Senator GILES --I note that there is some discrepancy between the program performance statements and the annual report draft that we have. I gather that about 33,000 approaches for assistance have been received by the Commission during the year.

Mr Chapman --The program performance statement was written some months ago, and quite often we get statistics from our State agencies very late and that is why there is a slight discrepancy in the figures.

Senator GILES --On this occasion, there is more than a slight one. One document describes a 19 per cent increase and the other one describes nearly a 100 per cent increase.

Mr Chapman --The 19 per cent increase relates to written complaints within jurisdiction. It is not spelled out in the program performance statement. It is actually a mistake in the program performance statement. It is about a 100 per cent increase in approaches for assistance.

Senator GILES --Thank you, that was not the message I received. I am grateful for your elucidation. I want to ask about the possibility of the appointment of a commissioner for Aboriginal social justice. Is that about to happen?

Mr Chapman --I understand that a Bill is being introduced this sitting. It is being drafted at the moment.

Senator GILES --So it is waiting on legislation?

Mr Chapman --Yes.

Senator GILES --Similarly, what is the position with the Commissioner on the rights of children?

Mr Chapman --I am not familiar with a suggestion that there be a commissioner on the rights of children.

Senator GILES --It says on page 27 of the draft report that the Commissioner is awaiting a decision in response to its recommendation that the Convention on the Rights of the Child be specifically added to the Commission's responsibility.

Mr Chapman --That is a matter for the Government and it has not responded at this stage. The creation of a commissioner is not, at this stage, anticipated.

Senator GILES --What about the addition of the convention to the Commission's responsibilities?

Mr Chapman --That is a matter for the Government.

Senator Tate --It is being considered at the moment. I think it is on the verge of a decision being made.

Senator GILES --There is some work being done in Vienna, I think, with the United Nations working group developing principles on the equalisation of opportunities for people with disabilities. Can you give me any information about the progress of that?

Mr Chapman --It is still in progress. The Department may be able to give you more information on that. We have certainly been involved in the past, but at the most recent working group, the Department is representing the Australian Government, not our Commission.

Senator GILES --Is that the Attorney-General's Department?

Mr Chapman --Yes.

Senator GILES --Right. I gather that is together with expertise from the Department of Health, Housing and Community Services, is that right?

Mr Chapman --Yes.

Senator GILES --Can you give me a little more information about the United Nations Conference on National Human Rights Institutions, in which our Commission participated quite recently?

Mr Chapman --The conference is actually planned for the middle of next year. There have been a series of preparatory meetings to discuss the planning of the world conference.

Senator GILES --Is the process one in which there is an opportunity for us to judge Australian systems and processes for human rights, against those that are in place in other countries?

Mr Chapman --Under its international reporting obligations, Australia reports to the United Nations. It is up to the United Nations to compare one country's record against another. But, obviously, we can compare our record against other countries by reading the reports of other countries.

Senator GILES --Can you see in the processes in other countries matters that are perhaps dealt with better than in Australia or vice versa?

Mr Chapman --There is a phenomenon going on at the moment whereby a number of countries are asking this country for advice on national human rights machinery. So I would say we are doing pretty well.

Senator GILES --Are you able to tell us which countries are interested in our processes?

Mr Chapman --There have been quite a few. Russia is a recent one, Thailand, India--a number of countries have expressed interest. They are the ones that come to mind immediately.

Senator GILES --Would this actually involve exchange of officers, or something of that sort?

Mr Chapman --If they are to set up national machinery, it may well do that; it may well be that that is the case. But there are no plans for the moment for that.

Senator GILES --Is the report being prepared for the Federal Attorney-General on the situation of descendants of South Sea islanders brought to Australia in the mid-1800s, which is referred to about halfway down page 127, ready yet?

Mr Chapman --It will be some months before the report is ready. At the moment we are conducting a census to identify just who the descendants of these people are. That census actually will be very useful in preparing the report. I suspect that it will be another two or three months before the report is available.

Senator GILES --Have we any idea of how many people would identify themselves as South Sea islanders?

Mr Chapman --That is why we are conducting the census--to find out exactly--but it is estimated that there are around 15,000, mainly in North Queensland.

Senator GILES --My last question is about the First Optional Protocol, which we became party to in 1991. There is a reference here, on page 126, to the Commission providing `advice and information in response to numerous inquiries regarding the Protocol'. Do we have a process for actually dealing with complaints?

