- Parliamentary Business
- Senators and Members
- News & Events
- About Parliament
- Visit Parliament
Table Of ContentsDownload PDF
Previous Fragment Next Fragment
HOUSE NOTICE PAPER
No. 34 — 10 May 2011
- Start of RNP34
- GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
- Committee and delegation reports
- BUSINESS OF THE MAIN COMMITTEE
- QUESTIONS IN WRITING
- REPORTS OF HOUSE AND JOINT COMMITTEES AWAITING GOVERNMENT RESPONSE
- OCCUPANTS OF THE CHAIR
- No. 34 — 10 May 2011
21 March 2011
280 MR L. D. T. FERGUSON: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs—In the calendar years 2009, 2010 and 2011 (to date), within our Foreign Aid Budget, how many tertiary scholarships were awarded to (a) Indonesian citizens, (b) Indonesian public servants, and (c) people residing in Java.
281 MS J. I. BISHOP: To ask the Minister for Justice—
(1) When he decided on 12 November 2009 to approve the extradition of Australian citizen Mr Charles Zentai to the Republic of Hungary, was he aware of the following information that had been provided to his department and office, that the: (a) Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (CDPP) had advised the Australian Federal Police (AFP) that there was no evidence to support a charge against Mr Zentai of a war crime (or any other crime); (b) CDPP and the AFP had decided not to prosecute Mr Zentai for the alleged war crime, although if there had have been sufficient evidence to support a charge, it would have been open to the Australian authorities to charge Mr Zentai and have him tried in Australia, rather than extradite him; and (c) Republic of Hungary only wanted Mr Zentai to be extradited for questioning, as no charge has been laid against him.
(2) If so, did he consider this information before approving Mr Zentai’s extradition to Hungary, and what were his reasons for making this determination.
(3) If not, was he made aware of this information after the Hon. Justice Neil McKerracher set aside, in December 2010, the Minister’s determination to extradite Mr Zentai to Hungary, and why did the Minister then authorise an appeal against Justice McKerracher’s decision.
282 MS J. I. BISHOP: To ask the Minister for Justice—Has he ever suggested to the Hungarian authorities that they conduct their questioning of Mr Charles Zentai in Australia; if so, what was their response; if not, why not, particularly given the (a) age and health of Mr Zentai, (b) fact that the Hungarian authorities have said they only want Mr Zentai for questioning; and (c) Mr Zentai has stated that he is prepared to co-operate with investigators and answer questions under oath.
283 MS J. I. BISHOP: To ask the Minister for Justice—What total cost has the Government incurred to date (including departmental personnel time and cost) in seeking to extradite Mr Charles Zentai to the Republic of Hungary, and what total estimated cost will be incurred in appealing the decision of the Hon. Justice Neil McKerracher.
284 MR BALDWIN: To ask the Minister for Home Affairs—In respect of the Passenger Movement Charge: (a) what total sum of money is forecast to be collected in (i) 2010-11, (ii) 2011-12, (iii) 2012-13, and (iv) 2013-14; (b) what proportion of money collected is returned to consolidated revenue, and (c) of the proportion of money collected that is not returned to consolidated revenue, on what programs will it be expended in (i) 2010-11, (ii) 2011-12, (iii) 2012-13, and (iv) 2013-14, and for each program, what sum of money will be expended each year.
285 DR JENSEN: To ask the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency—Using the first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scenario (A1F1—business as usual), with the exception of Australia being the only country to act on emissions (resulting in a 50 per cent reduction in CO 2 by 2050 which is sustained to 2100), (a) how much lower are global average temperatures estimated to be by 2100 than if Australia had not acted, and (b) what is this abatement expected to cost Australia annually.
286 DR JENSEN: To ask the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency—Assuming that (a) the entire globe takes action on reducing CO 2 emissions and as a result such emissions are halved by 2050, and (b) this level of emissions is sustained beyond 2050: (i) how many degrees lower is the expected global average temperature expected to be than if Australia alone had not acted; and (ii) what is this abatement expected to cost Australia annually.
287 MR FLETCHER: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy—
(1) How many kilometres of fibre access network does Telstra presently own.
(2) Under the proposed Telstra-NBN Co. Limited agreement, how much of the existing fibre access network will be (a) retained and operated by Telstra, (b) transferred to NBN Co. Limited’s ownership and control, and (c) destroyed.
