Senator LUNDY --Has there been any reduction in funding to the Sports Drug Agency?

Ms Howson --There was a reduction in the appropriation from government for 1996-1997.

Senator LUNDY --By how much?

Ms Howson --The sum of $240,000 was part of the savings proposal and another $100,000 was made up of the running costs, running cost efficiencies, dividend and the COPO requirements. We also had some acquittal of some legal costs which were carried over from the previous two financial years.

Senator LUNDY --So what is your total budget allocation for this year?

Ms Howson --Are you asking for the total amount of the government appropriation?

Senator LUNDY --Yes.

Ms Howson --It is $3.144 million.

Senator LUNDY --So that equals a percentage decrease of about 10.9 or 11 per cent?

Ms Howson --It is just over 10 per cent, yes.

Senator LUNDY --With respect to those cuts, how and in what way are you able to increase the effectiveness of this program, given that you have just suffered a 10 per cent cut?

Ms Howson --We are looking at a number of priorities. The first one is with our testing program. We have the ability to better target our government funded testing program within the sports that we are responsible for. So, clearly, those sports that are able to gain more of an advantage from the use of performance enhancing drugs attract more of our attention.

We can allocate our government funded tests in accordance with what we perceive to be the potential for drug use within those sports, so that gives us some flexibility. The board has also made a decision not to proceed with establishing any more state drug education units, and we have delayed the implementation of some enhancements.

Senator LUNDY --Can you tell me what sort of criteria you apply to assessing whether or not a given sport is considered a high priority, a low priority, susceptible to drug abuse, or whatever?

Ms Howson --We do have a set of criteria that we operate on, which I may not be able to give you a comprehensive list of so I can take that on notice. Just to give you some examples, if those sports are power sports they are going to benefit from the use of performance enhancing drugs. That is one criterion. Whether there are financial incentives involved in that sport and whether the sport is an Olympic sport or not--so the pressure that is perceived to be on athletes in a particular cultural environment that might lead them to use performance enhancing drugs--are the nature of the criteria that we use.

Senator LUNDY --Do you take into account overseas trends or records and results with respect to drug testing in making those assessments that you have described? Do you look overseas for evidence of your priorities?

Ms Howson --We do monitor what is happening within sports in a general way. We rely quite heavily on individual sporting organisations to give us some direction when we are developing our test distribution plan. So although we have complete independence from the sporting organisations, we do consult with them over what they feel are the key issues in terms of doping control in their sport.

Senator LUNDY --As part of that consultative process, what sort of time frame occurs between the sporting organisations and your actually making decisions on how you are going to target your program?

Ms Howson --In the lead-up to each financial year we develop a draft test distribution plan, which is submitted to our board. We begin that process at the end of May and we finalised this year's at our August board meeting.

Senator LUNDY --In that consultation process this year were you aware of the impending reductions in your overall budget? Were they able to be taken into account in those consultations?

Ms Howson --We certainly had a sense that that would be an outcome for us, so it was taken into consideration. As a consequence, there are some very low priority sports which may receive only one or two tests or perhaps no tests whatsoever, but they are sports--for example, women's lawn bowls--where we do not believe there is a need to create a deterrent effect.

Senator LUNDY --Have you had any response or reaction from sporting organisations as a result of the cuts or that reprioritisation of the different sports?

Ms Howson --We have not, no.

Senator LUNDY --There is something written in the PBS performance forecast about a more effective targeting of priority sports and countries relating to the anti-doping program. Could you perhaps take this on notice and provide a comprehensive list of the sports and the allocations?

Ms Howson --That we are prioritising at the international level?

Senator LUNDY --Yes.

Ms Howson --Yes.

Senator LUNDY --In terms of the actual testing that occurs as part of this program, is there any problem or concern with respect to facilities that actually provide that service to you being able to cope with the demands placed on it by the Sports Drug Agency?

Ms Howson --I am sorry, Senator, would you mind restating that question?

Senator LUNDY --Is there any concern about the ability of the organisations that provide the actual drug tests--

Ms Howson --You are talking about the analysis of the tests?

Senator LUNDY --That is right, in providing that service to the levels as required by the Sports Drug Agency?

Ms Howson --It is a service that we constantly monitor through a management consultative committee that we have set up with the Sports Drug Testing Laboratory, and whenever concerns arise we take action through that consultative committee.

Senator LUNDY --So you have had no indication that the current services provided are under pressure in any way?

Ms Howson --I have no indication that the services provided are under pressure.

Senator LUNDY --The reason I ask that question is that I am concerned--

Mr Beale --That is not to say that there might not be individual and isolated occasions on which the services fail to meet the standard required, but I think Ms Howson is saying that in those circumstances we provide the feedback to the laboratory and ask them to lift their game in an appropriate way.

Senator LUNDY --Mr Beale, the reason I asked that question is that I have been led to believe that, for example, the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories have also received through their various portfolio allocations a reduction in funding that might make it difficult for them to provide some services under this program, and that is being explored through the appropriate--

Ms Howson --I think that question is something that should be asked of the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories.

Senator LUNDY --That is right. It is being pursued through that portfolio's programs as well. But I was exploring whether or not you had any evidence of an impact of those problems on your programs yet?

Ms Howson --No evidence of an impact of any reduction in budget.

Senator LUNDY --I trust you will keep the minister informed, Mr Beale, if any such pressures arise, because it really does affect the operation of these programs.

Ms Howson --In effect, we are charged on a user-pays basis per drug, per drug test, by the laboratories, so presumably we are accommodating any resource problems that they have in the fees that they charge us.

Senator LUNDY --One would hope so. On page 63 of the portfolio budget statement, you mention the development of human resource management policies and procedures in line with best practice. Could you elaborate on best practice and what changes to working practices are occurring?

Ms Howson --There are a number of examples I can give you--for example, upgrading of the information technology systems within the organisation to ensure that individuals are preparing their own documentation and there is more effective communication within the agency as a result of that in the electronic transfer of information across the organisation. We are also implementing processes of performance appraisal and performance management with individual staff members. We are negotiating our current enterprise bargaining agreement, which will incorporate productivity outcomes along with enhanced terms and conditions of appointment, et cetera.

Senator LUNDY --And in terms of putting those technology systems in place, has the Office of Government Information Technology and Finance's recent statement restricting purchasing and implementation of new technology had any impact upon those plans?

Ms Howson --Our information technology and communication budget is so small, it has not been taken up in that context.

Senator LUNDY --Lucky! That is all I have.

ACTING CHAIR (Senator Ian Macdonald) --That is all you have in relation to program 4.?

Senator LUNDY --4.3, yes.

ACTING CHAIR --Okay. We will now move on to program 5, `Territories and local government', if the relevant officers could come to the table. We will start with subprogram 1--Executive and coordination.

[2.42 p.m.]