CHAIR —I welcome Mr Bolton and officers of the Joint House Department.

Senator FAULKNER —Mr Bolton, I was very upset when I walked over to this estimates committee—apart from having to come here—to see that the building had apparently sprung a leak, appropriately close to the press gallery. What is that all about?

Mr Bolton —I am not aware of that. Mr Smith might be able to enlighten us.

Mr Smith —I am not aware of that either.

Senator FAULKNER —There were a big fence and a sign up. There were barricades and garbage tins. It reminded me of home when you stick a bucket under a leak.

Mr Smith —I have been informed that it could be a leak in the skylight.

Senator FAULKNER —I am relieved to hear that is all

Mr Bolton —Unusually for Canberra, we had a little bit of rain over the weekend so it probably occurred at that time.

Senator FAULKNER —So Parliament House is not waterproof, Mr Bolton?

Mr Bolton —From time to time it is not.

Senator FAULKNER —I have a quick follow-up on an issue that I raised at the last estimates round about the blinds in the building being replaced, and you responded to a question on notice that I asked about this. As I understand it, the plan is to refurbish all the blinds in the building, apart from the 64 that have already been done. Is that correct?

Mr Bolton —Yes, the plan is to, over time, refurbish all the blinds.

Senator FAULKNER —What is the figure for the number of blinds?

Mr Bolton —There are 2,000 blinds.

Senator FAULKNER —I had 1,736.

Mr Bolton —The note that has been given to me says approximately 2,000 blinds.

Senator FAULKNER —So it is 2,000 blinds. We can take away the 64 that have been done—is that right?—or are there 2,000 left to do?

Mr Bolton —If I can extrapolate a little bit, what we are working on is this: in the last six months there have been 35 requests to undertake maintenance to blinds and the cost of this was of the order of $2,000. We have a further 17 blinds requiring some gearbox replacements. Those will be repaired shortly. This sort of repair costs us from $100 to $150 for each blind. By using that information we have extrapolated that the cost for blind maintenance is of the order of $9,000 per annum. With approximately 2,000 blinds in the building, that works out to be an average of about $4.50 per blind per year. We consider that to be a reasonable cost based on the age of those blinds, which are the original blinds put into this building.

Senator ROBERT RAY —So if I give you $4.50 you will come and fix mine?

Mr Bolton —Not all of them need fixing every year.

Senator FAULKNER —How many need fixing per year?

Mr Smith —In the first half of this year we have done 35 blinds. Extrapolating that over the year, we expect we will have 70 requests for blind repairs.

Senator ROBERT RAY —What is the turnaround time for repair?

Mr Smith —We have had a few that have taken some time because we have had to order new gearboxes, but the majority we can handle within a week.

Senator ROBERT RAY —If it has been 20 weeks that would be unusual?

Mr Smith —Yes, it would be unusual, except if it was a gearbox replacement. We have had to source gearboxes for them.

Senator FAULKNER —That is pretty good isn't it, Mr Smith? According to my calculations, in 30 years the blinds will be fixed.

Mr Bolton —No. What we are now saying is that, in accordance with our plan for what we have to fix and change in this building over its life, we will need a complete refurbishment of all of the blinds in the building over the next five to 10 years because the timber slats on them are now heavily faded and the cords on which they are hanging are also deteriorating. Therefore we will enter into a program over the next couple of years to get them online and gradually replace a certain number of blinds per annum.

Senator FAULKNER —It is a pretty substantial cost, though, isn't it?

Mr Bolton —It will be about $2 million.

Senator FAULKNER —Two million?

Mr Bolton —Yes, to do all those blinds.

Senator ROBERT RAY —I am wondering whether you properly record all complaints about the blinds not working. I do not want to be too self-interested here but it has been at least six months since mine has worked and I reported it. I just wonder how many others are like that.

Mr Smith —All complaints that come through the departmental service officer are recorded on a database.

Senator ROBERT RAY —Can you record another one, just in case the last one got lost?

Mr Bolton —Yes.

Senator ROBERT RAY —But no money has been allocated for this blind refurbishment as opposed to repair, has it?

Mr Smith —No, Senator. We have an agreement with the Department of Finance and Administration which is what we call a five-year program which they allocate money against. We update that on a yearly basis, so we keep it at five years. Within the next couple of years the blinds program will take some of that money.

