Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document


Previous Fragment    Next Fragment

Notice given 2 September 2003

1834  Senator Evans: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Heritage—

(1) When was it decided to establish the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust.

(2) Who made the decision to establish the Trust.

(3) Why was the Trust established.

(4) (a) Who was on the original board of the Trust; (b) has the membership of the board changed since the Trust was established; and (c) who is now on the board.

(5) On what basis have members of the board been chosen: (a) was there a selection process; (b) who authorised the original appointments and (c) on what basis.

(6) When was it announced that ex-Defence sites around Sydney Harbour would be transferred to the management of the Trust.

(7) Who made this announcement.

(8) Which other parties were consulted about this announcement (for example, the State Government, local councils, State and Commonwealth departments).

(9) What was the nature of this consultation.

(10) Who made the final decision to transfer the lands to the Trust.

(11) Which lands were actually transferred to the Trust, and in relation to each site can a list be provided, including: (a) its size; (b) its previous use; and (c) its proposed use.

(12) In relation to each site; on what dates did the transfers occur.

1835  Senator Evans: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Heritage—With reference to the ex-Defence lands managed by the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust:

(1) Were there any valuations done on any of the sites prior to the transfer from the Department of Defence to the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust.

(2) What was the valuation for each of the sites managed by the Trust.

(3) (a) Who undertook these valuations; and (b) when were they undertaken.

(4) What is the estimated current valuation for each of the sites being managed by the Trust.

(5) (a) Was there any valuation of the cost of the remediation works that were required at each of the ex-Defence sites being managed by the Trust; and (b) what was the amount of these valuations.

(6) For each financial year to date: How much has been spent on remediation and environmental works at each of the ex-Defence sites now managed by the Trust.

(7) When is it expected that all remediation work at the ex-Defence sites will be completed.

(8) What is the process by which the ex-Defence sites will be transferred to the State of New South Wales following completion of remediation works at these sites.

(9) (a) Will the sites then become part of the Sydney Harbour National Park, under the management of the New South Wales Government; and (b) when is it expected that this will occur.

1836  Senator Evans: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Heritage—

(1) How much funding has the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust received from the Commonwealth Government in each financial year since its establishment.

(2) Does this include the initial funding of $96 million that the Trust received as part of the Federation Fund.

(3) Can a breakdown be provided of how this funding has been spent for each financial year since the Trust was established.

(4) Can a breakdown be provided of how the $96 million allocated to the Trust as part of the Federation Fund was spent.

(5) Can a breakdown be provided of every payment greater than $1 million made by the Trust since it establishment.

(6) (a) When is it expected that the work of the Trust will be completed; and (b) will the Trust be closed down once its work is completed.

(7) What are the forecasts for Commonwealth funding to the Trust for the next 4 financial years.

(8) Has the New South Wales Government made any financial contributions to the Trust at any time since its establishment; if so, can a list be proved of these contributions (i.e. date, amount, purpose etc.).

(9) Is it expected that the New South Wales Government will make any financial contributions to the Trust at any time over the next 4 years.

(10) When the remediation work being undertaken at the ex-Defence sites managed by the Trust is fully completed, and the lands are transferred to the State of New South Wales, will the New South Wales Government have to pay any money to the Commonwealth in respect of the transfer; if not, why not.

1837  Senator Evans: To ask the Minister for Defence—With reference to the proposed sale of Defence land at Point Cook in Victoria:

(1) How much land is proposed for sale.

(2) What was this land previously used for.

(3) How is the sale process to be managed.

(4) Who is managing the sale on behalf of the department.

(5) How much are the sale managers being paid, including all advertising costs.

(6) Has the sale itself been advertised; if so, when did this occur and can a copy of the advertisement be provided.

(7) What are the key dates in the sale process.

(8) To date, have any organisations expressed an interest in the site; if so, can the names of these organisations be provided.

(9) Have any organisations expressed an interest in a priority sale of the Point Cook site; if so, can the names of these organisations be provided.