Mr Chapman --The complaints, in fact, go to the United Nations, but it is not generally known that that is only after you have exhausted all available domestic remedies; and we are informing people about what the process is. I should say that we have no additional funds to do this. This is just something we are doing as a service to people who would naturally ring the Commission to ask advice. We have produced a small document which sets out the process.

Senator Tate --It seems a big deal to answer the telephone.

Senator GILES --Can you give us some idea of the degree of interest there is in this protocol?

Mr Chapman --I do not have any figures in front of me about the number of inquiries we have had, but I could provide that if you require that information.

Senator GILES --Perhaps there is more information in the annual report.

Mr Chapman --There may be.

Senator GILES --I have not had a chance to--

Mr Chapman --We will make sure there is something in the final draft of that document, because what you have there is an officer's draft at this stage.

Senator GILES --Thank you.

Senator CALVERT --I refer to page 121, which is the fifth page of subprogram 3.1 in the program performance statements that start on that page dealing with the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. Could you provide the Committee with a breakdown of expenses in the last financial year for the four major components of your activities, those being, as listed here, human rights, race discrimination, sex discrimination and privacy? I do not mind if you take that on notice. Could you provide this?

Mr Chapman --Yes. I will take it on notice because we have not finalised the accounting processes to do that, but certainly it will be part of the annual report. Our last annual report gave a breakdown and this one, the current one, will as well. I am sorry; I did not get the page you were looking at there.

Senator CALVERT --Page 121: the first page. Have you formulated a comprehensive budget for the current financial year on how the outlays on page 122 are going to be spent?

Mr Chapman --Yes. Well, we are still in the process of doing that, but we have a fair idea of where the main expenditure will be. The area that is a bit difficult for us to divide up, for the moment, is salaries, because the computer system we have is not sophisticated enough to give us a breakdown by program. But we are working on improving that.

Senator CALVERT --You will be able to provide those to the Committee, I presume?

Mr Chapman --Yes.

Senator CALVERT --When you are doing that, could you provide a breakdown of the proposed expenditure between the four areas of race, human rights, sex discrimination and privacy, as I asked you previously?

Mr Chapman --Yes.

Senator CALVERT --How many staff are currently employed by HREOC and, in particular, what categories--SES 1 and SES 2, et cetera? Can you take that on notice for me?

Mr Chapman --I can tell you roughly. There are around 140 staff. There is one SES 2 and three SES 1s.

Senator CALVERT --Could you give me a fuller answer on your total staff structure?

Mr Chapman --There will be a detailed table in the annual report as well.

Senator CALVERT --What effect do you think the proposed racial vilification legislation, once in operation, will have on the workload for the Race Discrimination Commissioner? I notice that on page 135 you have made comments on that. It says that it will probably have a significant effect. What are you expecting? What proportion of time and money do you think it will take, as compared to your present situation?

Mr Chapman --Firstly, the Bill has not been drafted, so I am not absolutely certain what the parameters are. But if we take the New South Wales legislation as a case study, there were something like 600 complaints to the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board in the first year of operation of that Act. Given that this is nationwide legislation, we would be expecting quite a number of complaints.

Senator CALVERT --What about Irish joke tellers and all that sort of thing?

Mr Chapman --Jokes are not part of this proposal. It has a fairly high threshold for what racial vilification is. There has been a bit of misreporting in the newspapers about that.

Senator CALVERT --I believe there has. It certainly made a good story, anyway. I refer you to page 133, where it says that one of the specific goals of the privacy program element is to:

Monitor the conduct of the data-matching (assistance and tax) program to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Data-Matching Program (Assistance and Tax) Act 1990.

How many people were involved in the monitoring of the six data-matching cycles during the last year and how many are expected to be involved this year?

Mr Waters --There are, in fact, three professional staff involved more or less full time in the monitoring of the data-matching program, together with half a part time support staff person; and that is intended to continue. Well, it is certainly continuing for the first half of this year. As you are probably aware, the Data-Matching Program Act has a sunset clause in it currently and the continuation of the resources for monitoring will obviously be tied to the continuation or otherwise of the program itself.

Senator CALVERT --Have you got any ideas of cost?