Senator FAULKNER —Are there any other major refurbishment projects going on in the building at the moment?

Mr Smith —There are a number of programs occurring at the moment. We have the repairs to the timber handrails still occurring in the ministerial area. That is due for completion fairly shortly.

Senator FAULKNER —I noticed damage to a timber handrail on one of my extremely rare visits to the ministerial wing—on invitation only, I quickly add. Had someone been pushed through the handrail, or what?

Mr Smith —The handrails have been weak from day one. We have always had failures of the timber between the long spans. We have now put a metal insert into the timber handrails.

Senator FAULKNER —What is that project costing?

Mr Smith —I would have to get the numbers from my staff. They are looking them up for you now.

Senator FAULKNER —Excellent. Let's bat on: are there any other major projects?

Mr Smith —We currently have some work happening on the first floor on the Senate side of the building where we are modifying an office for an extension of some facilities for DPRS.

Senator FAULKNER —That is the help desk et cetera?

Mr Bolton —There have been some relocations of staff around to accommodate this requirement where the DPRS have taken over, on a contract basis from the Department of Finance and Administration, the management of members' and senators' electorate office computer arrangements.

Senator FAULKNER —That is directly above the office of the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate.

Mr Bolton —It is very close to your office, Senator.

Senator FAULKNER —I know, because of the—

Mr Bolton —Noise.

Senator FAULKNER —Yes.

Senator ROBERT RAY —It is percussive.

Senator FAULKNER —Yes, the noise is percussive. What about handrails?

Mr Smith —We have spent $432,000 this year to date and there is another $108,000 to go, and that is to do handrails in the Senate, the House of Representatives and the ministerial wing.

Senator FAULKNER —They are pretty expensive handrails, aren't they?

Mr Smith —The materials are difficult to work with, because they require timber to be bent into various shapes to make the turns on the handrails, plus we have had to use materials that were part of the original design concept of the building to keep with design integrity. It is a very labour-intensive job.

Senator ROBERT RAY —When will this half-million-dollar process be completed?

Mr Smith —It is due to be completed this financial year.

Senator FAULKNER —There is some $540,000 on handrails and you have the first floor on the Senate side being rejigged. Is anything else going on?

Mr Smith —We have some modifications happening in some attendant stations around the building. That is all I can think of occurring in situ at the moment, but there are others in design and planning stages.

Senator FAULKNER —There is nothing happening in the Prime Minister's office for a change?

Mr Smith —We have done no capital works in the Prime Minister's office this year.

Senator FAULKNER —This committee can take credit for that, Mr Chairman; they are grinding their teeth as we speak. Are the sniffer dogs that you mentioned kennelled in Parliament House?

Mr Bolton —No, they are provided with facilities offsite. I am not exactly sure where but, at one stage, they were using facilities out at RAAF Base Fairbairn. I am not sure whether that is a long-term solution.

Senator ROBERT RAY —They have been there for a long while.

Mr Bolton —That is right. The APS, who provide that facility, also work at the airport as well. The dogs do work in a number of locations, including Parliament House.

Senator FAULKNER —Can you tell the committee what these dogs can detect? I do not want the detail; I just want the broad categories. Is it true that they can detect explosives and explosive derivatives and that sort of thing?

Mr Bolton —Yes.

Senator FAULKNER —I think that announcement was made publicly, wasn't it?

Mr Bolton —Yes.

Senator FAULKNER —What else are they able to detect? Drugs, for example?

Mr Bolton —The dogs that we have that are tied up with the airport are particularly trained in terms of explosives. However, these dogs are part of an Australian Customs program. In fact, Australian Customs have a breeding program for dogs and they actually sell them offshore to other countries. Depending on what they are going to be utilised for and what they are going to be doing, they train them accordingly. There are dogs used for customs and other quarantine purposes, and the ones that are working at Parliament House and at the airport are trained for explosives.

Senator FAULKNER —I am not sure that that actually answers the question. It was very interesting.

Mr Bolton —I am not aware that they can detect drugs because it is not a specification that we gave. Mr Crowe may be able to give you more information.

Mr Crowe —The dogs that we have explosives capability only.

Senator MURRAY —So if we see them with their tails down running like hell, we should go too?