(10) (a) Is it the department’s preference to conduct a priority sale or an open market sale; and (b) on what basis was such a decision made.

(11) Has the site been valued by either the Victorian Valuer-General or the Australian Valuation Office; if so: (a) on what dates did these valuations occur; and (b) what is the estimated value of the site.

(12) Is the department aware of any heritage or environmental significance attached to the site.

(13) Was this taken into account prior to the decision being taken to sell the land; if not, why not.

(14) On what basis was it decided to sell the site.

(15) (a) Who took the decision to sell the site; and (b) when was the decision taken.

(16) Are there any restrictions on the future use of the land in the sale documentation; if not, why not; if so, what is the nature of these restrictions.

(17) Could the land be used for residential and/or commercial development.

(18) Does the department consider that residential and/or commercial development would be an appropriate use of this site.

(19) Did the department have any discussions with either the local council or the State Government prior to the decision being taken to sell the land; if not, why not; if so, what was the nature of these discussions.

(20) Given the environmental and heritage significance of the site, did the department raise the possibility of gifting the land to the local council or the State Government for preservation as parkland; if not, why not.

1838  Senator Evans: To ask the Minister for Defence—With reference to the Defence Security Authority and the security clearance process prior to the department doing business with individuals and organisations:

(1) Are individuals and organisations with which the department does business required to obtain a security clearance.

(2) What is the process for obtaining these clearances, for example, when can the individual or organisation apply, what does it cost, who bears the cost etc.

(3) How long does it take for security clearance applications submitted by individuals or organisations to be processed.

(4) What is current backlog of security clearance applications submitted by individuals or organisations seeking to do business with the department.

(5) (a) Why has this backlog developed; and (b) when is it expected that the backlog will be cleared.

(6) Are there any appeal or dispute resolution procedures for individuals or organisations who do not receive a security clearance which would enable them to do business with the department; if so, can an outline be provided of the nature of any appeal or dispute resolution procedures; if not, why not.

1839  Senator Brown: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs—

(1) Can the Minister confirm that in 2002, Mr Gary Johns of the Institute of Public Affairs had a Fulbright Scholarship to the United States that was partly funded by the Australian Government.

(2) What did Mr Johns study.

(3) Was there a contract between Mr Johns and the department.

(4) What sum of money did Mr Johns receive from the department.

(5) What did the department receive in return for this money.

(6) If there was a written report, can a copy be provided.

1840  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—

(1) Did Dr Peter Ellyard visit the Wide Bay Burnett region of Queensland in August 2002 in connection with the Sustainable Regions Programme.

(2) Was the visit the result of the collaboration of the department and the Wide Bay Burnett Sustainable Region Advisory Committee.

(3) What was the cost to the Commonwealth of Dr Ellyard’s visit to the Wide Bay Burnett region and can this cost be itemised.

(4) (a) What was the purpose of the visit; and (b) can a copy of the itinerary be provided.

(5) Did the visit include a public presentation at the Kondari Resort, Urangan, on 8 August 2002; if so: (a) how was the presentation advertised; and (b) how many citizens of the Wide Bay Burnett region (other than members of the committee) attended.

(6) On what basis was this visit considered a necessary part of the committee’s consideration of funding priorities for the region.

(7) Has Dr Ellyard attended meetings in other regions in connection with the Sustainable Regions Programme; if so: (a) what regions has Dr Ellyard visited at the invitation of the department and/or Sustainable Region Advisory committees; and (b) on what dates were those visits.

1841  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—What sitting fees, travelling allowances and motor vehicle allowances have been paid to each member of the Wide Bay Burnett Sustainable Regions Advisory Committee since its establishment in April 2002.

1842  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to Sustainable Regions Programme funding for the Wide Bay Burnett region of Queensland:

(1) Why is the Yarraman district included in the Wide Bay Burnett region for the purposes of the Sustainable Regions Programme but was not included in the same region for the purposes of the Wide Bay Burnett Structural Adjustment Package.

