The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. John Hogg) took the chair at 12:30, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.
That the Community Affairs Legislation Committee and the Community Affairs References Committee be authorised to hold private meetings otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) during the sitting of the Senate today, from 12:35.
Water Amendment (Water for the Environment Special Account) Bill 2012
Pastures underwater in Spring for long periods of time will result in pastures being totally wiped out for 7 - 8 months at a time …
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 Veterans’ Affairs in the Defence portfolio. The title of a department does not necessarily reflect the title of a minister in all cases.
And today I can assure every Australian that their Budget will be back in surplus in 2013.
The surplus years are here.
Surpluses that provide a buffer against global uncertainty and continue to give the Reserve Bank room to cut interest rates …
MINISTER FOR SUSTAINABILITY, ENVIRONMENT, WATER, POPULATION AND
COMMUNITIES
(Senate Question without Notice)
On 29 November 2012 during question time, Senator McKenzie asked me a question as Minister representing the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities:
The ACT Labor government continues to use grazing as a fuel reduction measure, recent media reports indicate. Indeed, in the last fire season, the Fire management Unit stated: 'Grazing is a crucial component of the ACT's hazard reduction program'. As we head into summer do your support the ACT Labor government's continued use of strategic grazing to keep the territory safe from fire?"
The Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities has provided the following answer to the honourable Senator's question:
On 22 October 2011, a regulation came into effect which removed any doubt that grazing of domestic stock within the Australian Alps National Parks and Reserves has a significant impact on the values of that place.
This reinforces the Australian government's commitment to ensuring appropriate protection is in place for the unique environment of the Australian Alps National Parks and Reserves.
The ACT Government's 2011/12 Bushfire Operations Plan outlines the hazard reduction strategies to be employed throughout ACT parks and reserves. While the ACT proposes to use grazing as a hazard reduction strategy across more than 7,000 hectares of the ACT, it will not be used in the two parks or reserves which are part of the Australian Alps National Parks and Reserves. These are the Namadgi National Park (the ACT's only national park) and Tidbinbilla Nature Reserve.
I note that the only fuel reduction activities planned in these parks/reserves are burning and slashing. I am advised that grazing is not used for hazard reduction in any areas of particular conservation and recreational value within the ACT.
The Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations has advised that the Booroongen Djugan Aboriginal Corporation is a member of both the 1EP Employment and Economic Development and Business Support panels. Currently the organisation has two IEP contracts valued at approximately $517,000. These contracts are to place Indigenous people who have a disability into jobs across various industries in the New South Wales Mid North Coast region and train indigenous people (targeting school leavers) in the aged care industry at Booroongen Djugans's aged care facilities. The Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations has advised the Minister that there is no outstanding IEP application from Booroongen Djugun Aboriginal Corporation.
The Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations has advised that the Replay Group currently receives funding under the IEP for two contracts valued at $2,295,000. A variation to one of its current contracts was approved in late 2012 to allow the placement of an extra 37 indigenous participants. The contract variation represents a total contract value increase of $185,000.
The Government remains committed to the IEP and will fund over $650 million to the program over the next four years to 2015-16. Growing interest in the IEP from employers and providers, coupled with the expansion of the number of IEP panel members, has seen a significant increase in demand. The Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations consider applications against existing selection criteria, and is progressively working through existing applications on a priority basis.
The Government is committed to a comprehensive approach to closing the employment gap, involving boosting education and training, creating better transition pathways for school leavers and strengthening employment services for Indigenous Australians.
In respect of Senator McKenzie's question on 20 September 2012 I seek leave to incorporate additional information into Hansard on behalf of the into The Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government.
The Government is supporting jobs and assisting businesses to transition to a clean energy economy. Regional Australia will benefit from the $8.6 billion Jobs and Competitiveness Package, the $1.257 billion Coal Sector Jobs Package, the $300 million Steel Transformation Plan and $1.2 billion to support industry investment under the Clean Technology Programs.
The Government will monitor the potential impacts of the carbon price on regions where impacts are acute and structural adjustment assistance may be required. Under the $200 million Clean Energy Future—Regional Structural Adjustment Assistance (RSAA) the Government will provide, if required, structural adjustment assistance to support workers, regions and communities that remain strongly affected by carbon pricing after other forms of assistance have been provided (this will be determined on a case-by-case basis as needed).
The Government will provide $6.2 million over seven years from 2012-13 to the Department of Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport to monitor the effects of carbon pricing on regions. The cost of this measure will be met by reallocating funding from the $200 million Clean Energy Future—Regional Structural Adjustment Assistance (RSAA) program.
The monitoring framework for the RSAA program will provide the capacity to investigate and verify claims about the impacts of carbon pricing and when considered necessary to design appropriate responses where responses are not already available under the Clean Energy Future program.
That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (Senator Conroy) and the Minister for Finance and Deregulation (Senator Wong) to questions without notice asked by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate (Senator Abetz), Senator Brandis, the Leader of The Nationals in the Senate (Senator Joyce) and Senator Sinodinos today relating to the Budget.
We'll be back in the black by 2012-13, on time, as promised. The alternative - meandering back to surplus - would compound the pressures in our economy and push up the cost of living for pensioners and working people.
The 2012 Federal Budget has not only returned to surplus as promised – it has ensured that families and small business will share in the benefits of the resources boom.
How do we compare on jobs and the economy?
… … …
Under Labor:
… … …
Our Budget has been returned to surplus in 2012/13.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Human Services (Senator Kim Carr) to a question without notice asked by Senator Siewert today relating to single parent income assistance.
That the following orders of the day may be taken together for their remaining stages on Thursday, 7 February 2013:
(a) general business order of the day no. 105 (Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2012 [2013]); and
(b) government business order of the day no. 3 (Public Service Amendment Bill 2012).
That the following orders of the day be considered on Thursday, 7 February 2013 under the temporary order relating to the consideration of private senators’ bills:
(a) general business order of the day no. 105 (Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2012 [2013]) and government business order of the day no. 3 (Public Service Amendment Bill 2012); and
(b) general business order of the day no. 95 (Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Making Marine Parks Accountable) Bill 2012).
That leave of absence be granted to the following senators for personal reasons:
(a) Senator Boswell from 5 February to 7 February 2013; and
(b) Senator Williams for 5 February 2013.
That the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit be authorised to meet on Wednesday, 6 February 2013, as follows:
(a) to hold a private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) during the sitting of the Senate from 11 am, followed by a private briefing; and
(b) to hold a public meeting during the sitting of the Senate from 11.45 am.
That the Joint Select Committee on Gambling Reform be authorised to hold a private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) during the sitting of the Senate today, from 4 pm.
Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:
The chronic dysfunction and maladministration of the Gillard Government.
Our crisis is more than just a crisis of trust brought on by the corrupt behaviour of property scammers and lobbyists. It's a crisis of belief brought on by lack of moral and political purpose.
Committee documents
1. Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights––7th report of 2012––Examination of legislation in accordance with the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011: Bills introduced 29 October to 1 November 2012 and legislative instruments registered with the Federal Register of Legislative Instruments 17 October to 16 November 2012––Corrigendum (received 5 December 2012)
2. Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee––Report, together with the Hansard record of proceedings and documents presented to the committee––Migration Amendment (Health Care for Asylum Seekers) Bill 2012 (received 7 December 2012)
3. Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition of Local Government––Preliminary report––The majority finding of the Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Local Government: the proposal, timing and likely success of a referendum to amend Section 96 of the Australian Constitution to effect financial recognition of local government (received 24 January 2013)
4. Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples––Report, together with the Hansard record of proceedings and submissions received by the committee––Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples Recognition Bill 2012 (received 30 January 2013)
5. Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills––Alert digest: National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012 (received 1 February 2013)
Government response to parliamentary committee report
Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade––Report––Australia's trade and investment relations with Asia, the Pacific and Latin America (received 20 December 2012)
Government documents
1. Australian Skills Quality Authority––Report for 2011-12 (received 30 November 2012)
2. Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC)––Report for 2011-12 (received 30 November 2012)
3. Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA)––Communications Report for 2011-12 (received 6 December 2012)
4. Australian Centre for Renewable Energy (ACRE) Board––Report for 2011-12 (received 11 December 2012)
5. Independent review of the National Health Performance Authority (NHPA) (received 12 December 2012)
6. Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA)––Report for 2011-12 (received 12 December 2012)
7. Tiwi Land Council––Report for 2011-12 (received 13 December 2012)
8. Screen Australia––Report for 2011-12––Correction (received 17 December 2012)
9. National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC)––NHMRC Licensing Committee––Report on the operation of the Research Involving Human Embryos Act 2002 for the period 1 March to 31 August 2012 (received 17 December 2012)
10. Australian Crime Commission Board––Chair––Report for 2011-12 (received 18 December 2012)
11. CrimTrac Agency–Report for 2011-12––Corrigendum (received 18 December 2012)
12. Sydney Harbour Federation Trust––Report for 2011-12 (received 14 January 2013)
13. Criminal Code Act 1995––Control orders and preventative detention orders––Report for 2011-12 (14 January 2013)
14. National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004––Non-disclosure and witness exclusion certificates––Report for 2011-12 (received 14 January 2013)
15. Gene Technology Regulator––Quarterly report for the period 1 July to 30 September 2012 (received 14 January 2013)
16. National Health and Medical Research Council––Strategic plan 2013 to 2015 (received 18 January 2013)
17. Sugar Research and Development Corporation––Report for 2011-12 (received 21 January 2013)
18. Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984––Report on ministerial consultants engaged (received 22 January 2013)
19. Torres Strait Protected Zone Joint Authority––Report for 2009-10 (received 29 January 2013)
20. Tax expenditures statement 2012 (received 31 January 2013)
Reports of the Auditor-General
1. Report no. 12 of 2012-13––Performance audit––Administration of Commonwealth responsibilities under the national Partnership Agreement on Preventative Health: Australian National Preventative Health Agency; Department of Health and Ageing (received 5 December 2012)
2. Report no. 13 of 2012-13––Performance audit––Provision of policing services to the Australian Capital Territory: Australian Federal Police (received 18 December 2012)
3. Report no. 14 of 2012-13––Performance audit––Delivery of workplace relations services by the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman: Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman (received 18 December 2012)
4. Report no. 15 of 2012-13––Assurance report––2011-12 major projects report: Defence Materiel Organisation (received 19 December 2012)
5. Report no. 16 of 2012-13––Financial statement audit––Audits of the financial statements of Australian Government entities for the period ended 30 June 2012 (received 20 December 2012)
6. Report no. 17 of 2012-13––Performance audit––Design and implementation of the Energy Efficiency Information Grants Program: Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency (received 29 January 2013)
7. Report no. 18 of 2012-13––Performance audit––Administration of Communities for Children under the Family Support Program: Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (received 30 January 2013)
8. Report no. 19 of 2012-13––Performance audit––Administration of new income management in the Northern Territory: Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs; Department of Human Services (received 31 January 2013)
Letters of advice relating to Senate orders
1. Letters of advice relating to lists of departmental and agency appointments and vacancies:
Prime Minister and Cabinet portfolio [2] (received 1 February 2013)
Defence portfolio (received 1 February 2013)
Health and Ageing portfolio (received 1 February 2013)
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (received 1 February 2013)
Attorney-General's portfolio (received 1 February 2013)
2. Letters of advice relating to lists of departmental and agency grants:
Australian National Preventive Health Agency (received 31 January 2013)
Defence portfolio (received 1 February 2013)
Prime Minister and Cabinet portfolio [2] (received 1 February 2013)
Cancer Australia (received 1 February 2013)
Attorney-General's portfolio (received 1 February 2013)
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (received 1 February 2013)
Government response to the recommendations in the report of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade ' s inquiry into Australia ' s trade and investment relations with Asia, the Pacific and Latin America
APEC
Recommendation 1
Work towards the admission of India to membership of APEC as soon as possible.
Australia supports India's membership of APEC and will consider the manner in which we might support India in gaining membership.
The Government notes that while the moratorium on new APEC members expired in 2010, APEC economies have not yet agreed to re-open the issue. A number of economies have expressed interest in joining APEC. The admission of any new member would require consensus amongst all APEC economies.
Recommendation 2
That Australia continues to strongly support the work in APEC on the identification and elimination of choke points in regional supply chains and the development of modern and efficient communications networks.
Australia has taken a lead role in this work in APEC through the development of APEC's supply-chain connectivity work program. At its November 2010 Summit, APEC Leaders endorsed eight Supply-chain Action Plans to improve logistics in the APEC region. APEC Leaders also set a 10 per cent improvement target for the performance of regional supply-chains by 2015, taking into account each economy's circumstances. A mid-term assessment of progress toward this goal is due in 2013.
Australia worked closely with other APEC economies, particularly Singapore, Japan and the United States, to identify chokepoints to the smooth flow of goods, services and business travellers throughout the region.
The Supply-chain Action Plans aim to:
Australia is leading work on the Action Plans dealing with inadequate logistics infrastructure and variations in cross-border communications standards. Australia is working on three projects relating to logistics: a review of best practice in logistics associations in APEC economies; development of standards for safe use of heavy road vehicles; and a proposal to address deficiencies in information infrastructure linking major seaports. In pursuing work under these Action Plans, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade works closely with the Department of Infrastructure and Transport and the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, and other government agencies.
As lead economy for the Action Plans on cross-border communications standards, Australia has coordinated work programs to improve means for maintaining the resilience of submarine telecommunications cables and, through cyber security initiatives, promoted a trusted and safe online environment.
