criteria will be used to assess applicants, (d) which nations are eligible to apply, (e) what safeguards are in place to ensure it operates transparently and with probity, and (f) which other nations have donated or pledged funds, and what were the amounts for the respective nations.
(a) The participation trust fund for Rio +20 is managed by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA).
(b) As managers of the trust fund, DESA decide on the allocation of funding.
(c) DESA will consider applications on a first-come-first-served basis. Countries are able to request support for up to two participants. Member states are encouraged to be represented at the conference at the highest possible level including Heads of State or Government.
(d) Funding is available to developing countries, including the least developed countries. Australia has expressed its preference that the funds be used to support representatives from the Asia-Pacific region, particularly least developed countries and small island developing states.
(e) The participation trust fund is operated in accordance with the United Nations financial rules and regulations.
(f) Other countries that have contributed to the fund include Canada, Croatia, Denmark, France, Iceland, Japan, Mauritius, Pakistan, Republic of Korea, Switzerland, Brazil, China, Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Norway, Poland, Sweden and the United Kingdom. We do not have a breakdown of individual funding.
(1) Did AusAID; (a) undertake a direct investigation of the Palestinian Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC), (b) refer the concerns about the Palestinian UAWC to any intelligence agency, and (c) seek the advice of any intelligence agency about the alleged activities of the Palestinian UAWC.
(2) How did AusAID determine that no employees or officials of the Palestinian UAWC have links to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
(3) In respect of background checks on staff and officials of the Palestinian UAWC to ensure they were not associated with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, were the checks undertaken by, (a) AusAID, and (b) an intelligence organisation.
(4) What due diligence processes does AusAID require of its fellow agencies and organisations working in such environments.
(1) (a) Yes.
(b) and (c) usAID consulted on this matter with relevant Australian Government agencies: the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade; the Australian Government Solicitor; the Australian Federal Police; and the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation.
(2) Through thorough examination of material alleging such links, and other relevant material, in consultation with relevant Australian Government agencies and others, AusAID determined that there was no evidence of a breach of the UN Charter Act as a result of AusAID funding of UAWC-implemented activities through World Vision. In particular, none of the material examined demonstrated that assets had been provided, directly or indirectly, to a proscribed entity or that any other entity has, or had, effective control over UAWC's assets.
(3) Under the Australia Middle East NGO Cooperation Agreement (AMENCA) program, background checks on staff and officials of UAWC are the responsibility of World Vision. AusAID consulted with the Department of Foreign Affairs to confirm that UAWC Board members are not listed under the UN Charter Act.
(4) AusAID requires that all those involved in managing and implementing Australia's aid program make all reasonable efforts to ensure that aid funds and resources are not used to support terrorist activity. AusAID's contracts and agreements require other parties to use their best endeavours to comply with the law. The actions required to satisfy these legal and contractual obligations may differ depending on particular circumstances. At a minimum, AusAID expects all development partners :
Further to his answer to questions in writing Nos. 790 and 827 ( Hansard , 8 May 2012, page 53 and 56), (a) on what date in 2009 was the advice (i) sought, and (ii) received, (b) was the advice sought before the decision was taken to expend funds under the Home Insulation Program, and (c) did the advice identify any risks, concerns or questions as to the constitutionality of expenditure under the Home Insulation Program; if so, can he indicate what these risks, concerns or questions were, and what measures were taken to mitigate them.
In my answers to the previous questions, I confirmed that legal advice was received from the Attorney-General's Department in 2009 in relation to the Commonwealth's constitutional powers in relation to the expenditure of funds. Consistently with the Government's policy on the disclosure of legal advice to Parliamentary Committees, I do not propose to comment further on the advice that was received.
Further to the answer to question in writing No. 741 (House Hansard, 8 May 2012, page 52) how much power is consumed by a standard fixed line telephone (that does not require a separate power source).
A report from the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineering indicates the power dissipated from a standard corded telephone, with little functionality other than making and receiving calls, would be less than 0.5Watts, equating to less than 0.0005 Kilowatts per hour.
In respect of diagnosed cases of cancer in Vietnam veterans: (a) how many cases were diagnosed for each year (i) 2007; (ii) 2008; (iii) 2009; (iv) 2010; (v) 2011;(vi) 2012; and (b) what type of cancer was identified in each case.
The Department of Veterans' Affairs is unable to provide the number of diagnosed cases as the Department only holds information on cancer related claims that are accepted as service related, or where the Department has accepted a claim for treatment of malignant cancer under Section 85 (2) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986.