(2) (a) On what date did the Wide Bay Burnett Sustainable Region Advisory Committee call for expressions of interest from possible candidates for Sustainable Regions Programme funding; and (b) in what form was that call made.

(3) How many expressions of interest were received.

(4) On what date did the committee report registration statistics to the department.

(5) Has the committee: (a) discussed the expressions of interest with each prospective proponent; (b) assessed all expressions of interest against program guidelines; (c) identified eligible projects; (d) worked with prospective proponents of eligible projects on the development of formal funding applications; and (e) made a recommendation to the Minister on funding individual projects; if so, what was the date of the recommendation.

(6) With reference to the 29 November 2002 media statement by the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) titled., ‘Strong Interest in Regional Funding’: (a) on what date was the contents of each expression of interest communicated to the Member; (b) did the committee or the department inform the Member about the contents of each expression of interest; (c) was the Minister or his office consulted about this communication; and (d) was the statement by the Member that projects being considered by the committee ‘all appeared to have potential for moving the region towards self-reliance’ based on advice from the committee or the department.

(7) Has the committee received representations from the Member for Wide Bay on behalf of prospective proponents or the committee.

1843  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to Regional Solutions Programme funding for the 2002-03 financial year for projects that provide assistance to people living in the federal electorate of Wide Bay, for each project:

(1) What is the name of the project.

(2) What is the name of the proponent.

(3) What is the business address of the proponent.

(4) What amount of funding has been allocated to the project.

(5) On what date was the funding allocation announced.

(6) What is the nature of the project.

(7) What amount of funding has the proponent received and on what dates.

1844  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $100 000 to the Tiaro Shire Council in the 2000-01 financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, for an economic development and tourism project:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii) project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position been funded until the time of application;

(i) what particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so, how;

(m) did the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so, how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what community involvement in project committees or working groups existed or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was received;

(t) what other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind contributions; and

(u) what major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what benefits has the project realised;

(b) what involvement does the community have in project committees or working groups;

(c) has the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project received from other sources;

(e) have all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i) what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding or other sources;

(c) has the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report; if so, on what date;

(d) if applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings did it make.

1845  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $20 000 to the Monto Shire Council in the 2000-01 financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, to employ a project development officer:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii) project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position been funded until the time of application;

(i) what particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so, how;

(m) did the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so, how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what community involvement in project committees or working groups existed or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was received;

(t) what other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind contributions; and

(u) what major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what benefits has the project realised;

(b) what involvement does the community have in project committees or working groups;

(c) has the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project received from other sources;

(e) have all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i) what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding or other sources;

(c) has the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report; if so, on what date;

(d) if applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings did it make.

1846  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $90 273 to the Hervey Bay City Musicians Inc. in the 2001-02 financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, for music rehearsal rooms:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii) project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position been funded until the time of application;

(i) what particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so, how;

(m) did the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so, how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what community involvement in project committees or working groups existed or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was received;

(t) what other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind contributions; and

(u) what major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what benefits has the project realised;

(b) what involvement does the community have in project committees or working groups;

(c) has the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project received from other sources;

(e) have all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i) what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding or other sources;

(c) has the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report; if so, on what date;

(d) if applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings did it make.

1847  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $12 200 to the Burnett Inland Economic Development Organisation in the 2001-02 financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, for the implementation of a regional development strategy:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii) project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position been funded until the time of application;

(i) what particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so, how;

(m) did the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so, how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what community involvement in project committees or working groups existed or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was received;

(t) what other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind contributions; and

(u) what major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what benefits has the project realised;

(b) what involvement does the community have in project committees or working groups;

(c) has the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project received from other sources;

(e) have all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i) what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding or other sources;

(c) has the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report; if so, on what date;

(d) if applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings did it make.