Recommendation 3
That Australia continues to set an example to other APEC member economies by: (i) maintaining its momentum towards trade liberalisation; and (ii) encouraging the APEC membership to push strongly for a positive and forward-looking outcome in the Doha Round,
The Government is working actively to ensure that Australia remains a model economy in APEC by continuing its trade liberalisation program.
In 2011 the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Trade Policy Review concluded that Australia has one of the most open economies in the world, and a trade policy framework characterised by an unusually high degree of transparency. Unilateral reductions in tariffs have reduced the average applied "most favoured nation" tariff rate to 3.1 per cent, from 3.8 per cent in 2006; further unilateral reductions will continue through to 2015.
Australia remains strongly committed to trade liberalisation — negotiation of improved access for Australian exporters to overseas markets to generate prosperity — as well as ongoing domestic reform. The Government's domestic reform agenda (skills enhancement, better infrastructure, taxation reform, a seamless national economy and innovation) will help ensure that Australian exporters are internationally competitive and can take advantage of the opportunities offered by trade liberalisation.
Australia has a strong record in encouraging the APEC membership to push strongly for a positive and forward-looking outcome in multilateral trade liberalisation negotiations_ At the Vladivostok APEC Summit in September 2012, APEC Leaders called for fresh thinking to explore new and credible approaches to the WTO Doha Round negotiations. Australian efforts helped secure this approach, which included the possibility of advancing parts of the Doha agenda, such as trade facilitation, based on consensus. APEC Leaders also reaffirmed their pledge against protectionism, through a standstill on trade barriers through to 2015.
Trade Facilitation
Recommendation 4
That the Australian Government commit itself to a concerted effort to lift Australia into the top 20 countries in the World Bank ' s list of economies having the easiest trade access.
The Government agrees with the Committee's recommendation that it is important to do more to improve and enhance Australia's trade access through trade facilitation measures.
Promoting trade facilitation through a commitment to a regulatory environment that minimises barriers to business is a priority for the Government.
The Government is delivering an effective border protection regime for the Australian community by regulating and facilitating legitimate trade. The strategies undertaken to achieve this goal include:
In APEC, Australia is a strong supporter of work to improve trade facilitation. APEC economies were able to achieve reductions in trade transaction costs (by five per cent between 2002 and 2006 and a further five per cent by 2010) through a range of initiatives targeting movement of goods, alignment of standards, business mobility and electronic commerce. The World Bank estimates that APEC-driven improvements in customs procedures, regulatory cooperation, logistics and infrastructure delivered US$58.7 billion in savings for business between 2007 and 2010..
Australia continues to lead work on trade facilitation in APEC economies including through supporting the Services Trade Access Requirements (STAR) Database and APEC's supply chain connectivity agenda. The STAR database is a business-friendly, on-line tool to help services providers from all APEC economies take advantage of new export opportunities by increasing their awareness of the regulatory requirements to trade and invest.
In the WTO, Australia is pushing strongly for an agreement on trade facilitation. Potentially 44 per cent of the benefits of the Doha Round are estimated to emanate from a trade facilitation agreement. The trade facilitation negotiations would lead to more modern, efficient customs clearance procedures and better cooperation between the customs authorities of WTO Members. This would markedly reduce the time it takes for goods to be processed and cleared, resulting in real reductions in the costs of trading.
Recommendation 5
That Australia work towards the complete introduction of paperless trading as soon as possible and that it encourage and, where necessary, assist its trading partners to achieve the same outcome.
The Australian Government commenced work in 2005 to examine the feasibility of introducing an agreed international trade data standard supported by information technology systems, including a single window that would enable linking of trade data across government and industry to facilitate data re-use and pre-population.
Work continued through the International Trade Cluster of the Standard Business Reporting (SBR) initiative, led by Treasury in 2007. A Business Case concluded that the Integrated Cargo System (ICS), implemented in 2005 and operated by Australian Customs and Border Protection Service, already provided a single window for the bulk of international trade-related reporting to Australian Government for import and export cargo.
At the border the ICS facilitates paperless clearance for 99.5 per cent of imports and 99.7 per cent of exports transactions. For a small proportion of transactions, border agencies request the presentation and sighting of trade documents to complete risk assessment. In some instances, exporters and importers may present trade documents electronically to border agencies. Ongoing work on paperless interaction includes advanced testing of the feasibility to electronically submit declarations in the postal environment and for household personal effects, which are currently paper based transactions. The aim is that electronic solutions would constitute 100 per cent of postal declarations and around 68 per cent of personal effects consignments.
Other initiatives are currently being investigated across Government to improve the range of electronically accessible trade documents, including permits, which would then further facilitate electronic clearance.
Drawing on the experience and lessons learned in developing and implementing the ICS as the Australian national single window paperless trading capability, Australian Government agencies are active participants in bilateral discussions and international forums. Such opportunities both leverage and assist Australia's efforts for success in paperless trading and facilitate timely dissemination and adoption of "best practice outcomes" by Australia and its trading partners.
Recommendation 6
That Australia should strongly encourage the complete acceptance of the APEC Business Travel Card by the remaining members of APEC; and also explore the possibility of establishing a similar arrangement with other trading partners, e.g. non APEC economies in Latin America, the EU and India.
The Government agrees that Australia should be encouraging the acceptance of the APEC Business Travel Card by the remaining members of APEC.
Through the APEC Business Mobility Group, Australia and other APEC economies have strongly encouraged the small number of APEC economies that have yet to finalise arrangements to transition to full membership of the APEC Business Travel Card scheme.
The Government continues to explore facilitative visa arrangements with Australia's trading partners in APEC and other regions, including with India, and with countries in Latin America and in the European Union.
Recommendation 7
That Australia should take a leading role in working towards the improvement of supply-chain processes in APEC and in encouraging other trading partners to undertake a similar program.
Australia is playing a leading role in improving supply chain processes in APEC.
The Department of Infrastructure and Transport (DIT) is undertaking an AusAID funded project to enable Indonesia, Papua New Guinea (PNG) and Vietnam to develop their own industry-based logistics associations in partnership between industry and government. Australia, Singapore and Thailand are providing expert advice to the project. The project seeks to enhance information flows and coordination among government agencies on policies affecting the logistics sector. It will develop a National Logistics Association (N LA) generic template and deliver a compendium of NLA best practices and benefits.
This project has been a catalyst for PNG to establish its first National Logistics Association (PNG-LA). The Australian Logistics Council is assisting PNG develop sound governance and reporting arrangements. The PNG-LA will act as a single voice for PNG's supply chain industry needs in interacting with relevant PNG authorities on key logistics issues.
In addition, DIT has played a leading role in developing a methodology for measuring progress towards the goal agreed by APEC leaders of achieving 10 per cent improvement of supply-chain performance in terms of reduction of time, cost and uncertainty by 2015.
Recommendation 8
That, in view of the benefits arising from the Export Market Development Grants Scheme, it should continue indefinitely and be fully funded to provide certainty for exporters seeking to widen their overseas market focus.
The Government has extended the Export Market Development Grants (EMDG) Scheme to the 2015-16 grant year and is committed to working with industry to maximise the benefit of the EMDG Scheme within the total funding that is available.
In the Mid-year Economic and Fiscal Outlook 2012-13, the Government announced it would retarget the Export Market Development Grants program towards emerging and frontier markets, with a focus on Asian markets. This measure complements the recent review of Austrade, which recommended that Austrade's export promotion work be undertaken in the world's emerging and frontier markets as this is where Australian businesses can benefit most from government support.
Latin America
Recommendation 9
The Sub-Committee considers that the introduction of electronic visa applications would be an excellent, and inexpensive, way to assist in improving trade and investment relations with the countries of Latin America. It would have valuable spin-off benefits for the tourism industry and would also facilitate business travel to Australia.
The Government agrees, and believes that the introduction of electronic visa applications would be an inexpensive way to assist in improving trade and investment relations with the countries of Latin America.
For foreign nationals intending to visit Australia for business or other reasons, including for citizens from countries in Latin America, the Government, through the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, has increased the number of visa categories accessible through electronic lodgement in recent years. In particular, the Government has extended electronic lodgement to client groups who have demonstrated compliance with visa conditions.
On 15 February 2012 Argentine and Brazilian nationals became eligible to apply online for a Tourist visa (Subclass 676), known as "e676". Chilean nationals became eligible to access the e676 service on 20 September 2011.
In 2013-14, the Government intends to progressively roll out online visitor visa applications to citizens of all countries.
Recommendation 10
The Sub-Committee recommends that the Government review the processing of applications by skilled migrants and, where appropriate, seek ways to fast track the recognition of their skills.
The Government continues to review procedures to achieve the most responsive processing times possible to enable employers to meet their skilled employment needs. In May 2011 the Government committed A$10 million over four years to fund a new processing centre with the aim of reducing the median processing time of Temporary Business (Long Stay) visas (Subclass 457) to 10 days for "decision-ready" applications.
Australia has a transparent and accountable system for processing applications for recognition of the skills of migrants to Australia. There is a national system of legally authorised organisations for nominated skilled occupations that process applications by individuals for recognition of qualifications for skills gained overseas. These assessing bodies are legally independent, professional organisations, and in general terms the Government has no statutory role in their assessment processes. DIAC continues to work with the various third parties involved in assessing aspects of visa applications (including skills assessments) to ensure that these processes are as transparent and responsive as possible.
Recommendation 11
The Sub-Committee also recommends that urgent attention he given to achieving mutual recognition of university qualification between Australia and the countries of Latin America. This would assist the efforts of Australia ' s universities to attract post graduate students, who might otherwise go to American or British universities. It would also assist tourism through attracting the relatives and friends of such students to visit Australia.
The Government notes the desirability of achieving mutual recognition of university qualifications. To this end, Australia has signed Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) on mutual recognition of qualifications with Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Peru.
Australia is a signatory to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Lisbon Recognition Convention and as such has in place policies and procedures for transparent, timely and defensible recognition of foreign qualifications, including those from Latin America.
In 2011 there were 31,450 student enrolments from Latin American countries. Of these, 12.4 per cent were in the higher education sector, 31 per cent were in the vocational, education and training (VET) sector and 53.7 per cent were in the English Language Intensive Courses for Overseas Students (ELICOS) sector. By country of origin, the top four student enrolments were from Brazil (15,266 enrolments or 48.4 per cent), Colombia (8,923 or 28.3 per cent), Peru (1,985 or 6.3 per cent) and Chile (1,974 or 6.3 per cent).
In 2011 there were 2,042 students from countries in Latin America enrolled in post graduate degrees at Australian universities. This represented an increase of 2.5 per cent on the 2010 post graduate enrolments from Latin America.
Australia established the Australian Education International-National Office for Overseas Skills Recognition (AEI-NOOSR) as its National Information Centre after signing the UNESCO Lisbon Recognition Convention in 2002. The National Information Centre promotes international student and labour market mobility through qualifications recognition, including qualifications gained by individuals from accredited educational and training institutions in Latin America. The National Information Centre is an easily accessible information resource that responds to inquiries about recognition overseas of Australian degrees and provides advice on authorised processes in Australia that assess qualifications gained by individuals in institutions in other countries.
In Australia, admission to professional practice may require registration at the national or state and territory level, or membership of the relevant professional body. Recognition of professional qualifications for the purposes of admission to practice, including qualifications gained overseas, is carried out by professional bodies which assess individuals and their qualifications against the relevant professional standards. Admission to professional occupations in Australia requires a specialised academic higher education qualification at degree level and, in some cases, relevant experience. In Australia, national, state and territory authorities regulate a number of professional occupations, relying on professional standards developed in conjunction with the relevant professional bodies. Professional bodies responsible for recognition processes often accredit higher education programs in the relevant disciplines and maintain close relationships with higher education institutions.
Australian professional bodies can and do establish their own mutual recognition agreements with their overseas counterparts.
AEI-NOOSR has a supportive relationship with higher education institutions and professional bodies. The National Information Centre provides broad information support services about the comparability of overseas qualifications in Australia, including through Country Education Profiles (CEP) Online, an easily accessible information resource designed as a general recognition guideline. CEP Online describes the education systems of overseas countries and provides assessment guidelines on the comparability of many overseas qualifications to Australian qualifications on the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF). In Australia, foreign qualifications are compared to qualifications on the AQF (www.aqf edu.au).
The CEP guidelines provide information on qualifications in 13 countries in Latin America. For countries that are not included in CEP Online, AEI-NOOSR provides information on the recognition of overseas qualifications to institutions and individuals.
Recommendation 12
Allied to the previous recommendation, the Sub-Committee recommends the adoption of a " working holiday " scheme for visitors from Latin America. At present, visitors from 27 countries can access such arrangements, but of the Latin American countries only Chile is included in that list.
The Government agrees that adding more Latin American countries to the "working holiday" scheme would be of benefit to Australia. The Government concluded a review of the Working Holiday Maker program in 2010. Based on the review's conclusions, the Government initiated a work program of negotiations with several countries for new reciprocal Work and Holiday (Subclass 462) visa arrangements. The Government may add other countries to the negotiations schedule in the future, subject to wider bilateral considerations and Australian economic and labour market conditions.
Foreign Governments may register interest in Australia's reciprocal Work and Holiday (Subclass 462) visa arrangements through contact with the Australian Department of Immigration and Citizenship, or through contact with an Australian embassy, high commission or consulate overseas.