288 MR FLETCHER: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy—In respect of the new proposed arrangements for the Universal Service Obligation (USO), (a) what sum of money will customers be charged for a voice telephone service, and (b) will the amount of money charged for a voice telephone service be the same in those parts of the country where the USO is to be provided over the (i) existing Telstra copper network (that is, rural and remote areas), and (ii) new fibre to the home network.
289 MR FLETCHER: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy—In respect of NBN Co. Limited’s business case, what assumptions has the company made about the (a) proportion of homes which are rented as opposed to owned, and (b) likely connection rate of the National Broadband Network in (i) rental homes, and (ii) owner-occupied homes.
290 MR FLETCHER: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy—In respect of potential street cabinets and fibre splitters to be constructed by NBN Co. Limited as part of its network roll out, (a) will the architecture of the National Broadband Network require external street cabinets to be installed to house fibre splitters, (b) what is the typical number of households to be served from an individual fibre splitter, and (c) how many street cabinets containing fibre splitters will be required to be installed around Australia.
291 MR FLETCHER: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy—In respect of the statement by Mr Mike Quigley, Chief Executive Officer, NBN Co. Limited, that NBN Co. Limited has an arrangement with Telstra for it to provide voice only services to end users for $24 (Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, Additional Estimates , 22 February 2011, page 131), (a) will this arrangement apply only to customers who as at the time of transfer from Telstra’s copper network to the National Broadband Network, were Telstra voice only customers, (b) what arrangements will exist for customers who wish to take a new voice only service from Telstra because, for example, they have moved house or were previously customers of another telecommunications provider, (c) given that this retail price of $24 will involve Telstra incurring a loss, will Telstra receive payment from NBN Co. Limited (or another party such as government) for all such customers, and (d) will these arrangements reduce competition in the voice only market, as other retail operators will be unable to match Telstra’s retail price without incurring a loss.
292 MR FLETCHER: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy—In respect of the new arrangements that are proposed for the Universal Service Obligation, (a) is it a fact that customers outside the 93 rd percentile will continue to receive the ‘standard telephone service’ (their entitlement under the universal service arrangement) over Telstra’s copper network; if so, does this mean that the Telstra copper network will continue to operate in many rural and remote areas of the country (the ‘residual rural network’), (b) given that today the rural and remote part of the network is cross-subsidised by the metropolitan network, what are the implications of removing this cross subsidy for the cost of operating the residual rural network, and (c) how will the (i) per customer cost of the residual rural network compare with that of today’s national copper network, and (ii) cost of operation of the residual rural network be met.
293 MR FLETCHER: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy—
(1) When was the decision made by the Government, announced on 7 April 2009, to replace its fibre to the node policy with a fibre to the home policy.
(2) In arriving at the decision in part (1), what advice (a) did the Government receive on the applications which could not be delivered over a 12 Mbps network but could be delivered over a 100 Mbps network, (b) was sought and received from people with experience in the sales and marketing of telecommunications and broadband services, and (c) did the Government receive on the revenues which could be captured from the delivery of any applications which could not be captured from applications delivered over a 12 Mbps network; and what were those applications, what would customers pay for them, and how many customers would take them up.
(3) Prior to the Government making the decision in part (1), what specific commitments were obtained from the Commonwealth’s various departments and agencies to deliver additional services and applications for the 100 Mbps network (as distinct from those previously planned for delivering the 12 Mbps fibre to the node network).
294 MR FLETCHER: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy—In respect of the decision made by the Government, announced on 7 April 2009, to replace its fibre to the node policy with a fibre to the home policy, when it was claimed that the Government ‘acted on the advice of an expert panel, containing within it the Secretary of the Treasury, expert advice also from the ACCC about this thing being the right way to go’, is it a fact that on 18 May 2009 a member of the expert panel, Prof Rod Tucker, said ‘I just want to make one thing clear: the panel of experts was never asked to and didn’t make any judgement call on the issue of investment for a fibre to the home network.’; if so, is Prof Tucker’s statement accurate; if so what advice did the Government base its decision upon.
295 MR FLETCHER: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Tertiary Education and Skills—How many schools in NSW received Commonwealth funding under the Building the Eduction Revolution program, and in these schools, how many classrooms were built, and how many of these classrooms are air-conditioned.