The SPEAKER ( Hon. Tony Smith ) took the chair at 12:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
That this House:
(1)acknowledges that Centrelink has, since late 2016, been sending out numerous incorrect notices relating to debt recovery – by its estimation, at least 4,000 of the 20,000 debt notices sent each week are incorrect;
(2)notes the severe financial and emotional toll that the debt recovery system has had on thousands of people, including some of the most vulnerable, with some going so far as to talk of suicide;
(3)notes the many well-documented problems with the system, including:
(a)incorrect debts being raised by a crude data-matching of a person's annual income as reported by the Australian Taxation Office with their fortnightly income reported to Centrelink;
(b)alleged debts having been referred to debt collection agencies in a short amount of time, often when the person has not even been made aware of the alleged debt because they have not received adequate notice from Centrelink;
(c)people being asked for payslips and other proof of income from periods or in circumstances where they could not reasonably be expected to provide such documentation; and
(d)the Department of Human Services often refusing to explain how an alleged debt has been calculated, and in some cases recalculating the alleged debt seemingly at random;
(4)notes that while the Minister for Human Services has indicated that some minor changes will be made, the program remains deeply flawed and must be shut down immediately;
(5)condemns the Minister for not only refusing to admit that there is a problem with the system, but also for insisting that the system will continue to operate despite it incorrectly targeting thousands of innocent Australians and its failure to treat people fairly and humanely; and
(6)calls on the Minister to:
(a)ensure that all Centrelink debt recovery activities are timely and accurate, and are conducted in a fair and humane manner; and
(b)convene, as a matter of urgency, an expert stakeholder roundtable to design a fair and humane system of debt detection and recovery.
That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Denison from moving the following motion immediately—That this House:
(1)acknowledges that Centrelink has, since late 2016, been sending out numerous incorrect notices relating to debt recovery – by its estimation, at least 4,000 of the 20,000 debt notices sent each week are incorrect;
(2)notes the severe financial and emotional toll that the debt recovery system has had on thousands of people, including some of the most vulnerable, with some going so far as to talk of suicide;
(3)notes the many well-documented problems with the system, including:
(a)incorrect debts being raised by a crude data-matching of a person's annual income as reported by the Australian Taxation Office with their fortnightly income reported to Centrelink;
(b)alleged debts having been referred to debt collection agencies in a short amount of time, often when the person has not even been made aware of the alleged debt because they have not received adequate notice from Centrelink;
(c)people being asked for payslips and other proof of income from periods or in circumstances where they could not reasonably be expected to provide such documentation; and
(d)the Department of Human Services often refusing to explain how an alleged debt has been calculated, and in some cases recalculating the alleged debt seemingly at random;
(4)notes that while the Minister for Human Services has indicated that some minor changes will be made, the program remains deeply flawed and must be shut down immediately;
(5)condemns the Minister for not only refusing to admit that there is a problem with the system, but also for insisting that the system will continue to operate despite it incorrectly targeting thousands of innocent Australians and its failure to treat people fairly and humanely; and
(6)calls on the Minister to:
(a)ensure that all Centrelink debt recovery activities are timely and accurate, and are conducted in a fair and humane manner; and
(b)convene, as a matter of urgency, an expert stakeholder roundtable to design a fair and humane system of debt detection and recovery.
Building and Construction Industry (Improving Productivity) Bill 2016
Building and Construction Industry (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2016
Treasury Laws Amendment (Working Holiday Maker Reform) Bill 2016
Superannuation (Departing Australia Superannuation Payments Tax) Amendment Bill 2016
Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2016
Income Tax Rates Amendment (Working Holiday Maker Reform) Bill 2016
Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2016
Superannuation (Departing Australia Superannuation Payments Tax) Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2016
Criminal Code Amendment (High Risk Terrorist Offenders) Bill 2016
Register of Foreign Ownership of Agricultural Land Amendment (Water) Bill 2016
Criminal Code Amendment (War Crimes) Bill 2016
VET Student Loans Bill 2016
VET Student Loans (Charges) Bill 2016
VET Student Loans (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2016
Civil Nuclear Transfers to India Bill 2016
Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Budget and Other Measures) Bill 2016
Civil Nuclear Transfers to India Bill 2016
Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Budget and Other Measures) Bill 2016
There is a body of evidence suggesting that China's criminal justice system 'does not act in accordance with procedural fairness and rule of law standards in criminal proceedings'.
That the House take note of the report.
That the order of the day be referred to the Federation Chamber for debate.
That:
(1) Ms Husar be discharged from the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training and that, in her place, Ms Lamb be appointed a member of the committee;
(2) Ms Lamb be discharged from the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs and that, in her place, Ms Husar be appointed a member of the committee;
Privacy Amendment (Notifiable Data Breaches) Bill 2016
An agency or organisation is required to notify the Privacy Commissioner and affected individuals when specified personal information has been, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by an unauthorised person and the agency, organisation or Privacy Commissioner believes that the unauthorised acquisition may give rise to a real risk of serious harm to any affected individual.
The finding is the latest stain on Telstra's lax privacy record. In 2012 the telco received a similar warning from the Privacy Commissioner for publishing the personal information of more than 730,000 customers online. It also received warnings for breaches of customer data in 2010 when a mailing list error resulted in about 220,000 letters with incorrect addresses being mailed out.
That this bill be now read a third time.
Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Amendment Bill 2016
Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Levy Bill 2016
That this bill be now read a third time.
Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Levy Bill 2016
That this bill be now read a third time.
Statute Update (A.C.T. Self-Government (Consequential Provisions) Regulations) Bill 2016
In establishing an ACT government, the Australian Capital Territory will be a body politic under the Crown. It will consist of a legislative arm and an executive arm to exercise powers as set out in the Bill. The dual nature of the Territory—home to both its residents and the nation's capital—will be reflected in the financial arrangements put in place by this Bill. The ACT will have the same legislative and executive powers and responsibility over finances as the States and the Northern Territory. The ACT will be treated by the Commonwealth on the same financial basis as the States and the Northern Territory. Fairness and equity will be assured.
Were, however, a free vote to be permitted I would support legislation which recognised same-sex couples as being described as in a marriage.
That statements on indulgence on the Bourke Street tragedy; the deaths of former member Russell Gorman, former Senator Trood and Anne Deveson; and the 50th anniversary of the Black Tuesday bushfires in Tasmania be permitted in the Federation Chamber.
Each box represents a portfolio. Cabinet Ministers are shown in bold type. As a general rule, there is one department in each portfolio. However, there is a Department of Human Services in the Social Services portfolio and a Department of Veterans' Affairs in the Defence portfolio. The title of a department does not necessarily reflect the title of a minister in all cases. Assistant Ministers in italics are designated as Parliamentary Secretaries under the Ministers of State Act 1952 .
Shows a lack of spine … By doing this, it means they are the party of increasing electricity prices and reduced energy security.
… it's a mongrel. It's not a credible alternative; it's a smokescreen.
… it is a mongrel. It is not a credible alternative, it is a smokescreen.
You can’t set policy on a wing, a hope and a prayer.
That the revised program of sittings for 2017 be agreed to.
The Government's failure to protect the interests of local workers and consumers.
The House divided. [16:40]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)
That the House take note of the report.
That the order of the day be referred to the Federation Chamber for debate.
Too often we see the young couple getting beaten out at the auction, and then renting out the very place that they were trying to buy.
The committee notes the strong majority view amongst the contributors to this inquiry that stamp duties are inefficient and out-dated.
That the House take note of the report.
That the order of the day be referred to the Federation Chamber for debate.
Statute Update (A.C.T. Self-Government (Consequential Provisions) Regulations) Bill 2016
That this bill be now read a third time.
Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (2016 Measures No. 2) Bill 2016
That this bill be now read a third time.
Corporations Amendment (Professional Standards of Financial Advisers) Bill 2016
That all the words after "that" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:
"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:
(1) notes that in recent years, numerous cases of inappropriate financial advice have had a negative impact on Australian consumers' confidence in the financial services industry;
(2) notes that this lack of trust has become a barrier to consumers seeking financial advice;
(3) welcomes this continuation of the Future of Financial Advice reforms which were initiated under the former Labor government; and
(4) calls on current Liberal and National Party parliamentarians to apologise for the disregard their colleagues in the 43rd parliament showed for the many victims of bad practice in the financial advice sector when they voted against Labor's Future of Financial Advice measures.
It had been apparent from a number of investigations that some advisers had very low education standards.
Britain ended last year as the strongest of the world's advanced economies with growth accelerating in the six months after the Brexit vote …
Business activity hit a 17-month high …
… … …
Andrew Haldane, chief economist at the Bank of England, suggested that economic forecasters were facing a 'Michael Fish moment' over their mistaken predictions, referring to the BBC weather forecaster. Mr Haldane, comparing the profession's failure to spot the 2008 recession to Mr Fish's infamous assurance of 'no hurricane' on the eve of the great storm of 1987, said: 'It's a fair cop to say that the profession—
is to some degree in crisis.
He also admitted to shortcomings in pre-Brexit predictions, saying that 'the data has surprised to the upside.'
… … …
An assessment by Cambridge University criticised 'flawed and partisan' Treasury forecasts of Britain's economy outside the EU.
The House divided. [18:49]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)
That this bill be now read a third time.
That business intervening before order of the day No. 18, government business, be postponed until the next sitting.
The House divided. [19:01]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)
Treasury Laws Amendment (2016 Measures No. 1) Bill 2016
Our family is anxious regarding the outcome, as we somehow try to work our way through this very difficult online system, to organise a reassessment. I am sick to my stomach with the thought that this may not be possible and that Centrelink will steal over $1000 from my son and, I might add, he earnt less than $15,000 for the year in question.
The issue that is of concern is that the ABC has failed to have a discussion with people in the bush to consult and provide any reasonable notice or explanation—
ABC will be providing digital radio to people in the city (who already have a magnitude of options to connect) and taking away the only option for bush people—people who don't have reliable internet access, mobile reception—
or radio.
