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


Previous Fragment    Next Fragment

Notice given 8 September 2003

1888  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $45 000 for the Capricorn Crayfish Value Adding and Marketing project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Central Queensland Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the Committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

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

1889  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $45 000 for the SILO Information and Reception Centre project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Central Queensland Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the Committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

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

1890  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $25 000 for the Dawson Valley Hardwood Plantation project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Central Queensland Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the Committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

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

1891  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $45 000 for the Trial Herb Processing Plant project in round three of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Central Queensland Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the Committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

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

1892  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $49 500 for the Biloela Economic Development Strategy project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2001-2002 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Central Queensland Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the Committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

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

1893  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $43 460 for the Cooloola Region Tourism Co-ordination project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Fairfax (Mr Somlyay) or the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

(6) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent, the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee and the Member for Wide Bay and/or Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

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

1894  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $30 193 for the Maryborough CBD Revitalisation project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

(6) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent, the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee and the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

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

1895  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $25 000 for the Cooloola Region Hardwood Value Adding Strategy project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) and/or the Member for Fairfax (Mr Somlyay) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Consultative Committee.

(6) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent, the committee and the Member for Wide Bay and/or the Member for Fairfax about the funding approval.

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1896  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $23 080 for the South Burnett Wine Industry Development project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

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

1897  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $350 000 for the Promoting International and National Visitation to the Bundaberg Region project in round two of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) and/or the Member for Hinkler (Mr Neville) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Area Consultative Committee.

(6) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent, the committee and the Member for Wide Bay and/or the Member for Hinkler about the funding approval.

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1898  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $25 000 for the Mary Valley Heritage Railway Development Strategy project in round two of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) and/or the Member for Fairfax (Mr Somlyay) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

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

1899  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $30 000 for the Australian Fishing Museum project in round two of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

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

1900  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $25 000 for the Bundeberg CBD revitalisation project in round two of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) and/or the Member for Hinkler (Mr Neville) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

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

1901  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $20 000 for the Eidsvold-Our Future project in round two of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1902  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $63 250 for the Marketing Wide Bay Arts and Crafts project in round three of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1903  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $22 000 for the Murgon/Wondai/Kilkivan Economic Development project in round four of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1904  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $74 250 for the Whistle Stop General Manager project in round four of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1905  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $8 800 for the Childers Passport project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) and/or the Member for Hinkler (Mr Neville) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1906  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $199 700 for the Capricorn Crayfish Value Adding and Marketing project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2000-2001 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1907  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $38 500 for the Tarong and Beyond E-commerce project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 1999-2000 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) and/or the Member for Blair (Mr Thompson) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

(6) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent, the committee and the Member for Wide Bay and/or the Member for Blair about the funding approval.

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1908  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $33 000 for the Industry Cluster Tourism project in round two of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2000-2001 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1909  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $44 000 for the Taming the Wild Scotchman project in round two of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2000-2001 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1910  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $33 000 for the Hardwood Sawdust Pilot Plant project in round three of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2000-2001 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1911  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $55 000 for the Gympie Animal Shelter project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2001-2002 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Fairfax (Mr Somlyay) or the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) a on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

(6) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent, the committee and the Member for Fairfax and/or the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1912  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $40 700 for the Addressing the Opportunities of Cooloola’s Ageing Population project in round three of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2001-2002 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Fairfax (Mr Somlyay) or the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

(6) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent, the committee and the Member for Fairfax and/or Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1913  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $44 000 for the Harvey Bay Industry Cluster project in round three of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2001-2002 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1914  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $110 000 for the Maryborough Urban Renewal project in round three of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2001-2002 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1915  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $138 104 for the Mary Valley Heritage Railway Corridor Maintenance Business Enhancement project in round three of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2001-2002 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) and/or the Member for Fairfax (Mr Somlyay) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

(6) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent, the committee and the Member for Wide Bay and/or Member for Fairfax about the funding approval.

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1916  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $13 282 for the Nanango Lee Park Assessment and Management Plan project in round three of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2001-2002 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) and/or the Member for Blair (Mr Thompson) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

(6) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent, the committee and the Member for Wide Bay and/or Member for Blair about the funding approval.