Australia and Argentina implemented new reciprocal Work and Holiday visa (Subclass 462) arrangements in February 2012. Australia and Mexico commenced negotiations in late 2010 for a capped Work and Holiday visa arrangement. Australia responded to Mexico's queries on proposed legislative limitations, and negotiations on a draft text are progressing well. Australia is currently in the final stages of negotiations with Uruguay on a Work and Holiday Memorandum of Understanding. The new arrangements are expected to commence early 2013.
Recommendation 13
All of the Latin American Ambassadors indicated how much they appreciated visits by Ministers, particularly at the head of business delegations, and by Parliamentary representatives. The Sub-Committee recommends that increased priority be assigned to visits such as these to the countries of Latin America — in line with the
Government ' s declared intention to engage more closely with Latin America and the Caribbean.
The Government sees value in increased visits to Latin America by Ministers and Parliamentary representatives.
In June 2012 Prime Minister Julia Gillard visited Mexico and Brazil. Prime Minister Gillard and Brazil's President Dilma Rousseff announced that the Australia-Brazil relationship would be elevated to the level of a strategic partnership.
In December 2011 Australia's then Minister for Foreign Affairs (Kevin Rudd) visited Mexico and El Salvador. He also visited Mexico in September 2011, and again in February 2012 for the G20 informal Foreign Ministers' Meeting.
In April 2012 Australia's Minister for Trade and Competitiveness, Dr Craig Emerson, visited Brazil, Chile and Colombia, with business delegations, for bilateral discussions, and attended the G20 Trade Ministers' Meeting in Mexico.
Parliamentary Secretary Richard Marles visited Uruguay in December 2011 and Venezuela and the Caribbean in January- February 2012, and the Caribbean again in May and September 2012.
In January 2012 the Prime Minister's Special Envoy (for Latin America and the Caribbean) visited Mexico, Nicaragua and Guatemala. In May 2012 the Special Envoy visited the Dominican Republic, Panama, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay.
At the Parliamentary level, Senate President Senator the Hon John Hogg has played a strong role supporting Australia-Latin America relations. He hosts two functions annually for the Latin American Ambassadors and parliamentary colleagues. In 2009, he visited Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Mexico. In 2011, he visited Peru.
The Government will continue to identify opportunities for Australian Ministerial and Parliamentary visits to countries in Latin America.
Recommendation 14
That COAG make improved cooperation between the Commonwealth and the States, and between the States themselves, a high priority — to achieve higher levels of efficiency in the transport and logistics supply chains, provision of infrastructure, and trade facilitation.
The Council of Australian Governments (COAG) seeks to improve cooperation between the Commonwealth and the States and Territories to respond to the challenges facing Australia. One of the strategic themes agreed by COAG in early 2011 to focus its agenda is a national economy that is driven by our competitive advantages. Under this theme, COAG is pursuing a number of microeconomic reforms; regulatory and competition reforms; infrastructure investment; and the use of new digital technologies to drive productivity.
In September 2011 COAG established the Standing Council on Transport and Infrastructure (SCOTI). Members of SCOTT are Commonwealth, State, Territory and New Zealand Ministers with responsibility for transport and infrastructure issues, and a representative, at Councillor level, of the Australian Local Government Association. The Council pursues and monitors issues of national significance which require sustained, collaborative effort in the areas of transport, logistics and infrastructure. An example of this is the recent completion of the National Land Freight Strategy.
The Pacific
Recommendation 15
The Sub-Committee expressed its satisfaction that AusAID has given some emphasis to gender issues in negotiations with the Pacific Islands Forum countries. It proposes that these issues should continue to be advanced by DFAT and AusAID as a priority.
The Government continues to advance gender issues and gender equality in Forum Island countries. In September 2011, Prime Minister Julia Gillard appointed Australia's first Global Ambassador for Women and Girls. The Ambassador works to support Australia's objective to empower women and girls around the world.
Australia has offered assistance to Forum Island countries for country specific research on the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations (PACER) Plus. While Australia does not determine the scope of these reports, gender is one issue that Forum Island countries may address. Gender awareness is also integrated into Australian funded trade training for Pacific Island trade officials.
In addition, the Prime Minister announced a new $320 million, 10 year commitment to expand Australia's support to empower women and promote gender equality across the Pacific. Announced at the 2012 Pacific Islands Forum, this initiative aims to increase:
This work will be supported by efforts to:
This builds on support Australia currently provides for gender equality in the Pacific. It includes efforts to improve access to finance, reduce barriers to women's participation in business, leadership training and efforts to eliminate violence against women.
That the committee documents be printed in accordance with the usual practice. Documents being printed are:
That consideration of the committee reports and the government response to a committee report be listed on the Notice Paper as separate orders of the day.
That the Senate take note of the response.
Sylvia worked as a community support worker. She was experiencing domestic violence from her husband who also came into her workplace. She was often late for work and the violence was impacting on her performance generally. Sylvia was eventually terminated for performance issues (lateness). Sylvia then left the relationship. She obtained a domestic violence protection order against her husband which covered her in her workplace.
Sylvia applied to work at another organisation. She did very well at the interview and was sure they would offer her work which they did. The new employer then rang the former employer for a reference. He told them that she'd had heaps of personal and family problems, that there'd been issues with attendance and that the abusive husband had been coming on to work premises causing problems.
That the Senate take note of the response.
(i) take further action to reduce the number of people living in poverty in Australia, particularly the number of children living in poverty, and
(ii) develop a national anti-poverty plan to facilitate coordinated action across all levels of government to meet targets which reduce poverty and its causes.
That the Senate take note of the responses.
Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Service Providers and Other Governance Measures) Bill 2012
That the Senate take note of the report.
The superannuation system has moved substantially away from single‐employer defined benefit funds that were dominant in 1993—
The introduction of fund choice, together with the prevalence of defined contribution funds today, materially changes (and in many cases severs) the close relationship that previously existed between the employer and the super fund.
The … representatives on many trustee boards are … are nominated by third party organisations, such as … trade unions. Current employment and industrial relations practices mean that these organisations do not necessarily represent all employers or all employees. Thus, the democracy that the equal representation policy appears to embed in the governance of superannuation funds is not always present in reality. The equal representation model also could result in a perception that individual trustee‐directors are required to answer to the organisation that appointed them in respect of trustee decisions or that they are dictated to by that organisation.
The large number of employers, employer organisations and employee organisations related to a fund can sometimes result in trustee boards being far larger than makes sense for efficient governance of that fund.
Equal representation leaves significant groups 'unrepresented.' Key among these are members who are pensioners … and members who have joined the fund because they exercised fund choice. These groups of members, already sizeable in some funds, can be expected to grow in the future.
AIST acknowledge the preparedness of government and Treasury to consult with the industry about all of the Stronger Super changes and in particular the matters that are contained within this bill. That is reflected in the changes between the consultation draft and this bill, and it is also reflected in the overwhelmingly positive comments that we and others have made about the legislation in our submissions.
Migration Amendment (Unauthorised Maritime Arrivals and Other Measures) Bill 2012
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
This bill amends the Migration Act 1958 in accordance with the report of the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers, which recommended that arrival anywhere in Australia by irregular maritime means should provide individuals with the same status. That is, arrival anywhere in Australia in these circumstances should make the person liable to regional processing arrangements.
At the forefront of the Panel's reasoning in making this recommendation was the need to reduce any incentive for people to take even greater risks with their lives by seeking to reach the Australian mainland to avoid being subject to regional processing arrangements.
Under the existing excision framework, unauthorised arrivals in excised offshore places are prevented from making valid applications for visas in Australia and are liable to be taken to a designated country for regional processing. Unauthorised arrivals who arrive at the Australian mainland are not currently subject to these provisions.
As the Panel emphasised—and the Government has reiterated – the recommendations in the report are an integrated set of proposals. To be effective in discouraging asylum seekers from risking their lives, the incentives and disincentives the Panel recommended must be pursued in a comprehensive manner. The legislative amendments proposed in this bill are part of this integrated approach.
Under the amendments proposed, all non-citizens who arrive in Australia by irregular maritime means – to be known as "unauthorised maritime arrivals" – will be subject to the regional processing framework inserted by the Regional Processing Act in August 2012, unless they are specifically excluded.
Certain persons not intended to be subject to regional processing arrangements will be excluded from these arrangements. These excluded classes of persons include certain New Zealand citizens and permanent residents of Norfolk Island who do not need visas to travel to Australia.
The bill also provides the power to prescribe further classes of excluded persons in the Migration Regulations in the future should it become clear that further classes need to be excluded from regional processing arrangements.
Excluded persons will not be subject to regional processing. Nor will they be subject to a statutory bar on applying for a visa.
In addition, the important safety valve provided under section 198AE of the act remains. This provides the Minister with a personal, non-compellable power to determine that an unauthorised maritime arrival should not be taken to a designated regional processing country if the Minister thinks it is in the public interest to exempt them. This section will continue to provide flexibility to exempt individuals or classes from regional processing. Unlike excluded classes, exempt individuals or classes will still be subject to a statutory bar on applying for a visa unless the Minister also decides to lift this bar.
Sound border management requires such flexibility, in recognition of the range of complex circumstances that can apply to a person's arrival in Australia by sea without a visa. For example, a person who has been rescued at sea, and who has inadvertently engaged these provisions by arriving in Australia without a visa, could be such a case. The person may have had no intention to come to Australia, and their circumstances may warrant a more flexible approach.
The bill also amends the definition of a 'transitory person' in the act to provide flexibility to transfer persons back from a regional processing country to Australia for a temporary purpose. This amendment will allow the Government to bring people assessed to be refugees – but who have not yet met the 'no advantage' principle – back to Australia for a temporary purpose such as medical treatment, and then return them to a designated regional processing country pending provision of a durable outcome.
The application of the 'no advantage' principle is to ensure that no benefit is gained through circumventing regular migration pathways. This, combined with an increased refugee intake from offshore, is designed to remove the attractiveness of attempting an expensive and dangerous irregular boat journey to Australia.
The bill also repeals section 198C of the act. The current effect of this section is that transitory persons may request the Refugee Review Tribunal to assess whether they are a refugee if they are bought to Australia under section 198B of the act and remain here for a continuous period of six months. This provision encourages transitory persons to attempt to extend their stay in Australia in order to gain access to the Refugee Review Tribunal and the courts and therefore should be amended.
This bill also makes amendments to section 189 of the act to provide for discretionary immigration detention of Papua New Guinea (PNG) citizens who are unlawful non‑citizens and are in a protected area of the Torres Strait.
Prior to the commencement of the Regional Processing Act in August 2012, the immigration detention of all unlawful non-citizens in an excised offshore place was discretionary. However, the Regional Processing Act amended section 189 of the act to change the immigration detention of these persons to mandatory. The exception is allowed inhabitants of the Protected Zone in the Torres Strait who are unlawful non-citizens. The act recognises the special status of PNG citizens who are 'allowed inhabitants of the Protected Zone' under the Torres Strait Treaty by including provision to permit their visa free travel within a protected area in certain circumstances. However, there are other PNG citizens who are not 'allowed inhabitants' of the Protected Zone, and are not provided for under the Treaty.
Due to the complex relationships, long standing cultural connections and way of life of the communities in and adjacent to a protected area, the bill extends discretionary immigration detention provided for in section 189 of the act to persons in a protected area who are citizens of PNG and are unlawful non-citizens. This provision will only apply to PNG citizens while they are in a protected area of the Torres Strait.
The bill also includes a clarifying amendment to section 198AE of the act to provide an express power for the Minister to vary or revoke a determination that a person is not subject to regional processing, if it is in the public interest to do so. The Government's view is that this power is already implied but, for avoidance of legal doubt, it is preferable to make this power explicit.
The bill provides for consequential amendments arising from the amendments relating to unauthorised maritime arrivals and transitory persons.
Finally, the bill also includes an amendment moved by the Honourable Member for Lyne, Rob Oakeshott, and supported by the Government in the House, that will require the Minister, as soon as practicable after 30 June in each year, to provide each House of Parliament with a report on the activities conducted that year as part of the Bali Process. The report must update each House on the progress made in regards to combatting people smuggling, human trafficking and related transnational crime, focusing particularly on the Regional Cooperation Framework agreed in Bali in March 2011.
This bill marks an important further step in giving full effect to the recommendations of the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers. It removes the incentive for asylum seekers to take greater risks with their lives to reach the Australian mainland.
I commend the bill to the chamber.