1848  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $5 000 to the Hervey Bay Historical Railway Village in the 2001-02 financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, to fund a consultant to assist the village:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii) project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position been funded until the time of application;

(i) what particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so, how;

(m) did the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so, how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what community involvement in project committees or working groups existed or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was received;

(t) what other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind contributions; and

(u) what major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what benefits has the project realised;

(b) what involvement does the community have in project committees or working groups;

(c) has the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project received from other sources;

(e) have all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i) what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding or other sources;

(c) has the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report; if so, on what date;

(d) if applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings did it make.

1849  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $63 635 to the Gin Gin and District Alliance Inc. in the 2001-02 financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, to employ a co-ordinator to conduct training programs:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii) project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position been funded until the time of application;

(i) what particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so, how;

(m) did the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so, how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what community involvement in project committees or working groups existed or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was received;

(t) what other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind contributions; and

(u) what major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what benefits has the project realised;

(b) what involvement does the community have in project committees or working groups;

(c) has the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project received from other sources;

(e) have all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i) what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding or other sources;

(c) has the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report; if so, on what date;

(d) if applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings did it make.

1850  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $116 500 to the Maryborough and Hervey Bay Show Society Limited in the 2001-02 financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, to upgrade showground infrastructure:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii) project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position been funded until the time of application;

(i) what particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so, how;

(m) did the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so, how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what community involvement in project committees or working groups existed or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was received;

(t) what other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind contributions; and

(u) what major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what benefits has the project realised;

(b) what involvement does the community have in project committees or working groups;

(c) has the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project received from other sources;

(e) have all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i) what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding or other sources;

(c) has the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report; if so, on what date;

(d) if applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings did it make.

1851  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $178 000 to the Theodore Sport & Recreation Association Inc. in the 2001-02 financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, to provide sport and recreation facilities:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii) project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position been funded until the time of application;

(i) what particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so, how;

(m) did the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so, how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what community involvement in project committees or working groups existed or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was received;

(t) what other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind contributions; and

(u) what major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what benefits has the project realised;

(b) what involvement does the community have in project committees or working groups;

(c) has the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project received from other sources;

(e) have all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i) what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding or other sources;

(c) has the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report; if so, on what date;

(d) if applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings did it make.

1852  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $100 000 to the Eidsvold Shire Council in the 2001-02 financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, to add value to native hardwood timbers:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii) project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position been funded until the time of application;

(i) what particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so, how;

(m) did the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so, how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what community involvement in project committees or working groups existed or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was received;

(t) what other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind contributions; and

(u) what major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what benefits has the project realised;

(b) what involvement does the community have in project committees or working groups;

(c) has the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project received from other sources;

(e) have all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i) what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding or other sources;

(c) has the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report; if so, on what date;

(d) if applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings did it make.

1853  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $272 727 to the Banana Shire Community Resource Centre Reference Group in the 2001-02 financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, for a community resource centre:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii) project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position been funded until the time of application;

(i) what particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so, how;

(m) did the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so, how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what community involvement in project committees or working groups existed or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was received;

(t) what other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind contributions; and

(u) what major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what benefits has the project realised;

(b) what involvement does the community have in project committees or working groups;

(c) has the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project received from other sources;

(e) have all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i) what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding or other sources;

(c) has the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report; if so, on what date;

(d) if applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings did it make.

1854  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $29 263 to the Monduran Anglers and Stocking Association in the 2001-02 financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, to develop skills in regional youth:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii) project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position been funded until the time of application;

(i) what particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so, how;

(m) did the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so, how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what community involvement in project committees or working groups existed or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was received;

(t) what other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind contributions; and

(u) what major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what benefits has the project realised;

(b) what involvement does the community have in project committees or working groups;

(c) has the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project received from other sources;

(e) have all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i) what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding or other sources;

(c) has the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report; if so, on what date;

(d) if applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings did it make.