Mr Waters --In salary terms, it would come out, for a full year, at around $140,000. That money was provided by means of a transfer from the Department of Social Security vote to our budget.

Senator CALVERT --Were the officers satisfied that the Act was being complied with?

Mr Waters --Generally speaking, there have been a number of cases where they found procedures that were not totally in accordance with the requirements of the Act or the guidelines, and in those cases the agencies concerned have taken action to bring their procedures into line.

Senator CALVERT --Were there any flagrant breaches, though? Was there anything worth reporting?

Mr Waters --We did comment on a number of areas of discrepancy in the interim report that the Privacy Commissioner made to the Attorney back in September last year, and we will be reporting again, as part of the reappraisal of the program, in about a month's time. I do not have to hand the details of those discrepancies or breaches.

Senator CALVERT --I note that on page 122 there is an allocation of an estimated $380,000 in the coming year to train legal and field officers under the Aboriginal deaths in custody program. Could you provide details of the nature of the training: what it entails, who will be training the officers and what experience and qualifications the trainers have to have?

Mr Chapman --This was part of the recommendations of the Royal Commission to provide improved legal education for Aboriginal people in their own communities. The idea is that we will select an institution--one of the universities--to conduct the course on our behalf. It will be an accredited course and an accredited institution.

Senator CALVERT --When you say `an accredited institution', what do you mean?

Mr Chapman --It will be one of the universities. We are going to ask for tenders for that.

Senator CALVERT --A sum of $380,000 should train a few, should it not?

Mr Chapman --Yes. There are some setting up costs in that $380,000. I do not know the exact number of possible trainees, but it will be several hundred.

Senator CALVERT --I have no further questions.

Senator VANSTONE --How many people are in the Commission?

Mr Chapman --Around 140.

Senator VANSTONE --How many of those, roughly, would travel?

Mr Chapman --I suppose that about a quarter would travel on a fairly regular basis.

Senator VANSTONE --About 40?

Mr Chapman --Yes, a quarter.

CHAIRMAN --A quarter or 40?

Mr Chapman --I said a quarter.

Senator VANSTONE --Did you? I am sorry. Well, a quarter is 35. Of those 35, what percentage would be support staff, as in someone who takes a staffer with them, as opposed to a person who is needed at a particular function, meeting or whatever?

Mr Chapman --It is hard to say. Probably 2 or 3 per cent of that.

Senator VANSTONE --Only a few?

Mr Chapman --Yes.

Senator VANSTONE --Of the support staff where you need them to be in any event?

Mr Chapman --If there were an inquiry, for instance, there might be a number of support staff. But on a number of occasions, there are no support staff required.

Senator VANSTONE --Would it be possible to take a question on notice and provide, in relation to the 30 most frequently travelled staff members in the last financial year, a list of their travel allowance payments, the dates and places for which they were paid?

Mr Chapman --Yes, we can take that on notice.

Senator VANSTONE --I would be happy with that, thanks.

Mr Chapman --Do not hold me to the 35; it may be slightly more. It is just a guess off the top of my head.

Senator VANSTONE --I am happy if you leave it at the top 30. Just leave it at the top 30.

Mr Chapman --Sure.

Senator VANSTONE --That should answer that aspect. Page 125, three dot points up from the bottom: the business of the National Advisory Committee on Discrimination in Employment and Occupation. I think it was mentioned last year as well and it still has not got going. Is there some problem there?

Mr Chapman --There is no problem, as far as I am aware. It is just a matter of trying to get together quite a large group of people and trying to get the appointments made.

Senator VANSTONE --How large a group will it be?

Mr Chapman --It will certainly be over 25. It includes State governments, Federal Government representatives, trade unions and business.

Senator VANSTONE --It has taken over a year to get 25 people selected?

Mr Skehill --I saw some papers the other day. I do not remember the exact detail, but I think the appointments are very close.

Senator VANSTONE --Imminent?

Mr Chapman --Yes.

Senator VANSTONE --Do we have any sort of estimate as to what the cost of the Commission's involvement will be?

Mr Chapman --We do not expect it to be extremely expensive, but it will meet four or five times a year, I would assume.

Senator VANSTONE --The next question concerns page 129, the inquiry into sex discrimination in overaward payments. Is there not a wealth of material around in relation to this? Is this something we think does not happen or we are not sure happens? I must be under a misapprehension. I was quite sure it was happening and I thought everyone was sort of in agreement on that.