Is this yet another example of double standards with those who live and work in remote Australia simply being expected to put up and shut up? The ABC should be proud to deliver services to the bush where they’ve probably got a greater listenership audience per capita than they do in the city.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mrs Wicks ) took the chair at 16:00.
We moved here in Perth with our little 4 year old daughter in September and I'm really grateful for being part of this country. This year, Australia Day is also a little bit mine and I'm really proud of it—I really feel Australia is my country.
To the Honourable the Speaker and the Members of the House of Representatives
This Petition of residents and visitors of Sulphur Creek on the North-West Coast of Tasmania draws to the attention of the House, the lack of mobile phone coverage at Sulphur Creek and the difficulty this causes residents and business owners.
We therefore ask the House to consider allocating finding under the next round of Liberal Coalition's Mobile Phone Black Spot funding programme to the Heybridge, Preservation Bay and Sulphur Creek community to ensure all residents and visitors have access to essential Services.
They are tragic and they are indefensible. Each entry in this data, for the most part, represents a child who suffered at the hands of someone who should have cared for and protected them, and let us not forget the ripples of the abuse also felt by their family, friends and carers.
That orders of the day Nos 1 to 6, government business, be postponed until a later hour this day.
To clear up another myth that Wilmar is hiding something, I am making available to you today the up to date GEISSA term sheet that we have produced in the course of the negotiations as well as the associated Co-mingling Agreement.
The only thing preventing QSL from being offered to you as a GEI marketer is QSL not yet accepting reasonable terms for the purchase of sugar from Wilmar.
The only thing preventing most grower collectives proceeding to conclusion of cane supply agreements is QSL not accepting reasonable terms for the purchase of sugar from Wilmar.
The only thing preventing growers capitalising on current strong prices is QSL not … accepting reasonable terms for the purchase of sugar from Wilmar.
We invite QSL to tell us—and you—what is holding us all back from getting on with it.
If it continues on like this, there's a great potential the town…
… will collapse if they don't sort the marketing situation with QSL.
(1) On what date (a) did he approve the Ballina Koala Plan, and (b) was he sworn in as the Minister for Environment and Energy.(2) Which documents, by (a) name, and (b) date, were part of the package provided to him as part of the approval package for the plan.(3) What alternatives were made available to him in approving the plan.(4) Has he been made aware of the concerns of the Ballina Shire Council on the impact of some aspects of this section on koalas and some residents in section 10 of the Pacific Highway Ballina to Woolgoolga upgrade.(5) What other controlled actions under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 did he or his delegates approve between 19 July and 13 September 2016, when were they approved, and by whom.
(1) (a) The Ballina Koala Plan was approved by my delegate on 19 July 2016, and (b) I was sworn in as the Minister for the Environment and Energy on 19 July 2016.
(2) The approval package provided to my delegate included the standard approval brief and approval letter to NSW Roads and Maritime Services. It also included the following attachments:
Department Advice – Ballina Koala Plan, July 2016
Ballina Koala Plan
Departmental Review comments
RMS Response to Department's Preliminary Comments (includes comments to Dr Phillips)
Letter from EDO and Dr Stephen Phillips Dissenting Report
Department's Issues Register
Letter from Department to RMS requesting Additional Information
Additional Information from RMS (including Addendum to the Ballina Koala plan)
Koala Management Plan
Summary of Management Measures in Koala Management Plan
Letter from Expert Phil Miller and Response from RMS
EPBC 2012/6394 Approval Conditions
Letter advising RMS that you approve the Ballina Koala Plan
(3) No alternatives were proposed with the recommendation to the Minister's delegate to approve the Ballina Koala Plan. However, alternative options were considered through the Department's review of the plan, which included a consultation phase, before the final decision was made by the delegate. As part of the decision making process, the delegate requested additional information, including further sensitivity analysis of the potential impacts before approving the plan.
(4) My delegate was made aware of the concerns raised by Ballina Shire Council and other interest groups. These concerns were taken into consideration by my delegate in approving the Ballina Koala Plan.
(5) The following controlled actions were approved by me or my delegate between 19 July and 13 September 2016
In respect of the link between atmospheric pollution, climate change and coral reef degradation, (a) what response has the Government made to the International Society for Reef Studies' letter (dated 25 June 2016) urging it to cease endorsing the export of coal and to stop or revoke approving new coal mines, and (b) what impact will the burning of coal at the Carmichael mine have on the world heritage values of the Great Barrier Reef.
(a) The Government has not made any response to the International Society for Reef Studies' letter dated 25 June 2016, due to the letter in question never being received by the Government.
(b) The Carmichael Coal Mine is located in outback Queensland, approximately 300 kilometres west of the Great Barrier Reef. A comprehensive environmental assessment concluded that the mine will not have any direct impacts on the reef. The burning of coal at the Carmichael mine has not been proposed. As this matter is currently before the Federal Court, no further comment can be made.
(1) How will the subsidy package for Budget Based Funding Services (BBFS) under the Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Jobs for Families Child Care Package) Bill 2016, (a) cater to the sparseness of population and unpredictability of utilisation of mobile children's services in rural and regional Australia, and (b) cover the cost of operational delivery of mobile children's services in rural and regional Australia.(2) How many families are estimated to be affected by the transition to the subsidy package for BBFS.(3) What cost savings are estimated to be achieved from the transition to the subsidy package for BBFS. (4) What are the findings of any modelling that has been undertaken on the impact of the transition to the subsidy package for BBFS on mobile children's services in rural and regional areas.(5) Was a regional Australia impact statement completed for this legislation; if so, what were the findings.(6) How will families in the electoral division of Indi who are utilising the four mobile children's services in Victoria benefit from the transition to the subsidy package for BBFS.
1. The Australian Government is committed to ensuring that BBF services (including mobiles) are well supported in their transition to the new child care system. For the first time, many BBF services will access child based fee subsidy assistance through the Child Care Subsidy (CCS) and some will also access the Additional Child Care Subsidy. For the BBF services that need it, there will also be an opportunity to access additional support through the Community Child Care Fund (CCCF). The CCCF, part of the Child Care Safety Net, will provide grants to child care services to reduce barriers to accessing child care, provide sustainability support for child care services experiencing viability issues (impacted by such factors as sparseness of population, fluctuating utilisation and the high costs associated with delivering a mobile service) and provide capital support to increase the supply of child care places in areas of high unmet demand, particularly in disadvantaged, regional or remote communities.
2. Approximately 23,000 children attended BBF services Australia wide during the four week reporting period in 2015–16. The BBF program reporting does not collect information on number of families.
3. There has been a provision made in the Budget for BBFs to receive the Child Care Subsidy and the Community Child Care Fund. This provision exceeds the anticipated expenditure for BBFs under the current system. This is not a savings exercise.
4. The Government has commissioned consultants to provide analysis on the ability of individual BBF services (including BBF mobile services) to transition to the new child care system through tailored transition reports for services.
These reports will provide detailed service-specific modelling on the impact of the Child Care Subsidy (CCS), as well as elements of the Child Care Safety Net, including the CCCF.
5. A Regional Australia Impact Statement was not required, as discussed with the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, because the circumstances of all families, including families in regional and remote areas, were taken into account in developing the Package upon which the legislation is based. The increased flexibility for services in relation to operating requirements is expected to be particularly useful for regional and remote services where the existing requirement of a five day per week, eight hour per day service will no longer be required.
It is also anticipated that the Child Care Safety Net will have a positive impact on families accessing child care across regional and remote communities as these communities are particularly targeted for assistance under the CCCF as outlined in the response to question one.
6. The current BBF program is capped and closed to new providers. It does not have capacity to respond to changes in demand. The total funding appropriated for BBF services has remained stagnant in real terms, while funding for mainstream child care has increased steadily for many years.
The funding level provided to services is based on historic precedent, without regard to changes in the number of children being assisted. Similar services, in similar circumstances, with similar numbers of children do not receive similar levels of funding. Over time, funding has become disconnected from delivery. Some services receive tens of thousands of dollars per child per year while others have to manage on less than $100 per child per year.
The Package to be introduced in July 2018 has been designed to support a diverse range of services so that they have the flexibility to adapt to the needs of local families. As part of these reforms, families and BBF services will be able to access funding streams they have not been able to access previously. For the first time, families using these mobile services will be eligible to claim the same assistance as families using other types of child care, as BBF mobile children's services will be eligible to administer the Child Care Subsidy (CCS) on behalf of families if they deliver child care. BBF services will be working closely with their communities to ensure that families understand the opportunities available through accessing the fee subsidy, including the impact on the out of pocket expenses for families.
Additionally, the Package will support the delivery of services in areas of unmet demand, increasing opportunities for families to access child care services. The individually tailored transition reports that are being provided as part of the consultant support to BBF services, including mobiles, will identify opportunities to tailor service delivery to meet demand, for example offering more days to local families.
In respect of the Government's election commitment to allocate $1,300,000 to the City of Gosnells for the Sutherland Park Hockey Club, (a) from which budgetary allocation will this funding be taken, (b) what information was provided to the Government by (i) the Sutherland Park Hockey Club, (ii) the City of Gosnells, or (ii) Hockey Western Australia, prior to this commitment being announced, and (c) what due diligence was undertaken by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development on the proposal for the Sutherland Park Hockey Club prior to the funding announcement.
(a) The Government's election commitment to the Gosnells City Council will be delivered through the Community Development Grants (CDG) programme. Projects under CDG undergo a value for money assessment before a deed of agreement between the Government and the proponent is signed.
(b) and (c) The election commitment was announced by Senator Linda Reynolds CSC and Mr Matt O'Sullivan, the then candidate for Burt, on 21 June 2016.