Mr Crowe —It is a good indicator, Senator.

Senator ROBERT RAY —You are pretty good at handling dogs, we know that.

Senator FAULKNER —We limit ourselves to rodents in the Labor Party. Can you indicate whether there is any cost sharing in relation to the sniffer dogs? Who is bearing the cost burden of that?

Mr Bolton —Working through the range of dogs we have, there are a number that the parliament is bearing the cost of via a budgetary appropriation. The cost of training of the staff and the training of the dogs is being borne by the parliament.

Senator ROBERT RAY —Mr President, for the record so there is no misunderstanding, the Appropriations and Staffing Committee encouraged you along this path, didn't they? That committee includes Senator Faulkner and myself in case anyone misinterprets the line of questioning.

The PRESIDENT —I think you are quite right. One of the first things that we decided was to increase the number of physical staff outside the building.

Senator ROBERT RAY —While we are talking about physical staff in the building, is there a differential between the way we staff the ministerial wing for security purposes in terms of training and the way we staff the Senate, the House of Representatives and the front entrance? Is it the APS in one area?

Mr Bolton —Until just recently, the entrances to the ministerial wing were staffed by Australian Protective Service officers. We have just recently, following a request via the Presiding Officers from the security management board to the minister, said that it would be a better use of resources if these more highly trained staff were added to the external APS staff and that we replaced the vetting staff at the doors with parliamentary security officers. The minister has just written back in the last week or so and agreed to that.

Senator ROBERT RAY —So it is now a pretty even distribution.

Mr Bolton —It will go back to that.

Mr Crowe —We will be recruiting the Parliamentary Security Service to fill that position. It will take us until July before we can actually effectively do the changeover, but we have had an agreement to do it.

Senator ROBERT RAY —Excellent.

Senator FAULKNER —Sorry to go back to the question of these dogs again. Can you say to the committee that the parliament is bearing the cost of that exercise, which was the point of my question?

Mr Bolton —Yes, it is.

Senator FAULKNER —That is for all the costs in relation to the dogs?

Mr Bolton —Yes. Australian Protective Services is a full cost-recovery organisation. Therefore, all those costs get passed on to whoever the client is—kennelling of dogs, training of dogs, buying of dogs.

Senator FAULKNER —Kennelling, training, cans of Pal or whatever it might be?

Mr Bolton —Yes.

Senator FAULKNER —The only other thing that I think needs to be said in relation to the issue of these dogs is that these changes at Parliament House are not having an effect on resources at the airport or elsewhere. That is certainly my understanding and you can confirm that.

Mr Bolton —Yes, that is correct.

Senator ROBERT RAY —Between the last estimates hearing and this one we had the `nurses station issue', which you are familiar with. Mr President, I think you indicated (a) that the nurses station would not be closed and (b) that there would be a look at whether it was running efficiently. Is that right?

The PRESIDENT —That is my recollection.

Senator ROBERT RAY —How is that examination going?

Mr Bolton —That has been agreed. The Presiding Officers determined that the nurses centre would remain in Parliament House. The matter was also discussed at a recent meeting of the Joint House Committee. I briefed the Joint House Committee on the issues, and the senators and members on that committee responded to me with their own views. It got tied up with some staffing changes that I had in the organisation, not relating to the nurses but to some of their superior staff—the senior staff there. Via the Joint House Committee, we are just about to enter discussions with some representatives and members of parliament, with some staff in the building and obviously with the nurses themselves to look at the framework under which we operate and decide how it might operate into the future. The decision has been made that it will remain. We are now looking at the best way to make it run.

Senator ROBERT RAY —When do you think you will have a concluded view, Mr President, about any reorganisation or changes that you deem necessary?

The PRESIDENT —My recollection is that we are looking at finding out what is really needed and what is the most efficient way to do it. As soon as we have the answers to that, it will happen. These things take a bit of time.

Senator ROBERT RAY —If there are going to be any changes, would you consult with the Appropriations and Staffing Committee before implementing them?

The PRESIDENT —The discussions will initially be with the Joint House Department. If we get to the stage that there are going to be changes in the way it operates, we will approach the staffing committee.

Senator ROBERT RAY —I think I can leave the line of questioning, in that case.

Senator FAULKNER —Mr President, do you think it is fair to say that the matter was pretty poorly handled last time?