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

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

1917  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $17 246 for the Gympie Landcare Revegetation Nursery Development project in round four of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2001-2002 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Fairfax (Mr Somlyay) or the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

(6) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent, the committee and the Member for Fairfax and/or Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1918  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $32 613 for the Country Music Industry Development project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2002-2003 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1919  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $275 000 for the Lake Monduran Development of Recreational Facilities project in round four of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2001-2002 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1920  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $65 714 for the Implementation of the South Burnett Regional Tourism Development Strategy project in round one of the Regional Assistance Programme in the 2002-2003 financial year:

(1) (a) What total 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 paid in instalments, what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) (a) What is the name of the proponent; and (b) if the proponent is an organisation or company, does it operate on a commercial or not-for-profit basis.

(3) What is the proponent’s business address.

(4) Can a description of the project be provided.

(5) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent and/or the Wide Bay Burnett Area Consultative Committee.

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

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

(8) What was the quantum of the grant announced by the department or the Minister.

(9) 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 programme guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) what total funding was sought, including, if applicable, the goods and services tax (GST) free amount, the GST-inclusive amount and the specific GST amount;

(e) what preferred project start date was nominated by the proponent;

(f) what preferred project completion date was nominated by the proponent;

(g) what was the project rationale, including identification of need for the project and demonstrated connection to the committee’s strategic regional plan;

(h) what community consultation did the proponent undertake prior to submitting the application;

(i) what previous studies or projects did the proponent nominate as relevant to the project;

(j) what project objectives and outcomes did the proponent nominate including employment outcomes and ongoing regional benefit;

(k) with reference to employment outcomes, how many direct and indirect full time equivalent positions did the proponent claim would be generated;

(l) what additional sources of funding did the proponent nominate would be required to sustain the project at the end of the funding period;

(m) did a project plan accompany the application form nominating project milestones; if so, what major milestones were nominated by the proponent;

(n) (i) what project linkages were nominated by the proponent, including federal agencies, state agencies, local government, community organisations and the private sector, and (ii) what was the nature of the links;

(o) (i) what project management structure was proposed by the proponent, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was proposed, and (iii) if applicable, what was the proposed membership, role and terms of reference for the steering committee;

(p) what progress report timing and format did the proponent propose;

(q) what monitoring and evaluation process did the proponent propose;

(r) what assistance did the proponent advise would be received from other sources (identified by source and type of assistance);

(s) did the proponent disclose receipt of other government funding in the 3 years before the application was lodged; if so, what funding had the proponent received;

(t) did the proponent propose the purchase of assets with the programme funds;

(u) did the proponent hold workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance when the application was lodged;

(v) was the proponent a Job Network member or involved with a New Apprenticeship Centre or Work for the Dole at the time the application was lodged;

(w) was the project endorsed for funding by the committee;

(x) was the proponent and/or the committee asked to provide advice on the primary and secondary electorates in which the project activity would be based; if so, why was this question asked and what answer was provided; and

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

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

(a) when did the project start;

(b) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(c) what economic or regional benefit has the project provided;

(d) (i) were progress payments negotiated on the basis of project activity; if so, has the proponent failed to meet any agreed project milestones, and (ii) have any progress payments been delayed or withheld due to the failure to meet agreed project milestones;

(e) were all nominated project linkages, i.e. with government agencies and the private sector, realised; if not, which linkages were not realised;

(f) (i) what project management structure was established, (ii) what selection process for the project manager was adopted; and (iii) was a steering committee established;

(g) (i) what progress report timing and format was adopted, and (ii) have reporting requirements been met;

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

(i) has the project received assistance from other sources during the programme funding period; if so, can this assistance be identified by source and type;

(j) has the proponent purchased assets with the programme funds; if so, did the proponent receive written permission prior to the purchase;

(k) has the proponent maintained workers compensation, public liability, professional indemnity and voluntary worker accident insurance during the funding period;

(11) 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 lodged a final report; if so, on what date;

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

(e) how many direct and indirect full-time equivalent positions have been generated by the project;

(f) have any assets purchased with programme funds remained the property of the Commonwealth; and

(g) 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.