In respect of the Minister's letter to the City of Gosnells confirming the $1,300,000 funding commitment for the Sutherland Park Hockey Club, where it was recommended that any financial commitments should not be entered into until a Deed of Agreement had been signed, and that final due diligence may still be undertaken, (a) under what circumstances would this funding commitment be retracted, and (b) when does the Minister expect (i) a Deed of Agreement to be signed for this project, (ii) the payment for this project to be made, and (iii) this project to be completed.
(a) Under limited circumstances, where the project does not demonstrate value for money under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013.
(b) This project is being progressed directly with the proponent. The project details are yet to be finalised.
In respect of the Government's election commitment to allocate $10,000,000 to the City of Armadale for the Armadale Aquatic Centre, (a) from which budgetary allocation will this funding be taken, (b) what information was provided to the Government by the Armadale Aquatic Centre prior to this commitment being announced, and (c) what due diligence was undertaken by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development on the proposal for the Armadale Aquatic Centre prior to the funding announcement.
(a) The Government's election commitment to the City of Armadale will be delivered through the Community Development Grants (CDG) Programme. Projects under CDG undergo a value for money assessment before a deed of agreement between the Government and the proponent is signed.
(b) and (c) The election commitment was announced by Senator Linda Reynolds CSC and Mr Matt O'Sullivan, the then candidate for Burt, on 21 June 2016.
In respect of the Minister's letter to the City of Armadale confirming the $10,000,000 funding commitment for the Armadale Aquatic Centre, where it was recommended that any financial commitments should not be entered into until a Deed of Agreement had been signed, and that final due diligence may still be undertaken, (a) under what circumstances would this funding commitment be retracted, and (b) when does the Minister expect (i) a Deed of Agreement to be signed for this project, (ii) the payment for this project to be made, and (iii) this project to be completed.
(a) Under limited circumstances, where the project does not demonstrate value for money under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 .
(b) This project is being progressed directly with the proponent. The project details are yet to be finalised.
In respect of the Government's election commitment to allocate $2,400,000 for the Thornlie Bowling Club, (a) from which budgetary allocation will this funding be taken, (b) what information was provided to the Government by the Thornlie Bowling Club prior to this commitment being announced, (c) what due diligence was undertaken by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development on the proposal for the Thornlie Bowling Club prior to the funding announcement, (d) under what circumstances would this funding not be forthcoming, and (e) when does the Minister expect (i) a Deed of Agreement to be signed for this project, (ii) the payment for this project to be made, and (iii) this project to be completed.
(a) The Government's election commitment to the Thornlie Bowling Club will be delivered through the Community Development Grants Programme.
(b) and (c) The election commitment was announced by the Hon Christian Porter MP, Minister for Social Services, on 18 June 2016.
(d) Under limited circumstances, where the project does not demonstrate value for money under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 .
(e) This project is being progressed directly with the proponent. The project details are yet to be finalised.
In respect of the Government's election commitment to allocate $6,000,000 for the Barbagallo Ballpark, (a) is the Government committed to this funding, (b) from which budgetary allocation will this funding be taken, (c) what information was provided to the Government by (i) Baseball Western Australia, and (ii) the City of Gosnells, prior to this commitment being announced, (d) what due diligence was undertaken by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development on the proposal for the Thornlie Bowling Club prior to the funding announcement, (e) under what circumstances would this funding not be forthcoming, and (f) when does the Minister expect (i) a Deed of Agreement to be signed for this project, (ii) the payment for this project to be made, and (iii) this project to be completed.
(a) Yes.
(b) The Government's election commitment to Baseball WA will be delivered through the Community Development Grants programme.
(c) and (d) The election commitment was announced by the Hon Ken Wyatt MP, Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care, on 14 June 2016.
(e) Under limited circumstances, where the project does not demonstrate value for money under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 .
(f) This project is being progressed directly with the proponent. The project details are yet to be finalised.
(1) What is the total cost of the Secretary to the Treasury's official overseas travel since he was appointed on 15 January 2015.(2) What is the breakdown of this total cost in terms of
(a) flights
(b) accommodation
(c) hospitality
(d) transport, and
(e) any per diem allowances.(3) What was the official purpose of each overseas trip.(4) What total number of days has the Secretary of the Treasury spent overseas since his appointment.
1. $124,036
2. According to Treasury records as at 5 December 2016, the breakdown of the total cost is as follows:
3. Official Purpose:
4.The Secretary has spent 51 working days overseas since his appointment.
To ask the Ministers listed below (question Nos. *38 to *39) –
*38 MR CHAMPION: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Finance.
*39 MR CHAMPION: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Defence.
At any stage since September 2013 has the Minister's department
(a) investigated any options to privatise the Australian Submarine Corporation (ASC); if so, what was the outcome,
(b) provided advice to the Government regarding the possible privatisation of the ASC, and
(c) considered the impact of a possible privatisation of the ASC on its employees.
As provided in the response to Question Number 41, the Department of Finance (Finance) conducted a strategic review of ASC Pty Ltd (ASC) to consider future options for ASC to best meet the Government's shipbuilding requirements.
The strategic review was conducted as part of the normal course of the Minister's shareholder oversight role to ensure that the assets Finance manages on behalf of all Australians continues to support broader Government policy objectives. This is consistent with the Commonwealth Government Business Enterprise Governance and Oversight Guidelines .
The impact of a restructure of ASC on its employees was considered as part of the strategic review. Employees' terms and conditions will not be directly affected by the structural changes to ASC.
To ask the Ministers listed below (question Nos. *40 to *41)
To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Finance.
To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Defence.
At any stage since September 2013 has the Minister's department
(a) investigated a possible restructure of the Australian Submarine Corporation (ASC); if so, what was the outcome,
(b) provided advice to the Government on a possible restructure of the ASC, and
(c) considered the impact of a possible restructure of the ASC on its employees.
The Government commissioned a strategic review of ASC Pty Ltd (ASC) in mid‑2015. The strategic review considered future options for ASC, its mandate, corporate and capital structures as well as its governance arrangements. The strategic review was conducted by the Department of Finance and its external business, accounting and legal advisers, in consultation with the Department of Defence. ASC also provided assistance and valuable input into the strategic review.
On 11 October 2016, informed by the recommendations of the strategic review, the Government announced that it will structurally separate ASC into three individual Government-owned companies to deliver a more flexible approach to managing the investment required in shipbuilding infrastructure.
The impact of a restructure of ASC on its employees was considered as part of the strategic review. Employees' terms and conditions will not be directly affected by the structural changes to ASC.
In respect of the Minister recently confirming that the Government will honour an election commitment of $120,000 to fund the Bulla Tennis Court upgrade, (a) on what date was this election commitment made, and by whom, and (b) what process did the Minister use to validate that this commitment was made during the election campaign.
(a) The Government's election commitment was announced by Mr Chris Jerrym, the then candidate for McEwan, on 30 June 2016.
(b) The commitment was confirmed by the Prime Minister, the Hon Malcolm Turnbull MP.
In respect of a media report 'Where's your pledge?' by Alina Rylko (Tweed Daily News , 27 June 2016) that after the Minister for Regional Development's visit to the Tweed Hospital during the election campaign, the Minister was uncertain as to what sum of funding was required for the hospital, but expected a figure to be finalised in the coming months: has a funding amount yet been determined; if so, (a) what sum, (b) from which program will it come, and (c) when will it be allocated; if not, when will the funding amount be determined
(a) (b) (c) The article to which the honourable Member refers quotes the Nationals candidate for Richmond, Matthew Fraser, rather than the Minister for Regional Development. Issues relating to hospital infrastructure funding fall within the responsibility of the Minister for Health, as well as state and territory governments.
(1) What factors were considered in the recent decision to deregulate the management of Bovine Johne's Disease (BJD) and abandon quarantining.
(2) What are the differences between (a) the deregulated scoring system used under the new BJD Framework, and (b) zoning used under the previous Market Assurance Program (MAP).
(3) On what grounds can he rationalise the outcomes of the BJD Framework given the Australian Chief Veterinarian Officer's acknowledgement that no national surveys have been carried out on the national herd in respect of (a) prevalence, (b) epidemiology, (c) productivity losses, and (d) cost-benefit analyses associated with BJD.
(4) Will the Government consider compensating cattle breeders who have been financially and socially impacted by trade restrictions resulting from the previous MAP.
1. In 2015, Meat and Livestock Australia surveyed endemic livestock diseases of cattle in Australia and found BJD to be the least important disease economically of the 17 diseases considered.
Australia's regulatory approach of quarantining affected properties was causing difficulties for many cattle producers, especially those in the north who had no outlets available to them once placed in quarantine. In many cases quarantine was imposed for a number of years on each property.
The National BJD Strategic Plan Review conducted by Animal Health Australia identified support for BJD to be dealt with differently from the way in which it had been dealt with over the previous 12 years. The review provided multiple opportunities for input into how the Australian cattle industry (beef, dairy and feedlot) and governments would work with BJD into the future.
The review panel included representatives of Cattle Council of Australia, Australian Dairy Farmers, Meat and Livestock Australia, Dairy Australia, Australian Registered Cattle Breeders Association, Australian Lot Feeders Association, Chief Veterinary Officers and the Australian Cattle Veterinarians Association.
There was general support for BJD to be addressed under a common biosecurity approach for endemic diseases, with less emphasis placed on an individual disease. Accordingly, it was not appropriate for the existing strategic plan to continue in its current state.
2. Zoning did not exist under CattleMAP. However, zoning was part of the previous national management plan, with restrictions specified for trading livestock between areas with different risk profiles.
The review of the national management of Johne's disease resulted in the removal of quarantine measures and zoning, as well as the replacement of CattleMAP with a system known as J-BAS (Johne's-Beef Assurance Score). J-BAS is a voluntary risk assessment system used to provide an assessment of the risk of cattle carrying Johne's disease. It is used by the producer to assess the risk of whether cattle they are buying or moving to their property have Johne's disease, and recognises that on-farm biosecurity is the producer's responsibility.