Mr Chapman --There might be a wealth of information around. It is a matter of collating that information and turning it into a sensible report for further policy direction.

Senator VANSTONE --So there are no sensible reports? I am not trying to be sarcastic; I am just trying to follow the gist of what you are saying. You do not think there is any authoritative statement in relation to this matter?

Mr Chapman --Not in relation to sex discrimination.

Senator VANSTONE --In overaward payments? Fair enough. It says that it is expected to be released in September. Is that still the case?

Mr Chapman --We are working towards that, yes.

Senator VANSTONE --In relation to the review of permanent exemptions, expected at the end of July, has a view been formed as to whether any of those exemptions are no longer appropriate?

Mr Chapman --I understand that that report may have been tabled today. I am not sure that it has in fact happened but, if it has, it is no longer under embargo. At the moment I am not sure that it has been tabled, but it was expected to be tabled today in the House.

Senator VANSTONE --Do you know, Minister, whether the review of permanent exemptions under the Sex Discrimination Act was tabled today?

Senator Tate --I do not know.

Mr Chapman --It was due to be tabled today. My information is that it should have been. I assume it will be.

Senator VANSTONE --I will have a look. I refer to page 132, `Audit and Investigation', where it says:

A number of major investigations were carried out into alleged breaches of the Act, including well publicised mail-out errors by three Commonwealth agencies.

What was the actual number of investigations and how many of them concluded that breaches, in fact, did occur?

Mr Waters --I do not have to hand the exact number. We make a distinction obviously between a complaints investigation, which is not included in that section, and investigations that are mounted as a result of allegations or press reports or a variety of other sources that stimulate an investigation. The number last year would have between 10 and 15. Of those, probably around a half found some sort of problem which was normally addressed by the agency concerned. In some cases there would have been probably two or three tax file number examples in that as well.

Senator VANSTONE --I suppose that you have an interest, but do you have any direct involvement in what now has to be done because of the recent ICAC report in relation to people flogging off information to supplement their incomes?

Mr Waters --There are a number of follow-up actions that will involve the Privacy Commissioner. The most immediate is that the Commissioner has written to the Commonwealth agencies that were named in the ICAC report asking them for a report on what action they have taken since they became aware of the allegations. We will be continuing to find out what they have done and if that is--

Senator VANSTONE --Have responses been received?

Mr Waters --I believe we have had responses from two of the agencies concerned. We are awaiting the others.

Senator VANSTONE --How many are there?

Mr Waters --I think there were five in total, including Telecom, which, of course, is no longer covered by the Privacy Act but was at the time.

Senator VANSTONE --Can you give me a rough idea how long ago they were written to?

Mr Waters --It was the week after the ICAC report. That would be two or three weeks ago.

Senator VANSTONE --Long enough for a couple of them to have responded?

Mr Waters --Yes.

Senator VANSTONE --Which are the ones that have responded?

Mr Waters --I believe it is the Department of Social Security and one other. I am afraid I cannot recall them.

Senator VANSTONE --Can we recall who the five are?

Mr Waters --The Department of Social Security, the Department of Immigration, Australia Post, Telecom and I would not like to guess the last one.

Senator Tate --I did answer to the Parliament that the AFP is also following up the ICAC Commissioner's report and is involved in discussions.

Mr Waters --I should say that the Commissioner has also been asked by the New South Wales State Government for his views on an appropriate State response.

Senator VANSTONE --Is the other one a department or in the category of Australia Post and Telecom?

Mr Waters --I believe it is a mainstream department. It is either Customs or maybe the Tax Office, but I can certainly provide you with that.

Senator VANSTONE --Could we find that out in a reasonable space of time, who has responded and who has not?

Mr Waters --I could find that out for you.

Senator VANSTONE --What are you going to do when you get the responses?

Mr Waters --The objective will be to assess primarily the adequacy of the security precautions which those agencies take against unauthorised disclosure, because that is the primary obligation under the information privacy principles which they may have fallen down on.

Senator VANSTONE --Do you have any time frame in mind as to when you will be able to make those assessments, and will the Minister report to parliament?

Mr Waters --As to the decision on whether the findings of particular investigations require a report to parliament, that discretion lies with the Privacy Commissioner and would depend on the seriousness of the findings. We are, of course, in respect of most of those departments engaged in other activity which may have already revealed systems `problems', but this will just be another part of that process.