1921  Senator Murray: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs—With reference to the Government’s policy in relation to the Mugabe Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) Government, can the Minister advise if there are any students attending Australian universities who are related to current ZANU-PF members of the Government or parliamentarians in Zimbabwe.

1922  Senator Murray: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—

(1) Does the department know how Australia’s national air carriers’ seating comfort, i.e. width of seat and legroom, compares with airlines elsewhere in the world for similar types of aircraft.

(2) Does the Minister recognise that Qantas, seating comfort in economy is extremely poor, and possibly unhealthy, particularly on long flights.

(3) Does the Minister intend to regulate to require much better economy class seating comfort; if not, why not.

1923  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Regional Services, Territories and Local Government—With reference to the Rural Transaction Centre program:

(1) When was the independent Rural Transaction Centre Advisory Committee (RTAC) established.

(2) Who was appointed to the RTAC.

(3) (a) How were RTAC members selected; and (b) who made the final decision as to their appointment.

(4) (a) Who is the chair of the RTAC; (b) how was the chair selected; and (c) who made the final decision as to the chair’s appointment.

(5) At the time of the announcement of the original RTAC: (a) what were the terms and conditions under which RTAC members were engaged; (b) for each member, what payments were made including base salary or retainer fees, sitting fees, travel costs, accommodation and other payments; and (c) for each member: (i) what was the tenure of their contracts, and (ii) who determined these contract terms and conditions.

(6) In relation to the period of service of each member: (a) how many meetings have been held; and (b) how many and which meetings has each member attended.

(7) Are RTAC members required to disclose to the Minister any financial interests they or their immediate families may hold.

(8) Can the Minister confirm that no members of the RTAC have, at any time, held a financial interest in GRM International Pty Ltd or its associated companies.

(9) Since its establishment, have there been changes in the make-up of the RTAC; if so: (a) who has left the RTAC; (b) for what reason or reasons did they leave; (c) when did they leave; (d) who replaced them; (e) when were they replaced; (f) how was their replacement selected; and (g) who made the final decision regarding the replacement’s appointment.

(10) How often and where has the RTAC met since its establishment.

(11) What records exist of these meetings.

(12) Who provides secretarial support to the RTAC.

(13) What has been the cost of the RTAC, by year, since the announcement of the program, including the costs of secretariat support and all other administrative costs.

1924  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Regional Services, Territories and Local Government—With reference to the Rural Transaction Centre program:

(1) (a) How are applications for preparation of business plans to enable identification of services required by the applicant communities evaluated; and (b) who makes the final decision.

(2) (a) How are applications for the establishment and operation of Rural Transaction Centres evaluated; and (b) who makes the final decision.

(3) Have these processes altered since the program was first announced; if so, how.

(4) (a) What benchmarks are used, and methods of ongoing evaluation employed, in monitoring and reporting on the performance of established Rural Transaction Centres; and (b) are these reports made available to the Minister; if so, how often.

(5) Can a copy of the funding guidelines used by the Rural Transaction Centre Advisory Committee to assess applications be provided; if not, why not.

1925  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Regional Services, Territories and Local Government—With reference to Media Release M250/2000 of 18 December 2000:

(1) (a) What process was used to select and appoint GRM International Pty Limited (GRM International); and (b) who made the final decision.

(2) Which other organisations expressed an interest in undertaking this work.

(3) What was the total forecast expenditure by year under the contract.

(5) How many full-time equivalent officers was GRM International to supply.

(6) Did the contract specify where these officers were to be located.

(7) (a) What, if any, changes have been made to the original terms of the contract; (b) why have these changes been made; and (c) who approved these changes.

(8) What has been the actual expenditure, by year, in relation to the contract.

(9) How many full-time equivalent officers has GRM International supplied for each year since the contract was awarded.

(10) (a) Where is each officer supplied by GRM International located; and (b) in which federal electorates are they located.

1926  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the Rural Transaction Centre program:

(1) When was the independent Rural Transaction Centre Advisory Committee (RTAC) established.

(2) Who was appointed to the RTAC.

(3) (a) How were RTAC members selected; and (b) who made the final decision as to their appointment.

(4) (a) Who is the chair of the RTAC; (b) how was the chair selected; and (c) who made the final decision as to the chair’s appointment.