3. The BJD Framework was developed using available evidence in consultation and with support from industry, producers and the Australian and state and territory Chief Veterinary Officers.
The review panel included representatives of Cattle Council of Australia, Australian Dairy Farmers, Meat and Livestock Australia, Dairy Australia, Australian Registered Cattle Breeders Association, Australian Lot Feeders Association, Chief Veterinary Officers and the Australian Cattle Veterinarians Association.
4. No. The Market Assurance Program was a voluntary program for producers to identify and promote their Johne's disease status to clients.
In respect of the Government's election commitment to provide a $25 million jobs package to diversify regional Tasmania's economy and create local jobs, will this be honoured; if not, why not; if so, (a) what will be the process for a Tasmanian business to receive funding under this program, (b) when will funding applications open, and (c) will it be a competitive process.
The Government will honour its election commitment to deliver a Regional Jobs and Investment Package to help regions in Australia diversify their economies, stimulate their long-term economic growth and deliver sustainable employment, including in Tasmania which will receive a $25 million package.
(a) (b) (c) The Government is currently developing the guidelines. Applications for funding will open after the guidelines have been issued and a local investment plan has been prepared by the local planning committee.
In respect of the Government's election commitment to provide $40,000 for the creation of a West/North-West Coast Winter Events program in Tasmania, (a) will this be honoured; if not, why not; if so, (a) what progress has been made, (b) what are the name(s) of any organisation(s) with which the Government has had discussions, with a view to delivering the program, and (c) when will this program commence.
Yes, we will honour this election commitment and are undertaking a process that aligns with the Commonwealth Grant Guidelines in order to deliver the commitment.
In respect of the Australian Government's election commitment to put $18.5 million towards the construction of fibre-to-the-node NBNTM technology in the towns of (a) Queenstown, (b) Rosebery, and (c) Zeehan, in Tasmania (with an additional $4.5 million of assistance from the Tasmanian Government), will the Australian Government's commitment be honoured; if not, why not; if so, (i) when it be delivered, (ii) can the Minister provide details of discussions between NBNTM and the Tasmanian Government on the delivery of this project, (iii) does the Tasmanian Government remain committed, and (iv) what action will NBNTM take if the existing copper network that will carry the NBNTM to homes and businesses in these towns is in such a state of disrepair that would prevent the delivery of fibre-to-the-node.
(a, b, c) In addition to Queenstown, Rosebery and Zeehan, the Coalition's election commitment also includes the rollout of fixed wireless to the town of Strahan. The in-kind support from the Tasmanian Government is included as part of the Government's $18.5 million election commitment.
(i) There has been no change to the Government's commitment to rollout fixed line to the towns of Queenstown, Rosebery and Zeehan and fixed wireless broadband to Strahan. Construction resources are expected to move to the area around mid-2017.
(ii) NBN Co Ltd (the company) and the Tasmanian Government are making the necessary arrangements to ensure that services are provided as soon as practicable.
(iii) The Tasmanian Government has committed $4.5 million of in-kind support to the project.
(iv) As at 1 December, 1.358 million households across Australia could connect to high speed broadband over the company's fixed line network. As with existing premises connected to fixed line, the company will progressively take ownership of the copper network and undertake any remediation if necessary.
In respect of the Government's election commitment to provide $3.5 million towards the construction of the Devonport Golf Club in Tasmania, which will also become home to the Devonport and Spreyton bowls clubs, will this be honoured; if not, why not; if so, (a) from which funding program will these funds come, (b) when will the funding be delivered, (c) what process will an organisation undertake to secure the funding, and (d) can the Minister name the organisation that will receive this funding.
(a) The Government's election commitment to the proponent will be delivered through the Community Development Grants programme.
(b) This project is being progressed directly with the proponent. The project details are yet to be finalised.
(c) The proponent will need to provide information to allow the Department to undertake a value with relevant money assessment.
(d) Devonport Golf Club.
(1) What is the per-episode cost of the Australian Border Force (ABF) podcast.
(2) What sum has the ABF budgeted for the production of its podcast in 2016–17.
(3) What is the purpose of the ABF's podcast.
The podcast is produced by the Department's Communication and Engagement Branch from within existing resources.
The ABF podcast is a departmental initiative identified to broaden the reach of our existing communication channels. The purpose of the podcast is to provide the opportunity for the Australian public and related government agencies to learn more about the ABF and promote the ABF's role in supporting Australia's economy, safety and security of our border in an open and transparent way.
In respect of the $68,050 contract to Rydges Hotels (CN3372457) for venue hire and conference facilities,
(a) for what purpose was the venue hired,
(b) how many staff members attended the function for which the venue was hired,
(c) what was the Australian Public Service classification level of each staff member in attendance, (d) what was the period of use of the venue, and
(e) what is the itemised breakdown of costs associated with the contract.
(a) Executive Level Leadership Conference.
(b) 195.
(c) EL1 and EL2 Officers attended the Leadership Conference.
(d) 10/11/2016 to 11/11/2016.
(e) The table below provides the itemised breakdown of costs;
In respect of the $96,000.02 contract to the Content Group Pty Ltd (CN3382544) for public relation services:
(a) what specific services were provided,
(b) what is the itemised breakdown of the services provided,
(c) what was the period of the contract, and
(d) what policy area did this relate to?
Answer
a) Content Group were engaged to provide services in support of the 2016 national Stay Smart Online awareness week, a Government initiative to help educate Australians about the ways they can protect themselves online. Specific services included:
o Developing a resource kit for use by program partners and members of parliament to promote online safety to the community.
o Providing support for major events including the launch of the week by the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Cyber Security, Dan Tehan.
o Managing media and publicity engagement throughout the week, raising awareness of free online safety and security resources available to the public.
o Creating content such as video messages and case studies, informational graphics, and articles.
o Managing Facebook community engagement in the lead up, during and after the week including coordinating an editorial calendar with the Department.
o Providing coordination and communication support for stakeholder engagement in the lead up, during and after the week.
o Measuring and evaluating awareness activities associated with national Stay Smart Online awareness week 2016.
b) The itemised breakdown of services (including costs) for CN3382544 is as follows:
c) The contract ran from 21 September 2016 to 30 November 2016.
d) The contract related to the delivery of the 2016 Stay Smart Online awareness week, a key component of the larger Stay Smart Online initiative which transferred into the Attorney-General's Department in August 2016.
Did the Attorney-General seek advice from Mr David Bennett QC on the proposed same-sex marriage plebiscite; if so, (a) when was the advice sought, (b) what fee was paid for the advice, and (c) what costs were associated with the seeking of this advice, including but not limited to (i) travel expenditure, and (ii) accommodation.
It is the established practice of Australian governments, of both political persuasions, not to comment on legal advice or the subject matter of legal advice.
In respect of Government data on parenting benefits reported in the media article by Sarah Martin 'Parental welfare pays more than work' (The Australian, 28 October 2016), was this data produced internally by his department? If so, how many staff hours were spent compiling this data? If not:a) who was engaged to prepare the data?b) what was the cost to his department of preparing the data?c) was he or his department advised that the data excluded family tax benefits payable to the employed parent example?
The following parenting benefits data quoted in the media article by Sarah Martin, 'Parental welfare pays more than work' (The Australian 28 October 2016) were produced internally by my Department:
The first data took one officer approximately two hours to complete. The second data took five officers a total of two hours effort. My Department also provided advice that in both instances the data included any Family Tax Benefit, Child Care Benefit and any other payments these families may be eligible for.
I understand that the data in the article concerning median full-time wages was sourced from the Australian National University. My Department was not consulted about these data.
In respect of the changes to the Minister's department to create the Defence Industry portfolio, can the Minister provide an itemised account of all costs associated, including (a) stationery, including business cards and letterhead, (b) signage, (c) web design and information technology services, and (d) marketing materials, including logos, pamphlets and audio-visual materials.
(a) The department has spent $3,093.30 on stationery to establish the Defence Industry portfolio.
(b) Nil.
(c) The department has spent nil on web design to establish the Defence Industry portfolio. The items purchased and costs associated with information technology are listed below:
(d) Nil.
In respect of costs for departmental media events and photo opportunities in 2015-16, what (a) date was each event held, (b) location was each event held at, (c) sum was spent on each event, (d) announcement and/or issue did the event relate to, and (e) was the expenditure for.
To attempt to provide the level of detail requested would involve an unreasonable diversion of resources as this information is not centrally recorded.
What sum was spent by the department(s) and agencies within the Minister's portfolio on advertising and associated services in 2015-16, and what policy areas did this relate to.
What sum was spent on promotional material and merchandise for the departments and agencies within the Minister's portfolio in 2015-16, and, of this, (a) what types of promotional material and merchandise were produced, and (b) what policy areas did this relate to.
What sum was spent by the department(s) and agencies within the Minister's portfolio on market research on market research and associated services in 2015-16, and what policy areas did this inform.
In respect of ministerial costs for media events and photo opportunities in 2015-16, (a) on what date was each event held, (b) at what location was each event held at, (c) what sum was spent on each event, (d) what announcement and/or issue did the event relate to, and (e) was the expenditure for.
To attempt to provide the level of detail requested would involve an unreasonable diversion of resources as this information is not centrally recorded.
In respect of ministerial costs for media events and photo opportunities in 2015-16, (a) on what date was each event held, (b) at what location was each event held at, (c) what sum was spent on each event, (d) what announcement and/or issue did the event relate to, and (e) was the expenditure for.
(1) Is the sale of Fremantle Port a condition of the Perth Freight Link (PFL) funding from the Commonwealth.
(2) Has the Australian Government sought or obtained any commitment from the Western Australian Government in respect of the future sale of Fremantle Port.
(3) What was the basis for the calculation of the component of the PFL funding that is provided under the Australian Government's Asset Recycling initiative.