Senator VANSTONE --Thank you for that. Page 133, the human rights conference in Vienna: how many people have we sent over for the preparatory committee, or perhaps they have not gone anywhere?

Mr Chapman --No. The conference is next year, Senator.

Senator VANSTONE --But the preparatory committee does not have to do any travelling.

Mr Chapman --No. The Human Rights Commissioner has attended the preparatory commission meetings.

Senator VANSTONE --In the government delegation, how many will be from the Commission, where will the others come from and what is the expected cost to the Commission of the Commission's participation?

Mr Chapman --There is only one from the Commission and that has been the Human Rights Commissioner. I am not aware of what other representation there is from the Government.

Senator VANSTONE --I do not need to know, then. If there is only one, it does not matter.

Mr Chapman --And we can provide the cost.

Senator VANSTONE --Fair enough. On page 134, looking at discrimination in relation to age, is there anybody looking at the existing discrimination in relation to age pensions whereby females get it at 60 and men do not until they are 65?

Mr Chapman --There is an exemption in the Sex Discrimination Act for social security, and that will be the second part of the review of permanent exemptions inquiry, whose report was being tabled today. It is quite a complex and difficult area and it will be subject to the next stage of the inquiry.

Senator VANSTONE --Thank you. On page 135, the first dot point is on the appointment of a commissioner for Aboriginal social justice and the establishment of an Aboriginal social justice unit. What problems has the race discrimination commissioner had in handling his or her work?

Mr Chapman --None that I am aware of.

Senator VANSTONE --What is the perceived need to create a commissioner for Aboriginal social justice?

Mr Chapman --This was a government decision that emanated from the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody.

Senator VANSTONE --I see.

Mr Chapman --It is considered to be one of the most important and significant human rights issues in the country. This Commissioner will report annually on the state of the nation on the social disadvantages of Aboriginal people. The Commissioner will also help to monitor the implementation of the recommendations of the Royal Commission. It is slightly different to the role of the race discrimination commissioner which is to receive complaints under the Racial Discrimination Act.

Senator VANSTONE --How big will the unit be?

Mr Chapman --It is around five staff.

Senator VANSTONE --On page 136 there is a heading, `The Sex Discrimination Act and unions'. You are going to develop a project to inform unions generally about the Act and how it can be used to assist their members and you have various strategies lined up et cetera. How much is all that going to cost?

Mr Chapman --I think it is estimated to be around $45,000 in this financial year.

Senator VANSTONE --Not that I like to propose the spending of money, but it certainly has been my view that unions have not done much for women and, if that helps them do it, well and good. I hope it is money well spent.

Senator HARRADINE --I believe the first one to get equal pay for work of equal ranking was--

Senator VANSTONE --There is a long way to go though, a long way to go.

CHAIRMAN --I am not disagreeing with you, but some have done a good job.

Senator VANSTONE --On page 138, the third dot point from the bottom refers to `continued promotion of public awareness and understanding of the privacy legislation' through things other than the Personal Information Digest. Could we have at some stage the publications that you have had in the last year other than the digest? Do you have any idea of what publications are different, not re-runs of last year's--

Mr Chapman --They will actually be listed in the annual report.

Senator VANSTONE --I will have a look there.

Senator CALVERT --The annual report only arrived on our desks at lunchtime; that is probably why we are asking questions that you think we should know. In fact, I just found in here an answer to a question that I asked earlier--the list of the staff members and their grades and all that.

Senator VANSTONE --Mr Chapman, do you have any idea when the top 30 travellers list will be available?

Mr Chapman --Just as soon as I can provide it.

Senator VANSTONE --I am sure of that. I was never in any doubt. I just wondered whether you had any idea when that might be.

Mr Chapman --The middle of next week.

Senator VANSTONE --That will be before this comes on, will it not?

Mr Skehill --Yes.

Senator VANSTONE --That is fine. It will have the TA payments and the places per day?

Mr Chapman --Yes.

Senator CALVERT --With regard to consultancies, I noticed that you have employed 40 consultants to a total of $969,000. Out of those 40 consultants, two were publicly advertised. Were all the others on the same basis as we were told earlier? Were they selectively tendered?