Superannuation Laws Amendment (Capital Gains Tax Relief and Other Efficiency Measures) Bill 2012
Fair Entitlements Guarantee Bill 2012
Higher Education Support Amendment (Streamlining and Other Measures) Bill 2012
Superannuation Auditor Registration Imposition Bill 2012
Superannuation Legislation Amendment (MySuper Core Provisions) Bill 2012
Appropriation (Implementation of the Report of the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers) Bill (No. 1) 2012-2013
Appropriation (Implementation of the Report of the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers) Bill (No. 2) 2012-2013
Federal Circuit Court of Australia Legislation Amendment Bill 2012
Illegal Logging Prohibition Bill 2012
Crimes Legislation Amendment (Serious Drugs, Identity Crime and Other Measures) Bill 2012
Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission Bill 2012
Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (Consequential and Transitional) Bill 2012
Wheat Export Marketing Amendment Bill 2012
Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Further MySuper and Transparency Measures) Bill 2012
Customs Amendment (Malaysia-Australia Free Trade Agreement Implementation and Other Measures) Bill 2012
Customs Tariff Amendment (Malaysia-Australia Free Trade Agreement Implementation) Bill 2012
Fair Work Amendment Bill 2012
Fair Work Amendment (Transfer of Business) Bill 2012
Treasury Legislation Amendment (Unclaimed Money and Other Measures) Bill 2012
Freedom of Information Amendment (Parliamentary Budget Office) Bill 2012
Corporations Legislation Amendment (Derivative Transactions) Bill 2012
Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Amendment Bill 2012
Personal Liability for Corporate Fault Reform Bill 2012
Superannuation Legislation Amendment (New Zealand Arrangement) Bill 2012
National Health Security Amendment Bill 2012
Dental Benefits Amendment Bill 2012
Tax Laws Amendment (2012 Measures No. 5) Bill 2012
Tax Laws Amendment (Clean Building Managed Investment Trust) Bill 2012
Access to Justice (Federal Jurisdiction) Amendment Bill 2012
Courts Legislation Amendment (Judicial Complaints) Bill 2012
Judicial Misbehaviour and Incapacity (Parliamentary Commissions) Bill 2012
National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 1) 2012
National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 2) 2012
Aviation Legislation Amendment (Liability and Insurance) Bill 2012
Migration Legislation Amendment (Student Visas) Bill 2012
National Gambling Reform Bill 2012
Law Enforcement Integrity Legislation Amendment Bill 2012
Customs Tariff (Anti-Dumping) Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2012
Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Bill (No. 3) 2012
Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Bill 2012
Clean Energy (Charges—Customs) Amendment Bill 2012
Clean Energy (Charges—Excise) Amendment Bill 2012
Excise Tariff Amendment (Per-tonne Carbon Price Equivalent) Bill 2012
Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Manufacture Levy) Amendment (Per-tonne Carbon Price Equivalent) Bill 2012
Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Import Levy) Amendment (Per-tonne Carbon Price Equivalent) Bill 2012
Clean Energy (Unit Issue Charge—Auctions) Amendment Bill 2012
Clean Energy Amendment (International Emissions Trading and Other Measures) Bill 2012
Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Bill (No. 1) 2012
Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Bill (No. 2) 2012
Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2012 [2013]
Water Amendment (Water for the Environment Special Account) Bill 2012
… announced that it may sell the water onto the temporary water market this year in the Lachlan Valley. As all environmental targets have been met on the Lachlan this year without the use of these entitlements, they are surplus to their requirements.
… there is nothing in the Bill which specifically guarantees the 'upward movement'—
will not cause social and economic downsides …
… government is of the belief that simply providing money towards socio-economic issues which arise will solve them. This is simply not the case.
I agree with the statement made that 'If we take 30% of your water out of this community it will have damaging, severe devastating effects.' I agree with that and I want to put that on the record right now.
The Government does not know in which community it has purchased $2 billion of water buybacks.
If you go to the Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority and look at their Lower Goulburn floodplain risk assessment, it is a nonsense to say that you can put 40,000 megalitres a day past McCoys Bridge without causing serious flooding of not only public property but also private property.
We are being asked to take a lot of this on trust. Although we believe that, ultimately, we are getting there, I have to say that my community members are a bit light on for trust at the moment.
… weaknesses in program governance and in the management of a number of implementation issues had an adverse impact on the overall effectiveness of the program's administration. In this regard, shortcomings were evident in DSEWPaC's design of the program, the assessment of applications and the development of measures to inform an assessment of whether the program is achieving its objectives.
Future proofing the South Australian agreement against intransigence, backsliding and an evaporation of political will is now a matter of urgency.
The certainty promised to the river Murray and the people of South Australia must be reflected in the language of the bill now before the federal parliament.
We are supposed to have the right for free and prior informed consent; instead we get the compulsory acquisition of our land.
We're supposed to have the right to protect our law, culture and sites, but when we ask for our sites to be protected, the state government approves their destruction.
When we try to stop this destruction, we're given move on notices from the police and told we'll be arrested.
…I was often taking children into the care of the state, into children's homes, and realised that given their home backgrounds, they didn't stand a chance. And I was one of the soft-hearted policewomen who befriended children and sent them birthday presents, and wrote to them and took them on outings.
… in those days, social workers had to work the hours that suited their clients, which were usually evenings and weekends, and by that time I had a family, so I went into teaching. And of course, with that very strange background, I was placed in a really tough school, and realised as a teacher that I could spot abused children, neglected children that other teachers couldn't spot.
We seek to offer a woman the opportunity to transform her life, through the various supports and programs that we provide, particularly through offering access to education and employment opportunities.
I love a sunburnt country,
A land of sweeping plains,
Of ragged mountain ranges,
Of droughts and flooding rains.
I look at the beautiful children held firmly, innocent, and smiling by their mothers and was so proud that these children have been born in a safe environment and that their birth was honored. I started challenging these women that the journey to have life has begun but the biggest hurdle lied ahead. I stressed the need for these women to love their children unconditionally, the need to utter positive words to their children whenever they are holding them, breastfeeding them, feeding them, bathing them and when preparing them for sleep. If they feel tired and the baby is crying they should not curse them but be patient and love them even more. I emphasized that all great men were raised by loving, caring women who blessed their sons and daughter and gave them hope for the future. They were told they will be great men and women who will make the world a better place to live in.
I gave an example of my own. I told these women that whenever I am holding Frank—
I always utter positive words full of blessings and love. I will do it either quietly, whispering or loudly. Words said goes deeper and pierce through the soul. When I was almost done most of these women were intently listening and holding their babies tightly. I ended up by telling them that the world out there is very corrupt, dangerous, and yes with their care, security and protection they will raise a loving and caring, responsible nation. I summed up by telling them not to let their babies to be raised by nannies, government or strangers but to be involved fully in their upbringing.
We envisage a world where each woman
is nurtured, heard, and valued and has the information, resources, confidence,
and support she requires to achieve the best possible pregnancy, birth,
and mothering experience.
In such a world, her baby would be born
with a fair and equal chance at life and love.
… the absence of taxation leads to a breakdown in natural checks and balances between the government and its people.
(1) For the period 1 July to 31 December 2011: (a) what was the hospitality spend for each agency within the responsibility of the Minister/Parliamentary Secretary; and (b) for each hospitality event, can the following details be provided: (i) the date, (ii) the location, (iii) the purpose, (iv) the cost, and (v) the number of attendees. (2)For the period 1 July to 31 December 2011, can details be provided of the total hospitality spend for the office of the Minister/Parliamentary Secretary. 1609 Minister representing the Minister for Defence 1610 Minister representing the Minister for Defence Materiel 1611 Minister representing the Minister for Defence Science and Personnel
(1) (a) The Defence Portfolio's total expenditure on Hospitality (excluding the Minister's Office and minor Portfolio bodies), for the period 1 July 2011 to 31 December 2011 is $658,977. Details for each agency are shown on Table 1.
(b) Details of: date, location, purpose, cost (GST exclusive) and number of attendees of each event are provided at Table 2.
(2) Table 3 provides Hospitality spend for the period 1 July 2011 to 31 December 2011, for Minister for Defence, Minister for Defence Materiel and Minister for Defence Science and Personnel. Details provided include: date, location, purpose and cost (GST exclusive) of each event for the period 1 July 2011 to 31 December 2011.
Attachments:
Table 1: Summary of Hospitality and Representational Allowance Expenditure for the Period 1 July 2011 to 31 December 2011 (available from the Senate Table Office) .
Table 2: Event Level Detail for Defence, DMO and DHA (available from the Senate Table Office) .
Table 3: Event Level Detail for Ministerial Hospitality (available from the Senate Table Office) .
[ This answer originally appeared in the Hansardof Thursday, 10 May 2012, without reference to question no. 1610 and has therefore been republished.]
(1) Can a list be provided of all office locations for each department or agency within the Minister's portfolio, detailing:
(a) the department or agency;
(b) the location;
(c) the size;
(d) the number of staff at each location and their classification;
(e) if the office location is rented, the amount and breakdown of rent paid per square metre;
(f) if the location is owned by the department or agency, the:
(i) value, and
(ii) depreciation, of the building; and
(g) the type of functions and work undertaken.
(2) For each department and agency within the Minister's portfolio, can details be provided of all public relations, communications and media staff, listed by department or agency, including:
(a) the number of ongoing staff, specifying:
(i) their classification,
(ii) the type of work they undertake, and
(iii) their location;
(b) the number of non‑ongoing staff, specifying:
(i) their classification,
(ii) the type of work they undertake, and
(iii) their location; and
(c) the number of contracted staff, specifying:
(i) their classification,
(ii) the type of work they undertake, and
(iii) their location.
(2) (a) (i) (ii) (iii)
The following table includes revised figures for ongoing public relations, communications and media staffing as at 22 March 2012.
With reference to the answer to Senate question on notice no. 1791, does the Treasury modelling rely on the same assumptions used to forecast the creation of half a million new jobs, as announced by the Government in the 2011-12 Federal Budget.
The Treasury modelling for the Strong growth, low pollution report incorporated projections updated from the 2010 Intergenerational Report and consistent with the 2011-12 Budget. The modelling showed that jobs continue to grow under carbon pricing, with employment increasing by 1.6 million jobs by 2020, with or without carbon pricing.
The employment forecast produced in the 2011-12 Budget was only for the period between March 2011 and June 2013, and will be updated in the usual way at subsequent estimate updates.
(1) Will the Minister confirm that the Government has established a sub-committee of the Anzac Centenary Advisory Board, to seek and coordinate corporate sponsorship for the Anzac Centenary commemorations?
(2) Who are the members of the sub-committee and how often has it met?
(3) What fundraising target has the Government or the Advisory Board established for the sub-committee?
(4) Does the sub-committee have a series of projects it is requested to fund; if so, what are they?
(5) Has a request been made for the sub-committee to raise funds to offset the cost of commemoration activities in Australia or overseas; if so, for which activities and to what value?
(1) On 9 February 2012, the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Anzac Centenary, the Hon Warren Snowdon MP, announced the membership of the six Anzac Centenary Working Groups supporting the Board; including a Business Working Group
(2) Membership for all Working Groups may be found at www.anzaccentenary.gov.au. The Chair of the Business Group, Mr Lindsay Fox, indicated his preference to work autonomously in raising money and therefore the members of the original Business Group have now joined the Partnerships Committee which is responsive to the Anzac Centenary Advisory Board regarding partnerships for the Anzac Centenary Program.
This committee is chaired by Mrs Kathryn Greiner AO, and its membership includes the Hon Arch Bevis, RADM Davyd Thomas AO CSC RANR; BRIG Bill Rolfe AO (Ret'); Professor Christine Charles; Mr Sandy Hollway AO; Ms Gabrielle Trainor; Ms Catherine Harris AO PSM and Mr Steven Skala AO.
The committee met for the first time on 13 September 2012 in Sydney and met again on 2 November 2012.
(3) The Anzac Centenary Advisory Board has not determined a fundraising target and at this stage the committee is responsible for advising the Board on opportunities for business participation for the Centenary, including potential sponsorship, philanthropy, profit and non-profit ventures, and partnerships with Government.
(4) No.
(5) No.
1) Is the CrimTrac Board of Management aware of Mr Murray Rankin's appointment as Chairman of Connexxion Business Solutions; if so: when was the Board informed, and did Mr Rankin himself inform the Board of the appointment; if not, were any board members personally aware of the appointment.
2) On what basis did the Board make the decision to award contract for management advisory services and temporary personnel services at a cost indicated in the multiple AusTender Contract Notices, totalling approximately $785,551, for the period September 2009 to November 2011.
3) Is Connexxion Business Solutions currently providing services to CrimTrac; if so, what is the total cost of all services provided, for the period 1 July 2009 to 26 June 2012.
4) Did the Board consider any alternative service providers prior to awarding contracts to Connexxion Business Solutions; if so, which businesses; it not, why not.
5) Is the Board considering further contracts between CrimTrac and Connexxion Business Solutions.
6) Was the CrimTrac Chief Executive Officer (CEO) aware of the appointment of Mr Rankin as Chairman when the contracts referred to above were awarded; if so, when was the current CEO informed, and did Mr Rankin himself inform the CEO of the appointment.
7) Is the Board or the CEO of CrimTrac aware of any: (a) business nexus between Connexxion Business Solutions and Projects Assured; (b) contracts in which Connexxion Business Solutions was contracted for services provided by Projects Assured; and (c) subcontractors contracted by Connexxion Business Solutions to conduct work for CrimTrac; if so, can the details relating to each instance be provided.
8) Do any CrimTrac Board members, including the CEO, have a nexus with, or hold an appointment to the Board of, any other company that has dealings with CrimTrac, which may give rise to a conflict of interest.
9) Can a list be provided detailing the number of contracts CrimTrac has entered into with Connexxion Business Solutions that were not advertised on AusTender, including: (a) the total cost of each contract; and (b) other specific relevant information, such as services provided.
10) Can details be provided of all contracts entered into between CrimTrac and Connexxion Business Solutions to date.