(4) Has a bonus payment been negotiated, that would be provided by the Australian Government to the Western Australian Government upon the sale of Fremantle Port, similar to the payment that is currently a matter of dispute between the Australian Government and the Victorian Government in respect of the sale of the Port of Melbourne.
(5) Is the private toll charge aspect of the PFL a condition of Commonwealth funding.
(1) & (2) No. The sale of the Fremantle Port is a matter for the Western Australian Government.
(3) There are no funds provided for the Perth Freight Link under the Australian Government's Asset Recycling Initiative.
(4) No.
(5) A distance based heavy vehicle charge forms an integral part of the funding arrangement for the Perth Freight Link project. This arrangement is contained in the business case and executive summary for the project.
(1) What sum has the Australian Government spent on legal fees in order to prevent the public from having access to Freedom of Information documents (sought by the former Member for Perth) which form the background to the Perth Freight Link, including the conditions set by the Australian Government in return for Commonwealth funding.(2) Was this matter discussed with the former Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development (the Hon. Mr Jamie Briggs) at any time; if so, can he outline the discussions.(3) Was any advice given by the former Assistant Minister as to the way the case was to be conducted; if so, can he outline the advice.
(1) This is an ongoing matter and the Australian Government will not comment on the cost of defending its decision to not release documents.
(2) No.
(3) No.
In respect of the impending relocation of the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) to Armidale in the electoral division of New England, (a) how many staff members has the APVMA lost since October 2014 when he first announced it would be relocated, (b) how did he calculate the cost of $24.1 million for the relocation, (c) has he revised this cost; if so, what is the revised sum, and (d) will he commit to releasing the cost-benefit analysis of the relocation, once Cabinet has completed its deliberations.
(a) From 1 October 2014 to 30 November 2016, 68 ongoing employees and 31 non-ongoing employees have ceased employment with the APVMA.
(b) The cost was calculated using the standard costing process for budget decisions. The cost comprises staff costs, relocation costs, property costs and other incidental expenses.
(c) The revised cost is $25.6 million.
(d) The cost benefit and risk analysis was released on 25 November 2016.
In respect of the Australian Government's Smart Cities and Suburbs Program, can the Government advise when local government authorities will be able to submit a short pitch for their project ideas in accordance with the program timeline as set out on the Smart Cities website.
A national consultation process to inform the development of Guidelines for the Smart Cities and Suburbs Program was undertaken in September and October 2016.
Draft Guidelines will be released for further public comment in December 2016.
It is anticipated that the Guidelines will be finalised, with applicants invited to submit proposals, in early 2017.
(a) Yes.
(b) (i) Australian Pesticide and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA), Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC), Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC) and Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC).
(ii) These agencies have considered a number of possibilities as part of determining relocation options since 2014.
(c) On 12 May 2015 I wrote to the University of New England, the University of Queensland and the University of Southern Queensland about the potential relocation of the APVMA.
Other agencies have approached regional universities directly, for example:
(d) Establishing Centres of Excellence in Agriculture will help to build partnerships between government agencies, regional universities and industry research organisations. The government has allocated $25.6 million to relocate the APVMA to Armidale to create a Centre of Excellence in Agriculture with the University of New England.
The FRDC, GRDC and RIRDC are drawing on their funding to develop partnerships with research institutions as part of normal business and their relocation plans.
(e) The government is monitoring the implementation of its policy. For example:
In respect of the media article by Natalie Kotsios 'Farm aid: Barnaby Joyce to rethink Farm Household Allowance scheme' ( Weekly Times , 4 November 2016) which reported that he would examine the Farm Household Allowance (FHA) scheme if necessary, (a) when will he examine the FHA scheme, (b) what actions has he undertaken to ensure that he is satisfied that the FHA scheme is working effectively, (c) has he sought information as to why more than half of the FHA applications have been rejected in the past six months, (d) is it a fact that he said 'Just because we apply for it, doesn't mean you're entitled to it'; if so, who is he referring to in 'we' and 'you're', (e) will he provide clarification for Victorian irrigators on whether their water entitlements are counted towards the non-farm asset limit of $157,500, and (f) will he provide a breakdown, by state and territory, on the number of farmers receiving the FHA, to date.
(a) The Coalition is proud to have introduced FHA after Labor abolished the Exceptional Circumstances Relief Payment and cut the Department of Agriculture budget in half. As of 16 December 2016 more than 6,860 farmers have benefited from the FHA. This assistance was not available under Labor. I regularly examine the FHA for its effectiveness. As with any government programme, it is prudent to keep policy settings and delivery arrangements under review to ensure they are delivered efficiently and effectively. I have sought advice from my department on steps that can be taken to streamline delivery and enhance the up-front customer experience for farmers. Senator Bridget McKenzie recently led a series of roundtable meetings on my behalf in regional Victoria, to receive feedback from dairy farmers regarding the implementation of the FHA and the Coalition Government's $579 million Dairy Support Package.
(b) I receiveregular updates on FHA uptake, geographic distribution and the status of claims.
(c) Yes. Over the life of the Farm Household Allowance until 16 December 2016 there have been 6 861 claims granted and 2 017 claims rejected.
(d) Farmers and their partners who believe they may benefit from the FHA are encouraged to apply and not self-assess. However, just because an individual applies for the FHA does not mean they will necessarily meet the eligibility criteria and be granted FHA payments.
(e) Under the Farm Household Support (Non-farm Assets) Amendment Rule 2016 I have exempted up to $1.1 million in net water assets from the FHA non-farm assets test. This provides clarity for all potential FHA applicants on how their water entitlements will be treated.
(f) The following table provides a breakdown by state/territory of the number of FHA recipients as at 16 December 2016.
Source: Department of Human Services
† Where there are fewer than 20 claims in any one state/territory, this figure has been masked so as to avoid privacy issues.
Of the $15 million for establishing specialised domestic violence units to provide access to coordinated legal, social work and cultural liaison services for women in a single location, and allow legal service to work with local hospitals, including for women from culturally and linguistically diverse communities and women living in regional/remote areas, what evaluation has been undertaken to ascertain whether the establishment of those chosen units has improved access to justice, and support, for domestic violence victims?
The Attorney-General's Department will evaluate the pilot services to inform future Government decisions and sector best practice. As the specialist domestic violence units commenced operations in the first half of 2016, the department intends to conduct the evaluation in 2018, allowing at least one full year of operation before the pilots are evaluated.
In respect of the Government's announcement on 28 October that it would commit $18.5 million, for the period of the Third Action Plan for the National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children, for integrated duty lawyer and social support services in family courts, (a) will each registry serving the Family Court and/or Federal Circuit Court be provided with such services, (b) who will (i) employ, and (ii) provide administrative support, the people providing such services, (c) how will the Government be assured of the quality of such services, and (d) what qualifications and experience will be required of the persons providing social support services.
(a) The Government is currently negotiating arrangements for these services with the states and territories, including service locations.
(b) The services will be managed by the legal aid commission in each jurisdiction.
(c) Appropriate accountability and reporting measures will be built into the funding arrangement negotiated with states and territories. The Attorney-General's Department will also evaluate the services.
(d) Legal aid commissions will be requested and encouraged to partner with existing family violence support services to deliver the integrated, court-based services. The qualifications and experience of staff will be a matter for legal aid commissions to consider in managing the new services.
In respect of the Government's announcement on 28 October that it would commit $5 million, for one year, to extend the 'pilots' announced under the Women's Safety Package, why have these pilots not been extended for the full period of the Third Action Plan for the National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children?
The legal assistance pilots are funded under the Women's Safety Package until 30 June 2018. The additional year of funding announced on 28 October 2016 will extend the pilots until 30 June 2019, to align with the full period of the Third Action Plan 2016-19 of the National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children 2010-2022 .
9 November 2016:
In respect of the Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia's claim that family violence is a feature in 41 per cent of family law matters, and the situation where people accused of violence can personally cross-examine the (often unrepresented) victim, risking re-traumatisation, will the Government consider providing legislative support and legal aid funding to allow the court to require a litigant to be represented in order to cross examine another party.
The Government acknowledges that direct cross-examination of a victim by their alleged perpetrator can be a traumatic experience.
The Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) includes protections to support vulnerable people involved in family law proceedings. For instance:
The courts can limit or prohibit cross-examination of a particular witness; enable vulnerable persons to give testimony via video or in closed court; and forbid the asking of, or excuse a witness from answering, offensive, scandalous, insulting, abusive or humiliating questions.
Over three years from 2016-19, the Government will provide $18.5 million for legal aid commissions to establish integrated duty lawyer and family violence support services in family law court registries. These services will support victims to access alternative ways to give evidence and ensure their risk is assessed and managed throughout the court proceedings, including by referring people for legal aid and other legal assistance.
The Government has commissioned a National Domestic and Family Violence Bench Book . The Bench Book is a comprehensive online resource for judicial officers in all Australian jurisdictions, to promote best practice and consistency in judicial decision making in cases involving family violence. Part 1, released in August 2016, includes guidelines for court room management to minimise secondary abuse through court processes of those who have experienced family violence. The final part is expected to be released by June 2017, and will cover a range of family law and criminal law issues.
Complementing the Bench Book, the Government is funding national training for judicial officers about the dynamics of family violence.
The Government continuously monitors the family law system, and has committed to undertaking a review of Part VII of the Family Law Act , together with broader issues about the operation of the family law system as a whole.
In respect of its response (29 April 2016) to the Productivity Commission Report in Access to Justice Arrangements (3 December 2014), where the Government stated that the Attorney-General's Department had, in March 2016, convened a roundtable discussion with key stakeholders on the topic of cross-examination of victims of family violence in family law courts by the alleged perpetrator of the violence, and that Government was considering the outcome of that discussion,
(a) which (i) individuals, and (ii) organisations, were invited to the roundtable,
(b) what were the outcomes of that discussion; and
(c) what progress has the Government made since March 2016 in considering
the outcomes of the discussion.