Has it ever been Australia Post's practice to present a manifest of international mail delivered to the Clyde International Mail Centre, and if not, why not.
No. In accordance with Universal Postal Union requirements, incoming international mail is accompanied by a Waybill that shows the total number of bags in/total weight of a shipment (ie not the contents of individual parcels).
In respect of (a) the Bowen foreshore water park; (b) the Mackay basketball stadium; (c) the Mackay junior football grounds upgrade; and (d) the Airlie Beach main street upgrade, (i) has his department completed the value for money assessments, and will these be made public, (ii) has he approved the release of funding and had the funding agreements executed, (iii) what are the delivery timeframes, and (iv) can he give an assurance that the completion date will be before the next election.
Based on project information as at 11 July 2012:
(a) Bowen Foreshore Water park:
(i) The project assessment has been completed. Assessments are not publicly released.
(ii) The release of funding for the project has yet to be approved. A funding agreement has not been executed.
(iii) Based on the project information provided by the proponent, construction commenced in April 2012 and is expected to be completed in July 2012.
(iv) Whitsunday Regional Council has indicated that the project is expected to be complete in July 2012.
(b) Mackay Basketball Stadium:
(i) The assessment for Stage 1 has been completed. Stage 2 will be assessed following the completion of Stage 1 which is expected by 31 July 2012. Assessments are not publicly released.
(ii) Funding has been approved for Stage 1 and the funding agreement has been executed. Stage 2 approval and funding agreement execution will be subject to the assessment for Stage 2 which is expected to be completed by 31 August 2012.
(iii) Based on the information provided by the proponent, Stage 1 has commenced and is expected to be completed by 31 July 2012.
(iv) Mackay Basketball Incorporated has indicated that Stage 1 is expected to be complete by 31 July 2012.
(c) Mackay Junior Football:
(i) No. The proponent has not provided sufficient information on the project for an assessment to be completed. The proponent has advised it can provide the required information by September 2012. Assessments are not publicly released.
(ii) These actions are taken after projects have been assessed and approved.
(iii) Timeframes for delivery of the project will be established when project information has been provided by the proponent.
(iv) Project completion will be subject to proponent delivery timeframes.
(d) Airlie Beach:
(i) The project assessment has been completed. Assessments are not publicly released.
(ii) Funding has been approved and a funding agreement is being negotiated with the Whitsunday Regional Council.
(iii) Based on the project information provided by the proponent construction commenced in February 2012 and is expected to be completed by
April 2013.
(iv) Whitsunday Regional Council has indicated that the project is expected to be completed in April 2013.
In respect of visas issued to residents of Papua New Guinea, in (a) 2008, (b) 2009, (c) 2010, and (d) 2011, (i) how many were issued, and (ii) what was the overstay rate.
Further to the answer to question in writing No. 840 (House Hansard, 8 May 2012, page 4216) in which he stated that Ernst and Young had been commissioned to conduct an analysis of prioritisation and financing of local government infrastructure due to report in April 2012, can he indicate:
(a) whether the report has been provided to the Government; and if so, will it be publicly released; and if not, why not; and
(b) if the report has not been provided to the Government, when is it expected to be provided, and does the Government plan to release it publicly when it is provided; and, if not, why not.
(a) The Ernst & Young report has been provided to Government and has been publicly released. The report is available on my Department's website: www.regional.gov.au.
(b) N/A.
Can the he confirm that his department is establishing a new facility at the quarantine station on the Cocos (Keeling) Islands to cope with the latest influx of irregular maritime arrivals; if so, (a) what is the purpose of this facility, (b) how many people can this facility accommodate, (c) how many arrivals is his department anticipating, (d) what will be the total cost of these new operations on the Cocos (Keeling) Islands, including capital and operating costs, (e) what is the estimated charter cost of supporting these new operations, (f) how many staff have been transferred to the Cocos (Keeling) Islands, and (g) how long will this facility be in place.
The Government is not building or operating an immigration detention centre on the Cocos Islands. As is appropriate, the department is making contingency arrangements to accommodate any irregular maritime arrivals who might arrive at the Cocos Islands for short periods until they can be transferred to Christmas Island.
The department, in consultation with the Department of Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport, is considering options for holding irregular maritime arrivals for short periods on the Cocos Islands using existing infrastructure pending transfer to Christmas Island. Work has commenced on minor refurbishment works to the Quarantine Station on West Island. It is estimated that these works will cost $50 000. The Quarantine Station can hold approximately 80 persons on a short term basis pending transfer to Christmas Island. There will also be capacity to house agency and service provider personnel to support the response to any arrivals at the Cocos Islands.