The Minister has been advised that the matters referred to above have been considered by the AFP and Mr Rob Cornall AO and no misconduct or criminality has been identified. Governance issues relating to CrimTrac are being addressed in a number of ways. First, the States, Territories and the Commonwealth are in the process of moving CrimTrac onto a statutory footing with the normal requirements and safeguards that apply to a FMA Act agency. Second, the CrimTrac CEO is currently revising the Board practices relating conflict of interest and has strengthened procurement practices at CrimTrac including revising the Chief Executive Instructions, revising the reporting arrangements so that the procurement team now reports directly to the legal directorate and there is a mandatory requirement for all staff to attend procurement training. Third, the Government has announced that it is taking steps to bring CrimTrac, Austrac and Biosecurity staff at DAFF under the jurisdiction of ACLEI from 1 July 2013.
1) The CEO of CrimTrac advises that he informed the Board of Mr Rankin's role with Connexxion on 1 December 2011; Mr Rankin advises he did not directly inform the Board, for your information Mr Rankin no longer provides services to the CrimTrac Board or the agency.
2) The CrimTrac Board has no role in awarding contracts or the selection of preferred service providers for CrimTrac and no contracts have ever been entered into between the Board and any entity.
3) No.
4) See 2) above.
5) See 2) above.
6) The former CrimTrac CEO advises that he was unaware of Mr Rankin's appointment as the Chairman of Connexxion Business Solutions when any contracts with this company were awarded and cannot recall being advised of any link between Mr Rankin and any company which was awarded contracts by CrimTrac during his tenure as CEO. Mr Smith advises that he became aware of this appointment on 28 November 2011 but was not advised of this by Mr Rankin.
7) In respect of the Board see 2) above.
(a) Yes the CEO advises that he is aware a business relationship exists between Connexxion Business Solutions and Projects Assured
(b) Work Order 2011/01 (Project and Program Management Framework Development and Implementation), and Work Order 2011/02 (Gateway Review) permitted subcontracting to Projects Assured. Commonwealth contracts generally permit subcontracting arrangements by prior agreement which occurred in this case.
(c) See answer 7(b).
8) No CrimTrac Board of Management members have advised of any business dealings with any service providers to the CrimTrac agency which would give rise to a conflict of interest. The CEO advises that he does not have a nexus with, or hold an appointment to the Board of, any company that has dealings with CrimTrac which may give rise to a conflict of interest.
9) CrimTrac records indicate various Work Orders (each a 'contract') have been placed with Connexxion Business Solutions following limited tender processes pursuant to the Centrelink Deed of Standing Offer for ICT Contractor Services.
The Centrelink ICT Services Deed of Standing Offer was established in 2007 following an open market tender procurement coordinated by Centrelink. CrimTrac is an FMA Act Agency able to 'piggyback' the arrangement. CrimTrac does this by requesting quotes from participating suppliers on the panel arrangement and placing a Work Order.
Requests for quotes to members of the Centrelink ICT Services panel were not advertised on AusTender, as it is not a requirement to do so.
CrimTrac records indicate that four (4) Work Orders have been placed with Connexxion Business Solutions since
1 July 2010 pursuant to the Centrelink Deed of Standing Offer for ICT Contractor Services:
Work Order Detail Dated Value
Work Order 2011/0001: review and development of project and program management 31 January 2011 $82,778.85 (inc GST)
Varied in August 2011 to increase contract value to $125,472.75 (inc GST)
Work Order ICT 2011/0002: Gateway review On or about 7/2/2011 Contract notes estimated value of services at $144,522.00 (ex GST)
Work Order RFQ 83: technical review of SharePoint 2/8/2011 $15,840 (ex GST)
Work Order RFQ 85: technical review, implementation and integration testing 25/8/2011 $57,728 (ex GST)
10) Contracts included in response to question 9) and the additional contract:
Work Order Detail Dated Contract Value
RFQ 49: Middleware and integration specialist On or about 11/09/2008 $228,800.00 (inc GST)
The above contract was awarded under CrimTrac's own ICT Services Panel established following an open market tender procurement coordinated by CrimTrac. The panel arrangement expired in or about April 2011.
(1) For each month since January 2008, how many individuals have entered Australia on a valid visa and subsequently overstayed their visa to remain in Australia, and of those, how many: (a) still remain in Australia without a valid visa; and (b) have been granted a visa to remain in Australia since their arrival.
(2) What category or type of visa has been issued to the individuals referred to in paragraph (1) (b).
(3) Is the department aware of the location of the individuals who have entered Australia on a valid visa and subsequently overstayed their visa to remain in Australia; if not, how many of those individuals reside at a location known to the department.
(4) For each month since January 2008, how many individuals have been located in Australia without a valid visa.
(5) Of the individuals mentioned in paragraph (1) (b), how many individuals have been deported and to which specific countries were they deported.
(6) (a) What has been the cost of deporting those individuals in paragraph (5); and (b) how much of this cost have been repaid by those individuals.
(7) (a) For each month since January 2008, how many individuals have been located in Australia who remain in Australia without a valid visa; and (b) what has been the dollar value to the department of the specific resources utilised in locating these individuals.
(1) (a) Table 1 outlines the instances of estimated visa overstay for clients, by month since 2008.
Table 1
Some people may overstay a visa more than once within the reporting period. This information is provided as an estimate only and numbers are rounded. This data does not include people who overstayed on a bridging visa (subclasses 010, 020, 030, 040, 041, 050, 051, 060).
(1) (b) Statistical reports are not available to show the current immigration status of the people covered in the table above.
(2) The Department does not have the reporting resources to readily identify the additional requested information, and a substantial diversion of resources would be required.
(3) No. The extent to which visa overstayers reside at locations known to the department cannot be determined before a compliance field visit takes place.
(4) Table 2 outlines for each month since January 2008, the number of instances where an individual has been located in the month, within Australia, without a valid visa. The same individual may be located and counted more than once.
Table 2
As a result of updates to Departmental systems 2008-09 totals differ from those in Annual Report 2008-09.
(5) Table 3 outlines for each month since January 2008, the number of instances of compliance related departures. The data does not relate to individuals mentioned at 1 (b) as the Department can not readily identify them. Furthermore, Departmental systems cannot readily determine figures on the countries to which these unlawful non-citizens were removed, but people are generally removed or returned to their country of citizenship.
Table 3
(6) (a) and (b) Reports are not available to identify the people in the cohort described at questions 5 and 1 (b) and who have since been removed. Accordingly the Department is unable to provide reports on the removal costs and repayments for these individuals.
Overall, the average costs per removal have remained relatively constant across the 2011-12 and preceding year, being in the vicinity of $4,000 to $5,000 per client. This is based on departmental removal supplier costs averaged out across the total removals conducted during each financial year. This figure does not include detention and case management costs.
(7) (a) Table 4 outlines for each month since January 2008, the number of instances where an individual has been located in the month, within Australia, without a valid visa as at 30 June 2012. The same individual may be located and counted more than once.
Table 4
(7) (b) The Department does not have the reporting resources to readily identify the additional requested information.
(1) What processes were followed and/or what criteria were used in determining which regions or program line items will be affected by the Government's 2012-13 Budget decision to defer the target spend of 0.5 per cent of Gross National Income on foreign aid by one year.
(2) Why has Australia begun pursuing membership of the African Development Bank in the same year it has deferred spending on foreign aid.
(1) The slowing of the growth in the aid program to 0.5 per cent of GNI from 2015-16 to 2016-17 has not resulted in a cut to current aid levels or in reduced Australian aid to any region. Assistance to all regions will increase by 2015-16, with the exception of Latin America and the Caribbean which will be maintained around its current level. The deferral has been achieved through a more graduated increase in aid to most regions than originally planned, and a more graduated increase in our support for multilaterals.
Growth adjustments were informed by consideration of targets set in the Comprehensive Aid Policy Framework and existing commitments to particular countries, regions, or initiatives.
(2) Membership of the African Development Bank (AfDB) will demonstrate Australia's commitment as a long-term development partner to Africa. To join the AfDB, a full treaty process, the passage of legislation through the Parliament, and agreement from AfDB members is required. These membership processes are not expected to be concluded before 2014.
Australian membership of the AfDB offers the opportunity to extend our reach and impact in Africa and to work more effectively in more development areas than are possible when working alone or through bilateral mechanisms.
The AfDB works in areas that are critical to spurring sustainable growth and reducing poverty in Africa. The Bank received a favourable review in the Australian Multilateral Assessment, which found that funding to the Bank would deliver tangible development benefits in line with Australia's aid objectives and represent value for money.
(1) With reference to the Australian Bureau of Statistics superannuation data for the 2011 December quarter, can an explanation be provided as to why contributions fell by 2.5 per cent, despite positive economic growth.
(2) What changes have occurred in consumer behaviour regarding salary sacrifice contributions following the decisions to substantially lower maximum superannuation contribution limits and to introduce a modified superannuation surcharge, and:
(a) how will this impact on the growth of national superannuation assets;
(b) is this trend likely to continue in coming quarters; and
(c) what are the anticipated impacts on Government superannuation tax collection.
(3) Can a list be provided of the bills relating to the provision of financial advice and/or superannuation that are currently before the Parliament, or are likely to be introduced during 2012.
(4) Is there a crisis of confidence in superannuation as a result of excessive legislative intervention or the withdrawal of taxation incentives; if so, what measures are being taken to revitalise confidence in superannuation as the principal long term savings vehicle.
(5) What interactions have taken place between the department, the Australian Taxation Office and industry groups, such as the Australian Institution of Superannuation Trustees, the Association of Superannuation Funds Australia, the Financial Services Council, the Financial Planning Association of Australia, Association of Financial Advisors and the SMSF Professionals' Association of Australia Limited, to counter the prospect of flagging superannuation contributions.
(6) Can the Minister confirm that there will be no additional adverse tax measures in the 2013 14 Budget, and that there are no existing projects of this kind.
Please refer to the answers provided in BET 294-301 as these questions are materially the same.
With reference to projections of dredging, spoil dumping and shipping within the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area:
(1) (a) To date, what is the total quantity of dredging that has been approved, or applied for, within the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area since 16 July 2000; and (b) for each dredging operation, can a breakdown be provided detailing: (i) with which development the dredging is associated, (ii) the location and quantities of dredge spoil involved, (iii) the timeframes for dredging activity, and (iv) whether the figures include maintenance dredging.
(2) (a) To date, what is the total quantity of dredge spoil that has been approved, or applied for, to be dumped offshore within the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area, since 16 July 2000; and (b) for each dredging operation, can a breakdown be provided detailing: (i) with which development the dumping is associated, (ii) the location and quantities of dredge spoil involved, (iii) the timeframes for dumping, and (iv) whether the figures include any dumping associated with maintenance dredging.
(3) (a) What are the current and projected levels of non-recreational shipping transiting, with or without docking, through the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area; and (b) can a breakdown of these figures be provided, including the: (i) industries, (ii) commodities, and (iii) ports or port developments with which the current and projected shipping levels are associated.
(1) (a) The total quantity of dredging that has been approved, or applied for, within the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area from 16 July 2000 to 10 September 2012 is 165,010,500m3.
(1) (b)
Dredging approved under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area.
(a) To be approved upon submission of a Dredge Management Plan (DMP). The DMP will be submitted if pipeline construction involves dredging
Dredging approved under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975 in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park since 1 January 2000.
Proposals involving dredging in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area being assessed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
(a) Project may be withdrawn;
(b) Referral documentation indicated that dredging is a component of the proposed action, however a dredge volume was not defined. Volumes will be specified by the proponent in subsequent assessment documentation such as draft Environment Impact Statements.
(2) (a) The total quantity of dredge spoil that has been approved or applied for to be dumped offshore within the GBRWHA since 16 July 2000 is 55,552,380m3.
(2) (b)
Approvals and applications for disposal of material under the Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981 in the GBRWHA since 16 July 2000.
Approvals and applications approved under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975 for disposal of material in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park since, 1 January 2000.
(3) In assessing environmental impacts, including potential impacts of commercial shipping, at both an individual action and broader regional scale, the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities draws on a range of information sources.
However, the information requested is not available through this portfolio in the format sought.
The Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics report, Australian bulk commodity exports and infrastructure – outlook to 2025, July 2012, provides forecasts for a range of coal and mineral commodity exports. In addition, the preliminary draft Abbot Point Cumulative Impact Assessment, October 2012, provides forecasts of shipping from that port to 2032 and notes trends in shipping levels for all main Great Barrier Reef ports. The forecasts contained in the Cumulative Impact Assessment are not necessarily endorsed by the Australian Government.
With reference to the Australian Government flyer titled Where every $100 on your electricity bill goes , distributed to households in September 2012:
(1) Of the $100 total represented by the bar graph, what height in millimetres represents $1 across each of the four columns.
(2) Is the column that represents $51 proportionally greater on a per unit basis than the column representing the Carbon Tax.
(3) Who is responsible for these calculations.
(4) Who prepared the: (a) statistical representation; and (b) artwork.
(5) Why is this chart not consistent with the figure published at the advertised website address, http://www.cleanenergyfuture.gov.au/your-electricity-bill.
The artwork was prepared by the graphic design team of the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency's Communications and Public Affairs Branch. It is not a statistical graph, rather it is a graphic representation of numeric information, which is based on Treasury figures and clearly displayed on each bar.
The website uses the same graphic, but the artwork was scaled down vertically to fit within the confines of the webpage. The website graph does feature a different heading to the hardcopy graph, but the numeric information presented is exactly the same.