(a) On 10 March 2016, the Attorney-General's Department hosted a roundtable with a diverse range of key stakeholders in the family law system, to discuss solutions to address issues concerning the direct cross-examination of victims of family violence be their alleged perpetrator in family law proceedings.
Roundtable attendees included judicial officers, lawyers, and advocacy and support groups. The following organisations were represented:
Representatives from the following organisations were invited but were unable to attend:
(b) Roundtable participants contributed to the achievement of the following three outcomes:
(i) development of a shared understanding of the issues arising from the direct cross‑examination
of alleged victims of family violence by the alleged perpetrator,
(ii) identification of the existing protections in Commonwealth, State and Territory legislation for vulnerable witnesses, and
(iii) identification of possible solutions for short, medium or long-term implementation.
There was agreement amongst participants that a range of solutions should be considered. Potential solutions identified during the roundtable were not limited to legislative change. Some solutions proposed by participants directly address the issues relating to cross-examination of victims of family violence in the family law courts and some aim to more broadly address issues arising when family violence is alleged in family law proceedings.
(c) Over three years from 2016-19, the Government will provide $18.5 million for Legal Aid Commissions to integrate duty lawyer and domestic violence support services in the family law courts. These services will support victims to access alternative ways to give evidence and ensure their risk is assessed and managed initially and throughout the court proceedings, including by referring people for legal aid and other legal assistance.
The Government is also funding a National Domestic and Family Violence Bench Book, providing guidance for judicial officers dealing with domestic and family violence. Part 1, released on
18 August 2016, includes guidelines for court room management to minimise secondary abuse through court processes of those who have experienced family violence.
Complementing the Bench Book, the Government is funding national training for judicial officers about the dynamics of family violence.
On 24 November 2016, the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court announced updates to the Courts' Family Violence Best Practice Principles to highlight that the victims of family violence are often traumatised and are vulnerable witnesses, and to explain the various means of protection available to judges who are hearing those cases. These principles help protect litigants and children by providing guiding principles for the case management of cases involving allegations of family violence and abuse.
The Family Court and Federal Circuit Courts have also jointly published the Family Violence Plan 2014–16, which is a commitment by the courts to the early identification and management of matters where violence, or the risk of violence, is alleged. In line with the Plan, the Courts will be implementing new screening processes to better identify issues of family violence in matters before the courts.
The Government has committed to undertaking a review of Part VII the Family Law Act . Any review should consider the structure and other key provisions of the Family Law Act, in addition to Part VII, to ensure the Act provides a framework capable of supporting families into the future.
1) What proportion of the $5 million of funding for 1800RESPECT in the Women's Safety Package of September 2015 has gone to the private, for-profit firm, Medibank Health Solutions Telehealth Pty Ltd, the principal contract for 1800RESPECT.2) What proportion of the $15 million for frontline services announced on 21 June 2016 has gone to that same firm.3) Has any of this funding found its way to the counselling provider, Rape and Domestic Violence Services Australia, to engage more counsellors.
(1) Of the $5 million of funding over three years for 1800RESPECT in the Women's Safety Package, $4.915 million has been provided to Medibank Health Solutions (MHS), which has been contracted to manage 1800RESPECT since 2010. This funding has been and will continue to be used to implement and operate the first responder triage model which commenced on 16 August 2016. The new model has significantly improved the responsiveness of the service. For example, during 2015-16, the average call abandonment rate was 44%, while under the new model it is 5.5%. The average call wait time has also been reduced from 10.3 minutes to 35.11 seconds under the new model.
The remaining $0.085 million funding was provided to KPMG to undertake a review into how 1800RESPECT could enhance their operating model.
(2) Of the $15 million for frontline services announced on 21 June 2016, $5.8 million has been allocated to 1800RESPECT through the Third Action Plan over three years for the first response triage model for online and telephone counselling, and for an investigation into the viability of online video counselling. An additional $2.058 million over two years has been allocated to undertake work to improve 1800RESPECT's service responses and referral pathways for women with disability experiencing, or at risk of, sexual assault, domestic and family violence, in response to consultation with the disability sector.
The implementation of the first response triage model has been successful. The percentage of abandoned calls has reduced from 44 per cent in 2015-16 to an average of 5.5 per cent since implementation. The 1800RESPECT service is also answering at least 80 per cent of calls within 20 seconds. This means women contacting the service are now having their calls answered and receiving the support they need, when they need it.
(3) MHS is contracted to manage the 1800RESPECT service and it subcontracts the trauma specialist counselling service to Rape and Domestic Violence Services Australia (R&DVSA). The contractual arrangements determine the amount of funding provided to R&DVSA and are based on the services provided by R&DVSA during each period.
1) Has the new 'first responder' model for 1800RESPECT taken effect.2) Of the answered calls, what proportion of callers are being put through to a counsellor engagement by the counselling provider, Rape and Domestic Violence Services Australia.
(1) The first responder triage model for 1800RESPECT has taken effect. It was implemented on 16 August 2016.
(2) All calls are responded to by qualified, professional counsellors with tertiary qualifications and a minimum of two years full time counselling experience. A referral assessment process is used to determine when a call requires trauma specialist counselling. These calls are then referred to Rape and Domestic Violence Services Australia (R&DVSA) through a three way transfer between the first responder counsellor, the R&DVSA counsellor and the caller. The referral assessment process was jointly developed between Medibank Health Solutions, contracted providers of 1800RESPECT, and R&DVSA.
To date, an average of 25 per cent of calls are being transferred to R&DVSA because they require trauma specialist counselling.
The implementation of the first response triage model has been successful. The percentage of abandoned calls has reduced from 44 per cent in 2015-16 to an average of 5.5 per cent since implementation. The 1800RESPECT service is also answering at least 80 per cent of calls within 20 seconds. This means women contacting the service are now having their calls answered and receiving the support they need, when they need it.
In respect of the 'first responder' model being based on people with lesser skills than those of the counsellors who are engaged by Rape and Domestic Violence Services Australia, including that they are not necessarily skilled in trauma counselling, how is the Government ensuring that notwithstanding these lesser qualifications, women are receiving the counselling they need.
A careful system of assessment and referral has been developed to support the first responder model. The safety and wellbeing of callers has been the highest priority in the development of the model. The new model was developed in close consultation with sector representatives including Rape and Domestic Violence Services Australia (R&DVSA).
Under the first responder triage model, all calls are answered by qualified counsellors, with a three year tertiary degree in a relevant field that includes Social Services, Social Work, Welfare Studies, Psychology and Counselling. All counsellors have a minimum of two years full time counselling experience and are trained in trauma-informed counselling. These counsellors provide initial counselling and support, information and referrals to appropriate support services.
Callers who require or request trauma specialist counselling are warm referred through a three way transfer between the first responder counsellor, the R&DVSA counsellor and the caller.
The implementation of the first response triage model has been successful. The percentage of abandoned calls has reduced from 44 per cent in 2015-16 to an average of 5.5 per cent since implementation. The 1800RESPECT service is also answering at least 80 per cent of calls within 20 seconds. This means women contacting the service are now having their calls answered and receiving the support they need, when they need it.
1) Can he guarantee that all of the contacts made via the telephones and web chat line for the 'first responder' model being implemented in relation to 1800RESPECT, will be answered by women.2) Can he advise if the Government required Medibank Health Solutions to ensure that all of the 'first responders' in relation to contacts coming in via 1800RESPECT, are women.
(1) All contacts made to 1800RESPECT via the telephone line and web chat for the first response triage model are answered by women.
(2) The Government requires Medibank Health Solutions (MHS) to ensure that all counsellors have a minimum three year tertiary degree in a relevant field and minimum two years full time counselling experience. 1800RESPECT is also required to provide best practice counselling, the same requirement that has been imposed on 1800RESPECT since 2010.
There is no mandated contractual requirement for either MHS or their subcontractor, Rape and Domestic Violence Services Australia, to use only female counsellors, however this approach has been adopted by both organisations to ensure the service meets the needs of callers.
The implementation of the first response triage model has been successful. The percentage of abandoned calls has reduced from 44 per cent in 2015-16 to an average of 5.5 per cent since implementation. The 1800RESPECT service is also answering at least 80 per cent of calls within 20 seconds. This means women contacting the service are now having their calls answered and receiving the support they need, when they need it.
1) Can he confirm that the private, for-profit firm Medibank Health Solutions will charge in the vicinity of $3.2 million per year for the 'first responder' arrangement that has been created for 1800RESPECT.2) Can he explain why the 'first responder' model (that diverts women away from counselling) was chosen rather than hiring additional counsellors.
(1) Over the next three years, from 2016-17 to 2018-19, Medibank Health Services (MHS) has been allocated $40.886 million to continue to deliver 1800RESPECT. This funding includes allocations for the first response triage model for both online and telephone counselling, trauma specialist counselling, the development of a national referral database, resources, the 1800RESPECT website and Daisy App, the frontline worker toolkit, promotional events and stakeholder engagement. An additional $2.058 million over two years has been allocated to undertake work to improve 1800RESPECT's service responses and referral pathways for women with disability experiencing, or at risk of, sexual assault, domestic and family violence, in response to consultation with the disability sector.
The specific amount of funding allocated to the first response triage model is commercial-in-confidence information.
(2) The first response triage model does not divert callers from counselling. It provides all callers with access to qualified, professional counsellors while ensuring that all calls are answered and all callers are helped as quickly and effectively as possible. In 2015-16, under the previous model, the average call abandonment rate was 44 per cent and the average call wait time was 10.3 minutes.
The Government was very concerned about these abandonment rates and wait times so in May 2015 it provided $4 million in additional funding for more counsellors. However, these additional counsellors were unable to reduce call abandonment rates and wait times to an acceptable and sustainable level. It was clear that a thorough examination of the operating model was required.