The department aims to transfer irregular maritime arrivals at the Cocos Islands to Christmas Island as soon as possible. Normally, this is within 72 hours.
Due to the isolated nature of the Cocos Islands, the department relies on air services to respond quickly to irregular maritime arrivals at the Cocos Islands. Charter costs vary according to the size of the aircraft used and its routing. The department follows Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines to source aircraft for charter services and uses panel arrangements established by the Department of Defence.
The department has a small contingent of officers on the Cocos Islands. These staff currently include a small number of detention service provider personnel and an interpreter, although staffing arrangements are under ongoing review.
In respect of holders of 457 visas, on 1 June 2012, how many were in Australia, and of those, how many were (a) single, and (b) part of a family group and what was the composition of the family group.
My Department has limited capacity to report on the composition of the family groups of 457 visa holders. However, my Department can report on the number of dependant family members that have been sponsored with the primary visa holder.
On 1 June 2012, there were a total of 90 221 subclass 457 visa holders in Australia. Of these, 53 896 had no dependants. Of the 36 325 with dependants, 17 933 had one dependant, 8063 had two dependants, 7633 had three dependants, 2169 had four dependants and 527 had five or more dependants.
What was the total cost to the Government for the Prime Minister's Economic Forum in Brisbane on 12 to 13 June 2012.
The event management of the Prime Minister's Economic Forum was carried out by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C).
The total estimated cost to PM&C to manage the event was $103,722.15. This is based on available invoices and is not expected to change substantially.
(1) Since the swearing in of the Government on 14 September 2010, per ministerial office,
(a) what is the total cost of ministerial staff separation payments, and
(b) how many ministerial staff resignations have been tendered.
(2) How many ministerial staff separation payments have been issued to staff in the Minister for Foreign Affairs' office, and at what total cost, since the resignation (from the Ministry) on 22 February 2012 of the Hon. Kevin Rudd MP.
(3) What was the total cost of the separation payment made to Mr Tony Hodges, who was employed by the Prime Minister until he resigned on 27 January 2012.
(1) (a), (b) and (2) The department does not routinely collate information on separations and I am advised that the effort required to collate the necessary information would be a substantial and unreasonable diversion of departmental resources at the present time.
(3) I am advised that the Department of Finance and Deregulation does not release personal information in relation to individuals. Final monies paid to an individual is considered to be personal information and will not be released.
(a) 2008-09: $86,865.37
(b) 2009-10: $134,867.81
(c) 2010-11: $121,128.34
(d) 2011-12: $67,796.23
Figures include airfares, meals, accommodation and incidentals.
Figures exclude GST and reflect departmental staff from the Office for the Arts, for overseas travel for purposes such as the repatriation of indigenous remains, the development of cultural links with other countries, and travel with industry bodies to promote Australian content.
(a) 2008-09, (b) 2009-10, (c) 2010-11 and (d) 2011-12 for the total cost of overseas travel for departmental staff.
(a) $3,164,757.39
(b) $2,676,198.85
(c) $2,444,216.92
(d) $2,121,128.94
For (a) 2008-09, (b) 2009-10, (c) 2010-11, and (d) 2011-12, what was the total cost of overseas travel for departmental staff.
(a) For 2008-09 financial year, the total cost of overseas travel for my departmental staff was $516,536.86.
(b) For 2009-10 financial year, the total cost of overseas travel for my departmental staff was $350,889.49.
(c) For 2010-11 financial year, the total cost of overseas travel for my departmental staff was $705,586.80.
(d) For the 2011-12 financial year, as at 30 April 2012, the total cost of overseas travel for my departmental staff was $199,641.20.
For (a) 2008-09, (b) 2009-10, (c) 2010-11, and (d) 2011-12 what was the total cost of overseas travel for departmental staff.
The total cost of overseas travel for departmental staff in the financial years requested is provided in the table below.
For (a) 2008-09, (b) 2009-10, (c) 2010-11, and (d) 2011-12, what was the total cost of overseas travel for departmental staff.
Can he confirm whether the Department of Immigration and Citizenship has access to the Passenger Analysis Clearance and Evaluation System administered by the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service.
Yes, officers of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship have limited access to the clearance component of the Passenger Analysis Clearance and Evaluation system.