It is worth noting that in developing a graphic such as this, the design needs to be able to be applied to a range of different formats. These different formats allow for necessary adjustments to the size and length of the graphic so that it maximises the space available, whether that is an elongated DL flyer or a square-shaped webpage. It is for this reason the focus of the graphic has always been on clearly presenting the numeric information.
In regard to each department and agency within the Minister's responsibility:
(1) Has there been a reduction in the number of plants in departmental and agency offices; if so: (a) by what percentage; (b) on what date did it come into effect; (c) what was the reason for the reduction; and (d) how much will each department and agency save as a result.
(2) What is the budget for the facilities management branch (or equivalent) in the: (a) 2011-12; and (b) 2012-13 financial years.
(3) What is the name of the organisation contracted to supply plants to departmental and agency offices.
(4) If a reduction in the number of office plants has taken place, when was the contracted organisation first made aware of the decision.
(5) Were staff consulted regarding a possible reduction in plants prior to it taking place.
(6) Have any complaints been registered from staff in relation to reductions in office plants.
Please refer to the following table.
(1)
(1) (a)
(1) (b)
(1) (c)
(1) (d)
(2) (a)
(2) (b)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department's budget of: (a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend; (b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and (c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in: (a) staff; and (b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many: (a) voluntary redundancies; and (b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
( 1 ) For the 2012-13 financial year, the net effect on the department ' s budget of:
(a) The original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend is $8.9 million.
(b) The additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend is $11.5 million.
(c) Other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers is ' Nil ' .
(2) The Department's primary strategy for managing within budget has been to set balanced budgets early and carefully monitor and regularly review these budgets.
In addition, there is a continuing focus on business improvements and reducing operational costs wherever possible. Examples include:
( 3 ) The Department ' s 2012-13 budgeted employee benefits expense is 57% of total expenses.
(4) Quantity of expected net reduction:
(a) A net reduction in staff is not expected for the 2012-13 financial year.
(b) It is too early to predict the quantity of any reduction in consultants and/or contractors for this financial year.
( 5 ) Redundancies in 2012-13:
(a) We do not currently have any specific plans or targets for voluntary redundancies.
(b) We do not currently have any specific plans or targets for involuntary redundancies.
( 6 ) The Department ' s staffing profile is available in the 2010-11 Annual Report at Appendix B, Table B-2.
In regard to the 2012-13 financial year:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department's budget of:
(a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend;
(b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and
(c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in:
(a) staff; and
(b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many:
(a) voluntary redundancies; and
(b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
(1) The net financial effect on the department's 2012-13 budget of:
(a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend is approximately $8.8 million;
(b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend is approximately $14.7 million; and
(c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers is $6.6 million.
(2) During 2011-12 the department undertook a series of workshops designed to generate ideas at all levels for stopping and changing work. Over a period of approximately six weeks, workshops were delivered for every branch and state office in the department. In excess of 1800 staff participated in the workshops which generated thousands of ideas. The outcomes of the workshops are being implemented. The department also continues to explore opportunities for savings in areas such as property and travel.
(3) The percentage of total expenditure for 2012-13 represented by staff costs is 68.6 per cent.
(4) A net reduction in:
(a) the department's average staffing level is expected to reduce from 4738 in 2011-12 to 3,593 in 2012-13. The reduction includes the impact of the transfer of the Tertiary Education funcion to the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education; and
(b) The department is not expecting a significant reduction in the number of contractors in 2012-13.
(5) How many:
(a) voluntary redundancies; and
(b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
No voluntary or involuntary redundancies are currently planned for 2012-13.
(6) The distribution of employees across classification bands as at 30 June 2012 is provided in the table below:
(1) What is the net financial effect on the department's budget of:
(a) the original 1.5 per cent efficiency dividend;
(b) the additional 2.5 per cent efficiency dividend; and
(c) other savings measures as introduced in the 2012-13 Budget papers.
(2) What measures or strategies are being considered to ensure continued operation within the budget and efficiency dividend targets of the department.
(3) What percentage of total expenditure is represented by staff costs.
(4) Is a net reduction in:
(a) staff; and
(b) consultants and/or contractors, expected for the financial year; if so, can a quantitative total for each reduction be provided.
(5) How many:
(a) voluntary redundancies; and
(b) involuntary redundancies, are expected to be executed.
(6) What is the current distribution of full-time equivalent staff across classification bands.
(1) (a) The impact of the 1.5% efficiency dividend for the 2012-13 Financial Year is $4.5 million.
(b) The impact of the 2.5% efficiency dividend for the 2012-13 Financial Year is $7.3 million.
(c) There were no other decisions of Government that resulted in other savings measures for the Department in 2012-13.
(2) The Department has implemented the efficiency dividend targets without impact on any services to the veteran community. Areas of where savings were made include:
(3) For the 2011-12 Financial Year, out of a total expenditure of approximately $360 million, DVA spent approximately $192 million on staffing costs, equating to 54%.
(4) As a result of the efficiency dividend for 2012-13 a net reduction is expected of:
(a) approximately $6.07 million savings from 67 staff reduction (which equates to approximately 62 FTE); and
(b) approximately $3.6 million savings due to reduced expenditure on contracts and consultants.
(5) As a result of the efficiency dividend:
Current Distribution of FTE across classifications
Figures as at 30 September 2012.
(1) Is the Minister aware that the former Maltese Minister for Immigration, Mr Alexander Cachia Zammit, in an article in the Times of Malta dated 21 January 2010, claimed that during his 1963 visit to Perth he did not meet with the Director of the Christian Brothers due to police investigations.
(2) Is the Minister aware that the former Minister stated that the Australian Government advised the Maltese Government of suspicions, causing the Maltese Government to cease sending Maltese children to Australia under the Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946.
(3) Can any documents relating to the 1963 police investigation of Christian Brothers institutions in Western Australia in relation to child migrants be provided; if not, why not.
(4) Can any advice given to the Government of Malta, which may have caused that Government to cease sending children to Australia under the Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946, be provided; if not, why not.
(1) No
(2) No
(3) No. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade no longer holds any records from the 1960s. Questions relating to access to Commonwealth records under the Archives Act 1983 should be directed to the National Archives of Australia.
(4) No. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade no longer holds any records from the 1960s. Questions relating to access to Commonwealth records under the Archives Act 1983 should be directed to the National Archives of Australia.
In regard to each department and agency under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 and each Commonwealth authority under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 within the Ministers portfolio:
(1) Is information collected from stakeholders and the broader community; if so: (a) what forms or other methods are used to collect information; (b) how many of these forms are: (i) paper-based, (ii) electronic-based; and (iii) both; (c) do these forms request an estimate of the time taken to complete; if not, why not; and (d) is data collected on how long it takes to complete each form; if so, can this data be provided.
(2) For each proposed regulatory initiative since August 2010: (a) how many stakeholder consultations have been conducted; and (b) have there been any complaints from stakeholders about the consultation process; if so, from whom.
Given the broad nature of the question and the diverse range of information collected by the Department and its Agencies, providing the information is an unreasonable diversion of resources.
Senator Bernardi: In regard to each department and agency under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 and each Commonwealth authority under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 within the Minister's portfolio:
(1) Is information collected from stakeholders and the broader community; if so:
a. What forms or other methods are used to collect information;
b. How many of these forms are:
i. paper-based,
ii. electronic-based; and
iii. both;
c. Do these forms request an estimate of the time taken to complete, if not, why not;
d. Is data collected on how long it takes to complete each form; if so, can this data be provided.
(2) For each proposed regulatory initiative since August 2010:
a. how many stakeholder consultations have been conducted; and
b. have there been any complaints from stakeholders about the consultation process; if so, from whom.
Responses are outlined below from the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy and agencies under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 and Commonwealth authorities under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997. In relation to part (2) of the question this is only applicable to the Department, and the Australian Communications and Media Authority, with regulatory responsibilities.
Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy
(1) Yes.
(a-b) The Department of Broadband Communications and the Digital Economy (DBCDE) collects information from stakeholders and the broader community in relation to a broad range of matters. Details of the Department's programs and links to its funding programs/consultations and submissions are available via the Department's Information Publication Scheme on its website http://www.dbcde.gov.au/about_us/information_publication_scheme_ips
The Department also provides its Personal Information Digest to the Australian Information Commissioner each year (as required under the Privacy Act 1988), listing personal information holdings.
(c-d) Where forms (online/paper) are used to collect information, the forms do not request an estimate of time taken to complete. Forms are designed to only collect the data necessary, for example, to enable an assessment of a grant application. In the main, data is not collected on how long it takes to complete forms. However, it is noted that the Digital Switchover Taskforce collects information via the Digital Tracker telephone survey. Verbal responses to this survey are entered into a computer system and respondents are advised of the approximate duration of the survey (less than 15 minutes depending on the length of the respondent's answers).
(2)
(a-b) Details relating to Regulatory initiatives since 2010 are outlined in the Department's Regulatory Plans 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, all available on the Department's website at http://www.dbcde.gov.au/about_us/reporting_requirements_and_reviews/departmental_regulatory_plan/archived_departmental_annual_regulatory_plans
Consultation opportunities are identified for planned regulatory activities in the Regulatory Plan. The Department complies with the Australian Government's regulatory impact analysis requirements administered by the Office of Best Practice Regulation. No formal complaints are on record with our central complaints manager as having been lodged about any consultation processes relating to regulatory initiatives. However, it is sometimes the case that there may be dissatisfaction with the consultation process expressed as part of the stakeholder's submission to a review or inquiry. These are dealt with as part of the review or inquiry process.
Australian Communications and Media Authority
(1) Yes. Information is collected in multiple ways and in multiple forms. Much of the information the ACMA receives is provided voluntarily by citizens, consumers, industry groups, industry participants and so on.
(a) Where the ACMA seeks to collect information a form is often provided for that purpose. The ACMA website provides a comprehensive online list of forms which can be downloaded or completed on-line (www.acma.gov.au).
(b) As per above, these forms are provided online:
i. All forms are available for download
ii. A number of these forms are able to be completed and submitted online
iii. All forms, since all of the electronic forms may be downloaded and printed.
(c) No. There is no such requirement for Commonwealth Government forms, however, the ACMA sometimes collects information on time taken to complete specific forms, such as through industry surveys or on the forms themselves, e.g. where a form is being released for the first time to meet a requirement of new legislation.
(d) No.
(2)
(a) The ACMA engages in full consultation in relation to all significant regulatory initiatives which it proposes, in line with legislative obligations contained in the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 and in the various pieces of legislation administered by the ACMA, and as required by the Australian Government's regulatory impact analysis requirements administered by the Office of Best Practice Regulation. Each such regulatory initiative therefore involves at least one consultation process. Within that consultation process there may be a large number of elements of various forms, tailored to the nature of the issue under consideration. Those elements of the consultation process may include one or more discussion papers, conferences, public hearings, one-on-one meetings with particular stakeholders, seminars, webinars, research activities and so on.
(b) It is sometimes the case that some persons may be dissatisfied with the process or outcomes of a consultation. Responses to consultation in relation to regulatory proposals are addressed in Regulation Impact Statements (RISs). These are prepared to inform decisions that are likely to have a regulatory impact on business or the not-for-profit sector that is not of a minor or machinery nature and do not substantially alter existing arrangements. Each RIS is a publicly available document which is available from the Department of Finance and Deregulation's website (www.ris.finance.gov.au).
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
(1) The ABC collects information from the community for a range of purposes related to the performance of its Charter obligations. The ABC collects personal information (within the meaning of the Privacy Act 1988), and information about stakeholder and community attitudes (for instance, comments and feedback). The ABC assumes that the question is not directed at information that is collected for content purposes, for instance, by a journalist in the preparation of program material.
Details of the manner in which personal information is collected by the ABC is set out in the ABC Privacy Policy.
(a-b) The ways in which the ABC collects information from stakeholders and the community include the following:
(c) Any forms that require completion do not require an estimate of the time taken to complete as this information is not required for our purposes.
(d) Not applicable.
Special Broadcasting Service
(1)
(a-b) SBS provides the following information in its Personal Information Digest to the Australian Information Commissioner each year (as required under the Privacy Act 1988).
The 'classes' of information SBS collects relevant to this query are as follows:
The purpose of these records is to record and process feedback from internal and external stakeholders on the selection criteria for the SBS Radio schedule review.
The purpose of these records is to record and process public feedback in relation to SBS Radio content.
The purpose of these records is to process and respond to audience comments and requests for information.
The purpose of these records is to maintain a register of SBS viewers, listeners and website users for the purpose of market research.
In respect of information the SBS collect from stakeholders (refer to the SBS Personal Information Digest for more information).
(c) No. Not relevant as SBS does not collect information on a consistent and ongoing basis.
(d) Not applicable.
Telecommunications Universal Service Management Agency
(1) The Telecommunications Universal Service Management Agency (TUSMA) was recently established on 1 July 2012. Since its establishment, no information has been collected from stakeholders and the broader community.
Australia Post
(1) Australia Post regularly seeks information and feedback from key stakeholder groups via surveys and customer channel modelling. Where appropriate, Australia Post obtains independent advice to ensure the length of time required to complete such surveys/modelling is appropriate.
(1) Is information collected from stakeholders and the broader community; if so:
(a) what forms or other methods are used to collect information;
(b) how many of these forms are:
(i) paper-based,
(ii) electronic based; and
(iii) both;
(c) do these forms request an estimate of the time taken to complete; if not, why not; and (d) is data collected on how long it takes to complete each form; if so, can this data be provided.