(5) At the time of the announcement of the original RTAC: (a) what were the terms and conditions under which RTAC members were engaged; (b) for each member, what payments were made including base salary or retainer fees, sitting fees, travel costs, accommodation and other payments; and (c) for each member: (i) what was the tenure of their contracts, and (ii) who determined these contract terms and conditions.

(6) In relation to the period of service of each member: (a) how many meetings have been held; and (b) how many and which meetings has each member attended.

(7) Are RTAC members required to disclose to the Minister any financial interests they or their immediate families may hold.

(8) Can the Minister confirm that no members of the RTAC have, at any time, held a financial interest in GRM International Pty Ltd or its associated companies.

(9) Since its establishment, have there been changes in the make-up of the RTAC; if so: (a) who has left the RTAC; (b) for what reason or reasons did they leave; (c) when did they leave; (d) who replaced them; (e) when were they replaced; (f) how was their replacement selected; and (g) who made the final decision regarding the replacement’s appointment.

(10) How often and where has the RTAC met since its establishment.

(11) What records exist of these meetings.

(12) Who provides secretarial support to the RTAC.

(13) What has been the cost of the RTAC, by year, since the announcement of the program, including the costs of secretariat support and all other administrative costs.

1927  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the Rural Transaction Centre program:

(1) (a) How are applications for preparation of business plans to enable identification of services required by the applicant communities evaluated; and (b) who makes the final decision.

(2) (a) How are applications for the establishment and operation of Rural Transaction Centres evaluated; and (b) who makes the final decision.

(3) Have these processes altered since the program was first announced; if so, how.

(4) (a) What benchmarks are used, and methods of ongoing evaluation employed, in monitoring and reporting on the performance of established Rural Transaction Centres; and (b) are these reports made available to the Minister; if so, how often.

(5) Can a copy of the funding guidelines used by the Rural Transaction Centre Advisory Committee to assess applications be provided; if not, why not.

1928  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to Media Release M250/2000 of 18 December 2000, can the Minister advise:

(1) (a) What process was used to select and appoint GRM International Pty Limited (GRM International); and (b) who made the final decision.

(2) Which other organisations expressed an interest in undertaking this work.

(3) What was the original tenure of the contract with GRM International.

(4) What was the forecast expenditure, by year, under the contract with GRM International.

(5) How many full-time equivalent officers was GRM International to supply under the contract.

(6) Did the contract specify where these officers were to be located.

(7) (a) What, if any, changes have been made to the original terms of the contract with GRM International; (b) why have these changes been made; and (c) who approved these changes.

(8) What has been the expenditure, by year, under the contract with GRM International.

(9) How many full-time equivalent officers has GRM International supplied for each year since the contract was awarded.

(10) (a) Where is each officer supplied by GRM International based; and (b) in which federal electorates are they located.

1929  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—

(1) When was the Rural Transaction Centre program announced.

(2) What was the intended outcome of the program at the time of the original announcement.

(3) (a) What was the program’s forecast duration; and (b) has the forecast been altered; if so, in what way and why.

(4) What was the initial funding allocation to the program for each year of the program’s original intended duration.

(5) Of the original funding allocation, what quantum was allocated for: (a) the preparation of business plans to enable identification of services required by the applicant communities; and (b) the establishment and operation of Rural Transaction Centres.

(6) What has been the actual quantum of funding expended for each year of the program for: (a) the preparation of business plans to enable identification of services required by the applicant communities; and (b) the establishment and operation of Rural Transaction Centres.

(7) At the time the program was announced, what was the forecast number of applications expected, by year, for: (a) the preparation of business plans to enable identification of services required by the applicant communities; and (b) the establishment and operation of Rural Transaction Centres.

(8) How many applications have been received, by year, for: (a) the preparation of business plans to enable identification of services required by the applicant communities; and (b) the establishment and operation of Rural Transaction Centres.

(9) How many Rural Transaction Centres have been established for each year since the program’s inception.

(10) What is the location of each established Rural Transaction Centre, and in which federal electorate are they located.

(11) (a) How many applications, for the preparation of business plans to enable identification of services required by the applicant communities, are pending; and (b) from which town or community groups have these applications been received and in which federal electorates are they located.