KPMG was commissioned to review the operational model for 1800RESPECT and provide advice about the best method to ensure a responsive, high quality service. The first responder triage model was found to be the most effective and value for money approach.
The new model was developed in close consultation with sector representatives including Rape and Domestic Violence Services Australia. The new model ensures callers receive a responsive and client centred service.
The implementation of the first response triage model has been successful. The percentage of abandoned calls has reduced from 44 per cent in 2015-16 to an average of 5.5 per cent since implementation. The 1800RESPECT service is also answering at least 80 per cent of calls within 20 seconds. This means women contacting the service are now having their calls answered and receiving the support they need, when they need it.
Can the Government provide assurances that the privacy of 1800RESPECT callers will be protected when Medibank Health Solutions, which is conducting the recruitment process for the 'first responder' service, has had a past privacy breach concerning eye test records and contact details of hundreds of military personnel, and that new staff can work from home.
The privacy of callers will be protected.
Medibank Health Solutions' (MHS) privacy policy for the release of client information and the protection of privacy is governed by current Commonwealth legislation (the Privacy Act 1988) and the Australian Privacy Principles, which are contained in the Privacy Act. Additionally, MHS complies with both state and Australian legislation on child protection, sexual assault and domestic and family violence with respect to the release of information about a client.
While MHS staff are able to work from home, there are strict policies in place to ensure the privacy of all calls and data.
The implementation of the first response triage model has been successful. The percentage of abandoned calls has reduced from 44 per cent in 2015-16 to an average of 5.5 per cent since implementation. The 1800RESPECT service is also answering at least 80 per cent of calls within 20 seconds. This means women contacting the service are now having their calls answered and receiving the support they need, when they need it.
Of the $14 million announced in the Women's Safety Package in September 2015 to expand the DV-alert training program to police, social workers, emergency department staff and community workers to better support women, and work with the College of General Practitioners to develop and deliver specialised training to general practitioners across the country:a) what sum has been spent b) how many police have received the DV-alert training since the announcementc) how many
(i) social workers
(ii) emergency department staff
have received DV-alert training in that periodd) how many general practitioners have received the specialised training in the intervening period.
(a) $13.499 million has been committed to Lifeline Australia to expand DV-alert over three years through a funding agreement. To date, $4.379 million has been spent. $0.500 has been provided to the Department of Health for training for general practitioners.
(b) Between 1 January 2016 and 30 June 2016, 49 participants who attended DV-alert training identified as working with the police.
(c) Between 1 January 2016 and 30 June 2016, approximately 685 participants who identified as support/social workers participated in DV-alert training, either through a face-to-face or e-Learning course.
Between 1 January 2016 and 30 June 2016, six participants self-identified as working in an emergency department.
During the reporting period, DV-alert has delivered training to other health staff including paramedics, drug and alcohol counsellors, Indigenous health workers and nurses.
(d) The Department of Health is providing funding for the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) and the Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine (ACRRM) to develop and deliver specialised training to help general practitioners better recognise, respond and refer victims of violence to appropriate specialist services. The RACGP and ACRRM are currently developing the materials, and will commence delivery of training in 2017.
To ask the Minister for Social Services—In respect of the Government's announcement on 28 October that it would commit $15 million, for the period of the Third Action Plan for the National Plan to Reduce Violence Against Women and their Children, towards improving and expanding national domestic and family violence services, and specifically, that an unidentified proportion of that money would go towards 'funding the 1800RESPECT helpline to implement the new first responder model, to assist with the increase in demand', what proportion of the $15 million will go towards this measure.
Of the $15 million for frontline services announced on 21 June 2016, $5.8 million has been allocated to 1800RESPECT through the Third Action Plan over three years for the first response triage model for online and telephone counselling, and for an investigation into the viability of online video counselling. An additional $2.058 million over two years has been allocated to undertake work to improve 1800RESPECT's service responses and referral pathways for women with disability experiencing, or at risk of, sexual assault, domestic and family violence, in response to consultation with the disability sector.
The implementation of the first response triage model has been successful. The percentage of abandoned calls has reduced from 44 per cent in 2015-16 to an average of 5.5 per cent since implementation. The 1800RESPECT service is also answering at least 80 per cent of calls within 20 seconds. This means women contacting the service are now having their calls answered and receiving the support they need, when they need it.
Given the Government's $15 million funding commitment for the period of the Third Action Plan for the National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children, a proportion of which will go towards a Housing Innovation Fund to identify alternative accommodation options for women and children affected by violence, will the Government now commit to reinstating the capital expenditure component of the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness funding.
On 9 December 2016 the Commonwealth Government announced $117.2 million for a Transitional 12 month National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness, commencing 1 July 2017. This funding will provide certainty for frontline services, while the Commonwealth, state and territory governments work together on longer-term homelessness reforms, including a funding framework. This builds on the $230 million commitment made in 2015 to restore funding to the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness after the previous Labor Government left no money in the forward estimates.
The NPAH gives priority to frontlines services focussing on women and children experiencing domestic and family violence, and homeless youth.
In addition, the Commonwealth provides states and territories with funding of approximately $1.3 billion per annum through the National Affordable Housing Agreement (NAHA), which includes around $275 million for homelessness services. States and territories may use these funds for capital projects. In establishing the NAHA, the Commonwealth rolled in the funding previously provided to states through the Commonwealth's Crisis Accommodation Program to facilitate the construction and acquisition of dwellings to provide crisis accommodation.
Decisions on funding allocations under the NPAH and the NAHA, including contracting, the locations, and the services provided, are the responsibility of state and territory governments, which determine the priorities and type of services funded.
In respect of the Government's announcement on 28 October 2016 that it would commit $10 million of funding for one year to respond to 'revenge porn' and online abuse, (a) why is the first measure focused on developing educational resources to shift attitudes and behaviours about pornography, and (b) what measures will be taken to educate offenders on the seriousness of their conduct, rather than focusing unduly on the actions of the victim (i.e., categorising their conduct as pornography and encouraging victim blaming).
(a) One in five Australian women has experienced sexual violence since the age of 15, and women aged 18-24 are more likely than other women to have experienced sexual violence.
There is growing evidence to suggest that exposure to violent pornography can lead to violence supportive attitudes and that girls often report feeling pressured into unwanted sexual activities. In addition, there is anecdotal evidence to suggest that child-on-child sexual violence has also been increasing and that some children are copying behaviour to which they have been exposed.
In response to this growing concern, the Government has committed $3 million to develop information and educational resources to counter the impact of pornography on young people. It is envisaged that this material will teach young people about healthy and respectful relationships. Funding includes developmental research and consultation, which will inform the approach.
(b) The $10 million announced on 28 October 2016 is for three years (2016-17 – 2018-19) and supports a number of measures including:
1. countering the impact of pornography with targeted information and educational resources to shift attitudes and behaviours in young people;
2. establishing a national online complaints mechanism to empower victims to report the non-consensual sharing of intimate images and access immediate and tangible support; and
3. identifying gaps in, and impediments to, information sharing about victims and perpetrators of domestic, sexual and family violence between jurisdictions.
The national online complaints mechanism will provide assistance to victims to have intimate images removed by working with internet and social media providers.
As announced on 23 November 2016, the Department of Communications and the Arts will undertake a public consultation process on a proposed civil penalties regime targeted at both perpetrators and at sites that host intimate images and videos shared without consent. In parallel, the Commonwealth Government is initiating work with the states and territories through COAG to develop principles for nationally consistent state-based criminal offences relating to the non-consensual sharing of intimate images.
What are the expected consequences of the budgeted $152 million cut from the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program, and specifically, how is this cut expected to affect participation and enrolment in higher education by (a) people from low socioeconomic backgrounds, (b) Indigenous people, (c) people from regional areas, and (d) people from remote areas.
$553.2 million dollars remains under the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program (HEPPP) over the next four years to assist universities to provide pathways and support for students from low socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds to participate and succeed in higher education.
The Australian Government has redirected $152 million over four years from the HEPPP:
Universities use their HEPPP allocations for a range of initiatives that support the aspiration, participation, retention and success of low SES students. The success of the HEPPP on (a) people from low SES backgrounds, (b) Indigenous people, (c) people from regional areas, and (d) people from remote areas depends on how each university chooses to use its HEPPP allocation.
The Government is currently evaluating the HEPPP to identify:
The Government will consider the findings of the evaluation in the context of the higher education reforms.
Will the submissions that the Government has received for the Government's higher education discussion paper 'Driving Innovation, Fairness and Excellence in Australian Higher Education' be made public; if so, when.
On 24 November 2016 the Department of Education and Training published the submissions in response to the higher education policy options paper. The submissions may be downloaded at https://www.education.gov.au/node/12551
A number of confidential submissions have not been released at the request of the respondent.
What, if any, are the terms of reference, parameters, criteria, or other guiding principles for the expert panel, in considering the submissions that he has received in respect of the Government's higher education discussion paper 'Driving Innovation, Fairness and Excellence in Australian Higher Education'.
The terms of reference for the expert panel appointed to assist higher education reforms can be found at Attachment A.
Attachment A
Terms of Reference – Expert Panel
Driving Innovation, Fairness and Excellence in Australian Higher Education
Background
The Australian Government is determined that Australia will be a nation that is agile, innovative and creative. A strong education and training system is key to achieving this. It is through access to excellent early childhood, primary, secondary and tertiary education that Australians are able to achieve their potential – in the labour market, in the social and cultural life of the nation, and as engaged global citizens.
The Government is committed to a higher education system that provides genuine choice and appropriate support for students, removes barriers for under-represented groups, underpins economic growth and allows institutions to excel and innovate to deliver world-class education. At the same time, it recognises that this system must be affordable and provide a return on investment for both students and the nation.