(2) For each proposed regulatory initiative since August 2010:
(a) how many stakeholder consultations have been conducted; and
(b) have there been any complaints from stakeholders about the consultation process; if so, from whom.
(1) and (2) Given the broad nature of the question and the diverse range of information collected by Defence, attempting to answer this question would cause unreasonable diversion of resources.
In regard to each department and agency under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 and each Commonwealth authority under theCommonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 within the Minister's portfolio:
(1) Is information collected from stakeholders and the broader community; if so: (a) what forms or other methods are used to collect information; (b) how many of these forms are: (i) paper-based, (ii) electronic‑based; and (iii) both; (c) do these forms request an estimate of the time taken to complete; if not, why not; and (d) is data collected on how long it takes to complete each form; if so, can this data be provided.
(2) For each proposed regulatory initiative since August 2010: (a) how many stakeholder consultations have been conducted; and (b) have there been any complaints from stakeholders about the consultation process; if so, from whom.
Given the very broad nature of the question and the diverse range of information collected by Australian Government agencies, attempting to answer this question would cause an unreasonable diversion of resources.
In regard to each department and agency under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 and each Commonwealth authority under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 within the Minister's portfolio:
Is information collected from stakeholders and the broader community; if so: (a) what forms or other methods are used to collect information; (b) how many of these forms are: (i) paper-based, (ii) electronic‑based; and (iii) both; (c) do these forms request an estimate of the time taken to complete; if not, why not; and (d) is data collected on how long it takes to complete each form; if so, can this data be provided.
For each proposed regulatory initiative since August 2010: (a) how many stakeholder consultations have been conducted; and (b) have there been any complaints from stakeholders about the consultation process; if so, from whom.
Given the very broad nature of the question and the diverse range of information collected by Australian Government agencies, attempting to answer this question would cause an unreasonable diversion of resources.
In regard to each department and agency under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 and each Commonwealth authority under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 within the Minister's portfolio:
(1) Is information collected from stakeholders and the broader community; if so: (a) what forms or other methods are used to collect information; (b) how many of these forms are:
(i) paper-based, (ii) electronic based; and (iii) both; (c) do these forms request an estimate of the time taken to complete; if not, why not; and (d) is data collected on how long it takes to complete each form; if so, can this data be provided.
(2) For each proposed regulatory initiative since August 2010: (a) how many stakeholder consultations have been conducted; and (b) have there been any complaints from stakeholders about the consultation process; if so, from whom.
(1) (a) to (d) and (2) (a) and (b) Given the very broad nature of the question and the diverse range of information collected by Australian Government agencies, attempting to answer this question would cause an unreasonable diversion of resources.
For each department and agency under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 and each Commonwealth authority under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 within the Minister's portfolio: For each of the following items: (a) licences; (b) registrations; (c) fee for services; and (d) permits (and all other permission structures): (1) How many are administered to the non-government sector. (2) What are the associated fees with each item, and which sectors of the community are required to hold each. (3) How often does each item require renewal. (4) What fees have been paid for each item for the following financial years (or since the item was introduced since 2007-08): (a) 2007-08; (b) 2008-09; (c) 2009-10; (d) 2010-11; (e) 2011-12; and (f) 2012-13. (5) How much total revenue is collected annually from each of the listed items.
Details are provided in Attachment A.
Attachment A
Fair Work Australia collects fee for making an application to FWA under subsections 367(2) (c), 395 (2) (c), 373 (2) (c) and 775(2) (c) of the Fair Work Act 2009. This is not a fee for service.
—————
1 Fair Work Australia charge application fees prescribed by s.367 of the Fair Work Act 2009. These fees are obtained by consolidated funds.
2 Right of Entry permits are upon application by a person wishing to exercise a right of entry into a workplace. They are not compulsory unless you seek to exercise the right under Part 3 4 of the Fair Work Act 2009.
For each of the following items: (a) licences; (b) registrations; (c) fee for services; and (d) permits (and all other permission structures):
(1) How many are administered to the non-government sector.
(2) What are the associated fees with each item, and which sectors of the community are required to hold each.
(3) How often does each item require renewal.
(4) What fees have been paid for each item for the following financial years (or since the item was introduced since 2007-08): (a) 2007-08; (b) 2008-09; (c) 2009-10; (d) 2010-11; (e) 2011-12; and (f) 2012-13.
(5) How much total revenue is collected annually from each of the listed items.
(1) Within the Agriculture, Fisheries & Forestry Portfolio there are currently 327 fees administered to the non-government sector. This is broken down by agency and item type in Table 1.
Please note the following;
i. The permit item category for DAFF includes permits, government certificates & other official documentation
ii. The license item category for AFMA incorporates an observer FFS charge where a company/individual chooses to be directly invoiced as opposed to receiving a levy for Observer services. Noting that an Observer FFS forms part of the total licencing charge calculation.
iii. The FFS item category for WEA relates to accreditation of bulk wheat exporters
These fees are administered by four agencies;
(2) See Table 2, available from the Senate Table Office, for all the associated fees and industry sectors.
(3) See Table 2, available from the Senate Table Office, for renewal (frequency) of fees.
(4) See Table 3, Available from the Senate Table Office, for details of fee rates throughout the various financial years.
(5) See Table 4 for revenue by item over the various financial years.
Please note the following;
i) The revenue provided in DAFF's response to this question must be reviewed in context of the following details:
a. Some revenue data cannot be allocated to a specific fee category and is not included. These revenue adjustments can be made in the general course of business such as transfers, accruals, sundry revenues or payments without sufficient remittance information.
b. Revenue reported for DAFF excludes Government transitional assistance (rebates) of $79.4m across three financial years, in 2009-10 ($26.3m), 2010-11 ($38.6m) and 2011-12 ($14.5m).
ii) The revenue provided in AFMA's response to this question must be reviewed in context of the following details;
a. * AFMA does not differentiate between licence, permits and Registrations in terms of Charges.
b. AFMA revenue reported exclude Industry Levy subsidy of $15.0 million across three financial years in 2006/07 ($7m), 2007/08 ($5m) and 2008/09 ($3m).
For each department and agency under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 and each Commonwealth authority under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 within the Minister's portfolio: For each of the following items: (a) licences; (b) registrations; (c) fee for services; and (d) permits (and all other permission structures):
(1) How many are administered to the non-government sector.
(2) What are the associated fees with each item, and which sectors of the community are required to hold each.
(3) How often does each item require renewal.
(4) What fees have been paid for each item for the following financial years (or since the item was introduced since 2007-08): (a) 2007-08; (b) 2008-09; (c) 2009-10; (d) 2010-11; (e) 2011-12; and (f) 2012-13.
(5) How much total revenue is collected annually from each of the listed items.
The Department (excluding Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency Division and Resources Division) and Tourism Australia
(1) (a) T-QUAL Accreditation Scheme – Master Licenses.
(b) China Approved Destination Status (ADS) Scheme – Registrations.
(2) (a) The T-QUAL Accreditation Scheme is open to quality assurance schemes. This includes accreditation programs that accredit, rate or certify operators, or Large Tourism Organisations that apply a quality standard to their operations, business units or related business entities. After a quality assurance scheme submits their application, their standards and processes are assessed by independent assessors on behalf of the Tourism Quality Council of Australia (TQCA) against the T QUAL Accreditation criteria. Following approval by the TQCA, the applicant will be required to sign a Master Licence with the Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism. A Master Licence allows quality assurance schemes to use the T-QUAL Tick under licence. Master Licence holders may then issue a Sub-licence to their operators or related business units to use the T-QUAL Tick
The T-QUAL Accreditation Scheme Master License Fee is currently $1,500 per annum.
(b) Appropriately qualified tourism businesses can apply to be registered as approved inbound tour operators under the ADS scheme. There are no registration fees associated with the China ADS Scheme.
(3) (a) The T-QUAL Accreditation Scheme Master License requires renewal every 2 years.
(b) Registration as an approved inbound tour operator under the ADS Scheme is ongoing and does not require renewal. Approved ADS inbound tour operators are required to comply with the ADS Code of Business Standards and Ethics. Penalties for breaches of the Code may include suspension or revocation of an operator's ADS approval
(4) and (5) (a) T-QUAL Accreditation Scheme Master License Fees - $4,500 paid in 2010-11; $3,000 paid in 2011 12 and $18,000 paid in 2012-13 (to end October 2012).
(b) China ADS Scheme Registrations – no registration fees are payable.
Clean Energy & Energy Efficiency Division
(1) to (3) See table below for the 8 classes of title instruments administered under greenhouse gas sections of the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 (OPGGSA). Non-government or government entities may apply.
Three greenhouse gas title instruments have been issued to date under the OPGGSA, but these have all been administered to government entities (1 Greenhouse Gas Assessment Permit to the Victorian Department of Primary Industries in 2011; 1 Greenhouse Gas Research Consent to the Victorian Department of Primary Industries in 2010; 1 Greenhouse Gas Research Consent to Geoscience Australia in 2012.)
Title instruments administered under Greenhouse Gas (GHG) activities under OPGGSA
(4) $0.
(5) $0 year to date.
Resources Division
(1) (a) A range of Offshore Petroleum fees are collected under the legislation listed below. Please see Attachment A for data from 1 January 2012.
Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Regulatory Levies) Act 2003
Petroleum Revenue Act 1985
Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Annual Fees) Act 2006
Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Registration Fees) Act 2006
(b) Custom (Prohibited Exports) Regulations 1958 – A Kimberley Process Certificate is a permit which allows the holder to export a shipment of rough diamonds to another country which participates in the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme.
(c) Customs (Prohibited Exports) Regulations 1958 - as of 15 October 2012, there were 64 current permissions under Regulation 9 for the export of controlled ores and concentrates.
(d) The Offshore Minerals Act 1994 (Fees) allows for the collection of offshore minerals exploration licenses, from exploration companies.
(2) (a) Please see attached spread sheet for fees for each item. Oil and gas companies which require offshore petroleum titles are required to pay these fees.
(b) Kimberley Process Certificates – no fees are levied by the Department, although applicants for Kimberley Process Certificates are required to apply to the AFP for a Police Criminal History Check, which currently costs $42.
Any individual, company or organisation which wishes to export rough diamonds from Australia is required to hold a certificate for each shipment. In the 2011 calendar year, 122 certificates were issued, covering shipments valued at $240 million.
(c) Controlled ores and concentrates - no fees are levied by the Department. Any proponent that wishes to export controlled ores or concentrates is required to hold an export permission.
(d) An application for an exploration license costs $3,000, and its renewal after four years (for a further two years) costs $600. Minerals exploration companies require a license to explore offshore areas of Australia.
(3) a) Please see Attachment A.
(b) Each shipment of rough diamonds requires a certificate (a baseline requirement under the international Kimberley Process Certification Scheme).
(c) Controlled ores and concentrates – permissions are renewed for up to 10 years dependent upon type of material exported and whether shipment is a one-off or involves multiple shipments over an extended period.
(4) (a)
(b) $0.
(c) $0.
(d)
(5) (a)
(b) $0.
(c) $0.
(d)
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (NOPSEMA)
(1) (a) Fee for services applies to NOPSEMA, in the form of early engagement safety case assessment.
(b) Fee for services is administered only to the non-government sector.
(2) The costs for the assessment of early engagement safety cases are recovered via the fee for safety case assessment provisions of Regulation 36 of the OPGGS Regulations. Fees for assessment shall be billed quarterly in arrears (October, January, April and July). The hourly rate applied will be the NOPSEMA annual cost recovery rate set at the commencement of each financial year.
(3) As fee for service involves provision of a service, renewal does not apply.
(4) Early engagement fees
(5) Total revenue
Geoscience Australia
Only fee for services (c) applies to Geoscience Australia.
Library Membership:
(1) The number of memberships varies yearly. Across the requested reporting period the Library has had 4 - 8 individual and 1 - 2 corporate members.
(2) $100+GST for individuals, $500+GST for Corporate memberships.
(3) Annually.
(4) and (5)
Inter-Library Loans:
(1) The number of Inter-Library Loans provided by the agency's Library to the non-government sector are:
(2) The Library follows the price recommendations of the Australian Interlibrary Resource Sharing Code (ILRS) under which prices have varied over the requested reporting period. Until October 2011, the base price for a standard inter-library loan was $12+GST. After this date, the standard price became $15+GST. Higher charges apply to urgently required items as detailed on the ILRS website.
(3) The vast majority of inter-library loans are single transactions.
(4) and (5)
National Earth Observation fee for Satellite imagery relating
(1) One.
(2) $1,918. The fee was determined on a full cost recovery basis.
(3) N/A.
(4) and (5)
Petroleum Data Repository – distribution of products
(1) Almost all items are administered to the non-government sector.
(2) Fees for distribution of products from the Petroleum Data Repository are set in accordance with the Australian Government's Spatial Data Access and Pricing Policy 2001. Under this policy fees are set at the marginal cost of transfer.
Marginal cost of transfer is defined as:
- Free, when the data is routinely available on-line for self service;
- Run-on cost, for standard, bulk-produced products;
- Full cost of distribution for all other products.
(3) N/A.
(4) and (5)
Compass Calibration
(1) All.
(2) Compass calibrations - $350+GST. Compass swing bay calibrations – fees will be calculated on full cost recovery basis.
(3) Geoscience Australia does not impose any renewal requirements. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority and Australian Maritime Safety Authority govern compass calibrations in relation to aviation and maritime activities.