The PRESIDENT —I had discussions with representatives of the whips. I think they had the view of not just members and senators but of other people who work here on the necessity for the nurses station.

Senator FAULKNER —It was a pretty poor process, wasn't it?

The PRESIDENT —You are talking about the way—

Senator ROBERT RAY —The way it was announced, basically. There was not much massaging done before it all got loose around the building. That is what I think Senator Faulkner is implying.

The PRESIDENT —I think that perhaps the nurses centre should have been put in charge of communications, because they seem to communicate pretty well—much quicker than the normal lines of contact around this place.

Senator FAULKNER —Certainly no content filtering service applied.

Senator MURRAY —Mr Bolton, do you have any update on the Parliament House water restrictions program? Is that progressing well? Is it being properly monitored? Are we making savings? What is happening?

Mr Smith —We have done some work in estimating the savings we have had since water restrictions commenced. We have saved around 25 million litres of water in the outside irrigation of the building since water restrictions commenced six months ago.

Senator MURRAY —What is that worth in money?

Mr Smith —It is about a dollar a kilolitre, so it must be about $25,000.

Senator MURRAY —It is only a couple of handrails, really!

Mr Smith —It is a significant saving in water for the Canberra community. We are now on level 2 restrictions, and that means we have turned off most of the irrigation in the outer landscape. We have been in discussion with the local water authority and they are quite happy with our performance to date, but they are also cautious of where the water restrictions are likely to go if there is no rain between now and spring.

Senator FAULKNER —And you said that you have bought those white barricades, Mr Bolton.

Mr Bolton —Yes, I did.

Senator FAULKNER —What did they cost us?

Mr Bolton —There are 325 of them, and they cost $94,737.

Senator ROBERT RAY —They would have a resale value if you decided to put up fences, wouldn't they?

Mr Bolton —Yes.

Senator FAULKNER —You are confident you can on-sell a large number of these.

Mr Bolton —Yes. We bought them clean. If we were to hire them, it was going to be a higher price over 12 months just to hire them. There was one firm which really was not into the retail market—but we might have been able to convince them—and which was a little bit cheaper, but the trouble was that their barriers came with advertising and everything else, and we obviously wanted a clean white barrier—

Senator FAULKNER —You have not put that to the department of finance—the possibility of actually having advertising on the white barricades? I would have thought they would jump at that.

Senator ROBERT RAY —They will be watching—quiet!

Senator FAULKNER —Finally, on that issue, you mentioned a couple of times, Mr Bolton, when we talked about the aesthetics and about the concerns that these things are a bit of an eyesore around Parliament House, that there have been suggestions that they be painted and that sort of thing. Did anyone check out whether that was a good idea and whether in fact it might have a positive effect?

Mr Bolton —Those barriers come in orange or white. We believe that the white is the most appropriate colour at this stage. Because of a hangover from the V8 Canberra days, we understand that there are substantial numbers of big concrete barriers. The Department of Defence is now using some of them for their barriers. I noticed the Department of Defence has been painting theirs a grey colour—maybe Defence grey. We were looking to utilise some of those. However, they are very expensive at this stage for the small numbers that we want, so it is more economical to stay the way we are.

Senator FAULKNER —The point is that, however efficient they might be, they look ugly.

Mr Bolton —Yes, they do.

Senator FAULKNER —I think, broadly, most people understand that. Is there a way of making them a little easier on the eye? That is the question. One logical, or possible, solution would be to chuck a bit of paint on it, I suppose.

Mr Bolton —I think that is an issue which we have deferred until we come up with a longer term solution, because it will incur an extra expense. We would like to see what our longer term solution is. Actually, Mr Crowe has just passed me a note which also says that there is a legal requirement that they be white when they are on the road.

Senator FAULKNER —So they will stay white.

Mr Bolton —When they are being used as a road barrier, there is a legal requirement to have them white.

Senator FAULKNER —So the vast majority of them have to stay white. So that is the end of that issue. While they stay, they are white.

CHAIR —There being no further questions, that completes the examination of the parliamentary departments. I remind you that the committee has set 10 July 2003 as the date for the submission of written answers to questions taken on notice. I thank the President, Mr Bolton and officers for their attendance and assistance this afternoon.