Scope
As part of the 2016–17 Budget, the Government released a policy options paper that sets out options for reform that support the Government's vision. The reforms are intended to:
The panel will provide advice on the issues that have been identified for reform in the Government's policy options paper, including:
The panel will have access to a data collection and analysis process initiated by the Department of Education and Training on the relative and reasonable cost of delivery of higher education.
Conduct
The panel will engage with stakeholders and take into account stakeholder submissions from the consultation process completed in August 2016 as part of the provision of advice to the Department of Education and Training and the Minister for Education and Training.
Timing
The panel will work with the Department of Education and Training and the Minister for Education and Training up until December 2016.
Constitution
The expert panel will comprise four panel members.
In respect of the 2016-17 budget papers estimate that the Government's stated position of not proceeding with full fee deregulation will give rise to savings of $2 billion, given there are no specific expenses associated with fee deregulation in the 2014-15 budget, on what basis has the $2 billion in savings been calculated.
As part of the 2016-17 Budget, the Higher Education Reform – further consultation measure is the cost of delaying the higher education reforms announced in the 2014-15 Budget and the 2014-15 MYEFO by a year to allow for further consultation to occur.
The entire Higher Education Reform – further consultation measure is estimated to achieve savings of $2 billion over five years from 2015-16 in fiscal balance terms, but cost $596.7 million over five years from 2015-16 in underlying cash balance terms. The $2b billion savings in fiscal balance terms includes the decision to not proceed with the deregulation of university fees announced in the 2014-15 Budget measure titledExpanding Opportunity – expansion of the demand driven system, and sharing the cost fairly.
Will the Government consider ensuring that transgender teenagers are not obliged to obtain an order from the Family Court before they can gain access to puberty blockers?
The Government is sensitive to the concerns of young people and their families that the need to apply to the Family Court for orders relating to stage two treatment can be expensive and stressful, and can delay a young person's access to the treatment. The Government is actively considering options for reform in this area.
Is the Government aware of any reviews underway to consider the human rights implications of surgical interventions for intersex children.
The Australian Government is not currently conducting any reviews on the medical treatment of intersex people.
In June 2015, the Australian Government tabled its response to the Senate Community Affairs References Committee report on 'Involuntary or coerced sterilisation of intersex people in Australia'. In its response, the Australian Government encouraged all state and territory governments to review the Victorian Decision-Making Principles for the Care of Infants, Children and Adolescents with Intersex Conditions , and consider adopting or developing specific principles for their jurisdiction in consultation with intersex support groups and medical experts as appropriate.
(1) How many Australian greyhounds have been exported in the last 12 months.
(2) What countries are Australian greyhounds being exported to, and how many Australian greyhounds have been sent to each of these countries in the last 12 months.
(3) Is he aware that Greyhounds Australasia has introduced a mandatory Greyhound Passport scheme to prevent Australian greyhounds from being exported to countries that do not meet with Australian animal welfare standards.
(4) Does the Government have any knowledge of Australian greyhounds being exported across Asia that are facing cruel treatment and being raced to injury or death.
(5) What is the Government doing to ensure the welfare of greyhounds from Australia in importing countries.
(1) The Department of Agriculture and Water Resources publishes statistics about greyhound exports on its website: http://www.agriculture.gov.au/export/controlled-goods/live-animals/live-animal-export-statistics/non-livestock-exports.
(2) See the answer to Question (1)
(3) Yes.
(4) The government is aware of concerns about the welfare of exported Australian racing greyhounds.
(5) The state and territory ministers agreed at the Agriculture Ministers' Forum (AGMIN) in May 2016 that the Animal Welfare Task Group (AWTG), chaired by the Victorian Minister for Agriculture, the Hon. Jaala Pulford MLC, would provide AGMIN and the Agriculture Senior Officials' Committee with an out-of-session paper on greyhound export considerations and suggested actions. The government will await the delivery of this paper by the AWTG to help inform any future action on this issue.
(1) Will prospective purchasers of the Bulimba Barracks be made aware of the Bulimba Barracks Master Plan (administered by the Brisbane City Council); if so, how.
(2) What assurances, if any, can he give constituents in the electoral division of Griffith that the purchaser will abide by the letter and spirit of the Master Plan.
(1) Defence will work with the Brisbane City Council to make purchasers aware of Council Planning requirements at the time of sale. The Bulimba Barracks Master Plan is reflected in Temporary Local Planning Instrument 03/16 Redevelopment of the Bulimba Barracks effective 10 June 2016. Defence will advise prospective purchasers to appraise themselves of local and state planning requirements for the site. Details of the Bulimba Barracks Master Plan are readily available on the Brisbane City Council website:
www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/planning-guidelines-tools/neighbourhood-planning/neighbourhood-plans-other-local-planning-projects/bulimba-barracks-master-plan.
(2) Any purchaser of the site would be required to comply with Brisbane City Council and Queensland Government planning requirements.
In respect of the Government's election commitment to provide $500,000 to fund a comprehensive study on the Bass Highway between Cooee and Wynyard, will this be honoured; if not, why not; if so, (a) what will be the process for the (i) Waratah Wynyard, (ii) Burnie City Council, or (iii) Tasmanian Government, to receive this funding, and (b) when will the funding be delivered.
The Australian Government has confirmed its commitment of $500,000 toward a comprehensive road safety and traffic flow study on the Bass Highway between Cooee and Wynyard.
Funding will be paid to the local government through the Tasmanian Government on the basis of project need.
In respect of the Government's election commitment to provide $2.13 million to fund intersection upgrades on the Bass Highway at Wynyard, will this be honoured; if not, why not; if so, (a) what will be the process for the (i) Waratah Wynyard Council, or (ii) Tasmanian Government, to receive this funding, and (b) when will the funding be delivered.
The Australian Government has confirmed its commitment of $2,130,000 to upgrade intersections on the Bass Highway beyond Wynyard.
Funding will be paid to the Tasmanian Government on the basis of project need.
In respect of his answer to question in writing No. 23 (Hansard , 21 November 2016, page 186), can he confirm that the New South Wales Government has not requested any additional funding for the WestConnex project.
Yes.
a) How many times has the Prime Minister of the Republic of Fiji, Rear Admiral (retd.) Hon. Josaia Voreqe Bainimarama, visited Australia since being elected in 2014.
b) Which Ministers have met with Mr Bainimarama on these visits, and
(a) when, and (b) where, did these meetings take place.
c) Has the Australian Government hosted Mr Bainimarama at any official events on his visits to Australia.
a) Prime Minister Bainimarama has visited Australia on numerous occasions since Fiji's election in September 2014. Under the provisions of the Privacy Act 1988 , the Government cannot provide information on travel to and from Australia by individuals without their consent. However, it is a matter of public record that Prime Minister Bainimarama has visited Australia in an official capacity and transited Australia on his way to third countries.
b) During a visit to Sydney on 15-19 October 2015 for the Australia-Fiji Business Council Joint Forum and Fiji National Day celebrations, Prime Minister Bainimarama met the Hon Steven Ciobo MP, in his former capacity as Minister for International Development and the Pacific.
During a visit to Sydney on 12-19 October 2016 for a Fiji Trade and Investment Symposium and Fiji National Day celebrations, Prime Minister Bainimarama met Senator the Hon Concetta Fierravanti-Wells, the Minister for International Development and the Pacific.
c) The Australian Government has not hosted Prime Minister Bainimarama at any official events during his visits to Australia.
Does any of the Government's $1.5 billion contribution to the entire WestConnex project remain outstanding; if so (a) what sum, and (b) by when is it payable.
No.
How many people from non-English speaking backgrounds are registered with Centrelink in (a) the electoral division of Macquarie, and (b) New South Wales.
Customers from a non-English speaking background(1)in receipt of a main income support payment(2):
(1) Non-English speaking background describes persons born outside of Australia, in countries where English is not the main language spoken. This indicator should be used with caution as it is based on Country of Birth.
(2) Main Income Support Payments were utilised as a customer base to minimise the risk of potential over counting of customers.
(3) Numbers have been rounded.
In (a) the electoral division of Macquarie, (b) New South Wales, and (c) Australia, how many people (i) from non-English speaking backgrounds, and (ii) who are 55 years of age and over and eligible to do so, have established myGov accounts to access Centrelink and Medicare.
The information sought is not available. Information about whether a person is from a non‑English speaking background is not collected within myGov.
What measures does the Government have in place to ensure that local amenity and the impact on local residents are foremost considerations in the sale of the Bulimba Barracks.
Defence will work with the Brisbane City Council to make purchasers aware of Council Planning requirements at the time of sale. The Bulimba Barracks Master Plan is reflected in Council's Temporary Local Planning Instrument 03/16 Redevelopment of the Bulimba Barracks, effective 10 June 2016.
A purchaser of the site would be required to comply with Council and Queensland Government planning requirements.
Will the Commonwealth commit a portion of the proceeds of the sale of the Bulimba Barracks site to the local community as a contribution to the additional infrastructure that will be needed if, as is expected, the site is developed for residential purposes.
Defence is not permitted to direct proceeds from the sale of Commonwealth property to the local community.
Can he advise when the Bulimba Barracks site will be on the market, and (a) how, (b) when, and (c) where, it will be advertised.
Defence anticipates commencing an open market sale process for Bulimba Barracks in 2017. At that time Defence will engage a marketing agent to sell the property. Defence will consult with the marketing agent in determining a preferred sales and marketing strategy.
In respect of the Bulimba Barracks Environmental Investigation Report (21 July 2015) relating to contamination at the Bulimba Barracks site, (a) what is the progress of the remediation work, and (b) will all remediation work be completed before the open market sale.
Defence has undertaken some remediation work at the site following the preparation of an environmental report in July 2015. The contaminants that have been identified on the site are not unusual for any typical metropolitan redevelopment site. Defence will ensure that a prospective purchaser is aware of the environmental report and the extent of work that has been undertaken.