(4) and (5)
ATTACHMENT A
For each department and agency under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 and each Commonwealth authority under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 within the Minister's portfolio:
For each of the following items: (a) licences; (b) registrations; (c) fee for services; and (d) permits (and all other permission structures):
(1) How many are administered to the non-government sector.
(2) What are the associated fees with each item, and which sectors of the community are required to hold each.
(3) How often does each item require renewal.
(4) What fees have been paid for each item for the following financial years (or since the item was introduced since 2007-08): (a) 2007-08; (b) 2008-09; (c) 2009-10; (d) 2010-11; (e) 2011-12; and (f) 2012-13.
(5) How much total revenue is collected annually from each of the listed items.
(1) The following are administered to the non-government sector:
(a) Licences: Not applicable.
(b) Registrations:
(i) Medicare Specialist Recognition registration (Health Insurance Act 1973 sections 3DB and 3E)—application for specialist recognition as a medical specialist, in order to claim Medicare benefits.
(ii) Approved Pathology Laboratories registration (Health Insurance Act 1973/Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) Act 1991)—registration as an approved pathology laboratory in order to obtain Medicare benefits for pathology services rendered.
(iii) Approved Pathology Authorities registration (Health Insurance Act 1973/Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) Act 1991)—registration as an approved pathology authority in order to claim the Medicare rebate for pathology services.
(iv) Approved Collection Centres registration (Health Insurance Act 1973/Health Insurance (Approved Pathology Specimen Collection Centres) Tax Act 2000)—registration as an approved pathology specimen collection centre in order to receive Medicare benefits.
(v) Approved Pathology Practitioner registration (Health Insurance Act 1973/Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) Act 1991)—registration as an approved pathology practitioner in order to obtain Medicare benefits.
(vi) Approved Suppliers of Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) medicines registration.
(vii) Botox registered doctors under the PBS registration.
(viii) Medication Management Programs:
(i) Home Medicines Review (HMR) registration—registration for accredited pharmacists and community pharmacies to conduct HMR's.
(ii) Residential Medication Management Review (RMMR) registration—registration for pharmacists in collaboration with a general practitioner to conduct RMMR's
(iii) Rural Pharmacy Maintenance Allowance (RPMA) registration—registration for pharmacies to obtain the RPMA.
(iv) Medicines Use Review (MedsCheck) registration—registration for pharmacies to obtain the status of MedCheck service provider.
(v) Quality Use of Medicines (QUM) registration—registration for accredited pharmacists to provide QUM services.
(c) Fee for services: Not applicable.
(d) Permits: Not applicable.
(2) The associated fees for each item and the sectors of the community that are required to hold each, are as follows:
(a) Registrations:
(i) Medicare Specialist Recognition registration fee.
Fee: $30.00
Required by: Specialised medical practitioners.
(ii) Approved Pathology Laboratories registration fee.
Fee: $750 - $2,500 depending on the assessment from the National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA).
Required by: Pathology services.
(iii) Approved Pathology Authorities registration fee.
Fee: $1,500
Required by: Approved Pathology Authorities.
(iv) Approved Collection Centres registration fee.
Fee: $1,000
Required by: Pathology companies.
(v) Approved Pathology Practitioner registration fee.
Fee: $500
Required by: Any medical practitioner that wants to become an approved pathology practitioner.
(vi) Approved Suppliers of PBS medication registration.
Fee: Not applicable.
Required by: Approved pharmacists, doctors, private and public hospitals to supply/dispense PBS medicines.
(vii) Botox registered doctors under the PBS registration.
Fee: Not applicable.
Required by: Approved doctors that are registered to inject Botox under the PBS.
(viii) Medication Management Programs:
(i) HMR registration.
(ii) RMMR registration.
(iii) RPMA registration.
(iv) MedsCheck registration.
(v) QUM registration.
Fee: Not applicable.
Required by: Pharmacists, pharmacies and other non specialist medical practitioners who provide non referred services.
(3) How often does each item require renewal:
(i) Specialist Recognition registration—this is a one off application (unless registration is revoked).
(ii) Approved Pathology Laboratories registration—this registration needs to be renewed every 6 months to 3 years, depending on the determination from NATA.
(iii) Approved Pathology Authorities registration—annually.
(iv) Approved Collection Centres registration—annually.
(v) Approved Pathology Practitioner registration—annually.
(vi) Approved Suppliers of PBS medicines registration—this is a one off application, unless the approved supplier's circumstances change.
(vii) Botox registered doctors under the PBS registration—this is a one off application.
(viii) Medication Management Programs:
(i) HMR registration - this is a one off application, unless the reviewer's circumstances change.
(ii) RMMR registration—annually.
(iii) RPMA registration - annually.
(iv) MedsCheck registration - this is a one off application, unless the reviewer's circumstances change.
(v) QUM registration - this is a one off application, unless the reviewer's circumstances change.
(4) The fees that have been paid for each item for the following financial years (or since the item was introduced since 2007-08): (a) 2007-08; (b) 2008-09; (c) 2009-10; (d) 2010-11; (e) 2011-12; and (f) 2012-13 include:
(5) The total revenue that is collected annually from each of the listed items is as follows:
Refer to the table at question 4.
For each department and agency under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 and each Commonwealth authority under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 within the Minister's portfolio: For each of the following items: (a) licences; (b) registrations; (c) fee for services; and (d) permits (and all other permission structures):
(1) How many are administered to the non-government sector.
(2) What are the associated fees with each item, and which sectors of the community are required to hold each.
(3) How often does each item require renewal.
(4) What fees have been paid for each item for the following financial years (or since the item was introduced since 2007-08): (a) 2007-08; (b) 2008-09; (c) 2009-10; (d) 2010-11; (e) 2011-12; and (f) 2012-13.
(5) How much total revenue is collected annually from each of the listed items.
Please refer to the Minister for Finance and Deregulation's response to Question No. 2345.
In regard to amendments to the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Bill 2011 that improve mechanisms for trade mark and copyright enforcement (Schedule 5):
(1) Can examples be provided of situations in which the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service has needed more personal information to pass onto companies or individuals alleging infringement of their copyright about those alleged to have imported infringing goods (section 135AC(8)(a)) .
(2) Can a description be provided of the kinds of personal information which the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service envisages collecting.
(3) Can an outline be provided of the safeguards for persons or companies whose personal information is being divulged to the complainant.
(4) Is there is a requirement that the alleged copyright infringer be made aware that personal information is being disclosed.
(5) Do those filing a notice with the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service asking for the seizure of goods have to prove to that organisation that the goods are infringing copyright before customs will intervene?
(6) Can personal information be passed on to a complainant without proof of infringement of copyright?
(7) Would recent amendments to the Copyright Act 1968 and the inclusion of 'personal information' make permissible the kinds of surveillance conducted in New Zealand in the Megaupload case.
(1) Can examples be provided of situations in which the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service has needed more personal information to pass onto companies or individuals alleging infringement of their copyright about those alleged to have imported infringing goods (section 135AC(8)(a)) .
Customs and Border Protection will not collect any additional personal information under the revised legislation. Currently, some importers may avoid identification for civil action by nominating fake addresses or storage facilities on their import documentation, or the documentation itself maybe incomplete. Under the revised legislation, where it is known and considered appropriate, Customs and Border Protection may release, for example, the name of a company principal or an alternative private address to assist with the serving of legal documents.
Disclosure of the overseas supplier will also be permitted under the revised amendments.
(2) Can a description be provided of the kinds of personal information which the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service envisages collecting.
As noted above, no additional personal information is to be collected. Commercial trade information is received from importers as part of normal import clearance reporting procedures, copied from international mail consignments or taken from international travellers carrying commercial quantities of suspected counterfeit goods. Information may also be received and recorded by Customs and Border Protection from objectors as to persons or entities they suspect of infringing their rights.
(3) Can an outline be provided of the safeguards for persons or companies whose personal information is being divulged to the complainant.
Existing provisions under s16 of the Customs Administration Act 1985, restricts the release of information acquired by Customs and Border Protection, except in specific circumstances, including where it is authorised by another law. Severe penalties apply to breaches of the Act.
The Trade Mark and Copyright Acts authorise the disclosure of those information fields specified under the amended Acts. Information may only be disclosed where a rights holder has asserted their rights under the Notice of Objection Scheme, where a Customs Officer has a reasonable suspicion that goods detected at the border are counterfeit or pirated, the goods appear to be for a commercial purpose or public display, and formal seizure action has been undertaken.
Any personal information disclosed to a rights holder is limited to information that will assist a right holder to identify the importer name and locate the home or business address and address for service. Additionally the name and address of any entity responsible for making arrangements on behalf of the designated owner for the goods to be brought to Australia may also be disclosed.
(4) Is there is a requirement that the alleged copyright infringer be made aware that personal information is being disclosed.
No. However there is an obligation for Customs and Border Protection to advise the importer / designated owner of the seizure of the goods, in which case the infringer would become aware that information relevant to the seizure will be released to the rights holder.
(5) Do those filing a notice with the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service asking for the seizure of goods have to prove to that organisation that the goods are infringing copyright before customs will intervene?
No. Customs and Border Protection makes the decision to seize based upon information or intelligence the agency holds that leads to a reasonable suspicion that the goods are counterfeit or pirated. In most cases, the goods seized will provide the evidence of the goods being infringing for any subsequent litigation action undertaken by the rights holder.
(6) Can personal information be passed on to a complainant without proof of infringement of copyright?
Personal information is disclosed to a rights holder / objector only when a seizure is made, and in the circumstances described above. In Australia, only the courts can determine if goods are infringing.
(7) Would recent amendments to the Copyright Act 1968 and the inclusion of 'personal information' make permissible the kinds of surveillance conducted in New Zealand in the Megaupload case.
The Copyright Act does not provide law enforcement agencies with specific surveillance powers relating to IP infringement.
To ask the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy—With reference to the brief employment of Mr Tim Byrnes by the Department and his dismissal:
(1) Did Mr Byrnes voluntarily disclose information to the Department arising from his work immediately preceding his engagement?
(2) Did the Department know what the alleged document was, what country it referred to or any of its details?
(3) Did departmental staff view, read, review or examine the alleged material to confirm its existence and content?
(4) Did Mr Byrnes have any opportunity to discuss the issues raised in his letter of dismissal before being escorted from the building on his fourth day of work?
(5) Did the Department undertake any inquiry or investigation before the instant dismissal on account of Mr Byrnes' prior, legitimate activities as a journalist?
(6) Why did the Department contact the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) after Mr Byrnes dismissal was reported in the Canberra Times, and not at the time of dismissal if a security issue was involved?
(7) Why was it necessary to call the National Security Hotline to discuss information voluntarily disclosed by an Australian Government employee on a protected clearance level?
(8) Has a protected clearance level employee ever been reported to ASIO or the National Security Hotline in the past?
(9) On what occasions has the Secretary of the Department, the Minister, and/or Senator Conroy's office been briefed in regard to matters concerning Mr Byrnes?
Mr Byrnes was employed as a non-ongoing employee by the Department from 6 March 2012 to
9 March 2012.
The Department does not comment on personal matters concerning current or former employees for privacy and other reasons.
The Department can confirm Mr Byrnes non-ongoing employment was terminated on
9 March 2012 on grounds relating to matters that occurred prior to his employment with the Department, which Mr Byrnes did not disclose until after the commencement of his non-ongoing employment contract.
In ceasing Mr Byrnes employment, the Department met all its obligations under the Fair Work Act 2009.
With reference to the mandatory disclosure of payments for listed extractive companies and the Publish What You Pay initiative:
(1) Is the Government aware of the efforts to stop corruption across the world through new rules for the mandatory disclosure of payments made by extractive industry companies to governments.
(2) Has the department conducted any research or provided any advice on these laws; if so, can copies be provided.
(3) Has the Minister been briefed on these developments and what steps is the department taking to determine whether Australia should follow suit.
(4) Given that BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto and other ASX listed companies will be covered by the new regulations as they are also listed in the United States (US), has the department discussed with these companies the possibility of aligning Australia's legislation with rules in other nations.
(5) What progress has been made in regard to the pilot Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) program being undertaken in Australia.
(6) What is the Minister's view on the statement by the Chair of EITI, former United Kingdom Secretary of State for International Development, Ms Clare Short, that the 'SEC and EU transparency requirements are complementary to, and not in conflict with, the EITI transparency requirements. Let us be clear, the extraction of oil, gas, and minerals is still failing to bring the benefits to ordinary citizens that it should, particularly in the poorer countries. Implementation of the EITI standard does not achieve enough in isolation. We need a range of different transparency, accountability and governance reforms'.
(7) Has the US Government, which is undertaking the EITI in addition to implementing legislation, got it wrong.
(1) The Government is aware of such efforts by some countries.
(2) No. The Government is undertaking a domestic pilot of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative. Consideration of alternative rules will be considered after the completion of the pilot.
(3) Refer to response to Question 2.
(4) No.
(5) A Multi Stakeholder Group has been formed to oversee the pilot process, which is chaired and supported by the Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism. The MSG will deliver a report to the Government outlining the outcomes of the pilot upon completion.
(6) The Government will consider the various approaches to transparency in the extractives sector upon completion of the domestic pilot of the EITI.
(7) The Australian Government is not in a position to comment on legislative approaches taken in the US, as it is a matter for their Government.