(12) How many applications for the establishment and operation of Rural Transaction Centres are pending and, if successful, in which towns and federal electorates will they be located.

1930  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Regional Services, Territories and Local Government—

(1) When was the Rural Transaction Centre program announced.

(2) What was the intended outcome of the program at the time of the original announcement.

(3) (a) What was the program’s forecast duration; and (b) has the forecast been altered; if so, in what way and why.

(4) What was the initial funding allocation to the program for each year of the program’s original intended duration.

(5) Of the original funding allocation, what quantum was allocated for: (a) the preparation of business plans to enable identification of services required by the applicant communities; and (b) the establishment and operation of Rural Transaction Centres.

(6) What has been the actual quantum of funding expended for each year of the program for: (a) the preparation of business plans to enable identification of services required by the applicant communities; and (b) the establishment and operation of Rural Transaction Centres.

(7) At the time the program was announced, what was the forecast number of applications expected, by year, for: (a) the preparation of business plans to enable identification of services required by the applicant communities; and (b) the establishment and operation of Rural Transaction Centres.

(8) How many applications have been received, by year, for: (a) the preparation of business plans to enable identification of services required by the applicant communities; and (b) the establishment and operation of Rural Transaction Centres.

(9) How many Rural Transaction Centres have been established for each year since the program’s inception.

(10) What is the location of each established Rural Transaction Centre, and in which federal electorate are they located.

(11) (a) How many applications, for the preparation of business plans to enable identification of services required by the applicant communities, are pending; and (b) from which town or community groups have these applications been received and in which federal electorates are they located.

(12) How many applications for the establishment and operation of Rural Transaction Centres are pending and, if successful, in which towns and federal electorates will they be located.

1931  Senator Allison: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Education, Science and Training—

(1) For the calendar year 2003 to date: (a) how many staff have been made redundant at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO); and (b) for each staff member made redundant: (i) what Division did they work for, (ii) what was their position within the organisation, (iii) was the nature of their redundancy voluntary or involuntary, (iv) what was the duration of their employment with CSIRO, and (v) what was the last project they worked on.

(2) For the remainder of 2003: (a) how many staff will be made redundant at the CSIRO; and (b) for each staff member: (i) what Division do they work for, (ii) what is their position within the organisation, (iii) was the nature of their redundancy voluntary or involuntary, (iv) what is the duration of their employment with CSIRO, and (v) what will be their last project.

(3) For the calendar year 2002: (a) how many staff were made redundant at the CSIRO; and (b) for each staff member: (i) what Division did they work for, (ii) what was their position within the organisation, (iii) was the nature of their redundancy voluntary or involuntary, (iv) what was the duration of their employment with CSIRO, and (v) what was the last project they worked on.

(4) What consultation on the matter of redundancies has been undertaken with affected staff, relevant unions and the CSIRO Staff Association during 2003.

(5) (a) At what level were these staffing cut decisions made; and (b) was the Minister involved.

(6) What are the costs of redundancy packages for 2003, actual and planned.

(7) What is the rationale for these redundancies.

1932  Senator Allison: To ask the Minister for Health and Ageing—Does the Government acknowledge that: (a) in 2001 the Australian Bureau of Statistics split the Lismore Statistical Local Area into two statistical local areas known as Part A and Part B; and (b) that the urban centre of Lismore was included in Part A and that the populations of Nimbin, Modanville, Dunoon and Clunes townships were then included in Part B which, by definition, no longer has an urban population centre of more than 10 000; if so, why is it that the Lismore Statistical Local Area Part B has not been given Rural Remote and Metropolitan Area Classification 5 status.

1933  Senator Allison: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Heritage—

(1) What representation, if any, has the Government made to the proponents of Basslink and to the Victorian and Tasmanian State Governments on the recommendation of the Joint Advisory Committee (JAC) that an environment review committee be established to monitor developments.

(2) Why did the Government not make the establishment of such a committee a requirement of its approval of the project.

(3) Has the Government been advised by proponents of Basslink that a metallic return cable is now to be used in order to reduce the magnetic field; if so, has the Government called for the Integrated Impact Assessment Statement to be amended and resubmitted; (a) if not, why not; and (b) has the Government called for a report on the detail of this new technology.