Mr Chapman --A number would have been selectively tendered, but the Commission maintains a register of consultants which we advertise annually and it is updated on a reasonably regular basis. Depending on the cost of the consultancy and the magnitude, we often select from that register which is advertised in the press. But a number of those consultants would have been by selective tender. We would have picked, say, the six top firms for instance in the privacy audit, and so forth.

Senator CALVERT --I have questions on one or two of these. I have them here; I took them out of the annual report and I have not had a chance to research them too well yet. Could you tell me why you would need to spend $3,200 to provide policy advice to the Commission? I would have thought the Commission would have had its own policy and would have been very well aware of what it needed to do without--

Mr Chapman --It depends on the sensitivity of the matter. It may be necessary to get outside advice. It may be a particular issue where there are only outside experts that can provide the information. We certainly have policy staff but they are not experts in every possible aspect that the Commission may come across.

Senator CALVERT --I notice that one of the major items was the privacy advertising campaign, a figure of $100,000-odd. Was there anything peculiar about that that we need to know? For instance, were videos and all those types of things included in that campaign? Was that the one that is indicated in the document in front of us?

Mr Waters --The $100,000 paid to Lintas, the advertising agency, was in respect of press advertising. During the same period last year, from July to September 1991, we also used a medium known as `doctors' television' which is a video playing in doctors' surgeries. From memory, that cost about another $40,000 on top of the $100,000 for the press advertising. Both of those campaigns yielded a very high response in terms of hotline inquiries and requests for publications.

Senator CALVERT --I do not know whether the Minister has received his copy yet, but I received a copy from the Privacy Commissioner yesterday of a volume, about as big as the Hobart telephone book, listing the companies and the people who have information on people in the country at the moment. It is quite frightening. I also noticed that you spent $14,550 for a Barbara Pearson to provide legal advice to the Commission. Why did you not get your advice from the Attorney-General's Department?

Mr Chapman --Sometimes we get advice from the Attorney-General's Department but, as we are an independent authority, we have our own legal section. Barbara Pearson is a person who has provided legal advice on a fee for service basis.

Senator CALVERT --Now that A-G's has gone to a user pays system and is going to spread its wings, you might be able to use the `new' Attorney-General's Department. I notice you spent $71,977 on a media adviser to the Commission. What sort of work does that adviser do?

Mr Chapman --The adviser monitors reports in the media of human rights issues and informs the commissioners about the matters that ought to be brought to their attention. They prepare press releases and advise the commissioners generally on issues relating to the media.

Senator CALVERT --Why could that not be done in-house? Why do you need to have--

Mr Chapman --It is. The person is at the Commission most of the time to provide that service.

Senator CALVERT --So you believe it is cheaper to contract out to someone else rather than have someone working permanently for you?

Mr Chapman --At this stage we think it is, but that is under review, of course.

Senator CALVERT --Can you tell me what the media campaign was for a multicultural project that you spent $40,000 on?

Mr Chapman --That was a project with the Sydney University of Technology to encourage better reporting of multicultural and racial discrimination issues in the media. `Campaign' is probably not the correct word. It was actually a course that was developed and run by the UTS; the course is an ongoing one.

Senator CALVERT --So it was not something that had advertisements on television and all that sort of thing?

Mr Chapman --No, the wording is not quite correct there.

Senator Tate --Madam Chair, we want to provide an answer to a previous question from Senator Vanstone. I think the whole room will be very interested in it.

Mr Skehill --Senator Vanstone asked me whether a Ruth Creswell of Balmain, the literary agent, was related to Chris Creswell, who is the Assistant Secretary, International Trade Law and Intellectual Property in the Department. I have managed to contact Mr Creswell at a meeting of the Copyright Law Review Committee in Sydney. He tells me that he has known one Ruth Creswell, who was his mother and who sadly passed away in 1985. He knows--

Senator VANSTONE --Please, we are not going to weep over that, for heaven's sake--everybody's mother dies sometime. I do not mean that harshly, but it is really irrelevant. If what you want to say is that the answer is no, fair enough.

Mr Skehill --I have some more information. He knows of two Rosemary Creswells. One is a cousin who lives in Melbourne and has no literary interests. Another one he does not know and has not met but has read about. He understands she is a literary agent, but she is no relation.

Senator VANSTONE --That is a relief and I am glad we have got that resolved promptly.