(4) What effects will the new technology have on marine organisms including breeding, migration and feeding habits.

(5) What does the Government understand to be the impact of this technology on shark behaviour in the area.

(6) Have the proponents of Basslink provided details as to how the cables are to be kept in close proximity in order to reduce the magnetic field; if so, can these details be provided.

(7) Is it the case that cables will now be installed in separate ducts or trenched through the dune system; if so, what assessment has been made of the impact on dunes.

(8) What assessment has been made of the means by which cables will be protected and kept together over the very dynamic marine environment, where sand shifts of 4 metres in depth can occur overnight and large rocks are moved about on the sea bed over a distance of up to 5 kilometres.

(9) Given that, according to Basslink, polypropylene rope proposed to be used to bundle cables during the laying operation will not last the life of the project, what assessment has been made of the life of this rope.

(10) (a) How many kilometres of the rope will be used; and (b) what effect will it have on fauna, boat propellers and marine life when the rope unravels and drifts away.

(11) When the rope unravels, how will the cables be kept together.

(12) What are the effects on Ramsar sites of changes to the coastal processes caused by the proposed rock berm designed to protect cables underwater.

(13) Is it the case that the Tasmanian Government has applied for a fishing exclusion zone around Basslink; if so, what is the impact of such a zone on the fishing industry.

(14) Given the advice from Basslink that coaxial cables and underground cables rather than pylon transmission would increase the cost beyond $500 million and make the project unviable, what does the Government understand to be the viability of the project now that it is estimated to cost $780 million.

(15) What information does the Government have about how this additional cost will be funded.

(16) Is it the case that the Tasmanian Government is underwriting the profits of National Grid International’s subsidiary, Basslink Pty Ltd.

(17) Will the proponents of Basslink be required to establish a bond or financial guarantee that would fund the removal of infrastructure and rehabilitation, where necessary, in the event that the project proves to be unviable or the proponent becomes insolvent.

(18) What does the Government now understand to be the greenhouse implications of the project, including transmission losses but excluding the proposed but, according to the draft JAC report, unviable Tasmanian windfarms.

1934  Senator Carr: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Education, Science and Training—

(1) Can a list be provided of all projects commissioned under the department’s Evaluation and Investigation Program (EIP) since 1 July 2000.

(2) In relation to each project mentioned in paragraph (1), can the following information be provided in tabular form: (a) the title of the project; (b) who commissioned the project; (c) who undertook the study and research for the project; (d) the stated purpose of the project; (e) the value of the project; (f) the date of acquittal of payment for each project; (g) the date the report for the project was provided to the department; (h) the date the report was published; (i) details of whether the report was published electronically or in hard copy; (j) confirmation that all such reports have been provided to the Employment, Workplace Relations and Education Legislation Committee, together with the date of provision; (k) if reports were not published, why; and (l) if reports were not provided to the Committee, why not.

1935  Senator Bishop: To ask the Minister for Defence—

(1) How many instances were there in each of the past 3 years of explosives being stolen from Defence establishments.

(2) In how many instances in the same years were there incomplete reconciliations of stock holdings.

(3) In each case, what was stolen and in what quantity.

(4) (a) What regular process exists for the routine reconciliation of explosive supplies; and (b) what is the reporting and coordination process.

(5) What quantities of explosives, by type, were purchased in each of the past 2 financial years.

(6) In how many locations around Australia are explosives stored.

(7) What accountability for stocks of explosives exists to security agencies at both federal and state levels.

1936  Senator Bishop: To ask the Minister representing the Prime Minister—

(1) How many cases of stolen explosives were reported to the Australian Federal Police and state police forces in each of the past 3 years.

(2) What coordination mechanism exists at the federal level for the exchange of information on explosive imports, local manufacture, sale and distribution of all explosive material.

(3) What investigations are conducted into reports of missing or stolen explosives in Australia.

(4) What quantity of explosive material was manufactured within Australia in each of the past 3 years.

(5) How much explosive material, by type, was imported.

(6) How much explosive material, by type: (a) was exported; and (b) to which destination ,by quantity.