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

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment

Notice given 20 October 2005

1331  Senator Siewert: To ask the Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation—With reference to the $12.5 million Forestry Assistance Program for Western Australia and the $2.5 million Grants for Forest Communities program, announced by the Minister on 26 July 2004, can the following information be provided: (a) a complete list of grant recipients; (b) the amount provided to each recipient; (c) when each grant was provided; (d) the purpose for which the grant was provided; (e) any conditions attached to the grant; and (f) a report on monitoring of compliance with the conditions.

1332  Senator Bishop: To ask the Minister for Defence—

(1) Which consultancy firm was selected by the department to act as quantity surveyor or head contractor for the Defence Science and Technology Organisation Rationalisation Project at the Fisherman’s Bend site in Melbourne.

(2) What consultancy firm or individual was contracted by the department to provide initial advice and costings for the Fisherman’s Bend project prior to second phase approval.

(3) (a) What were the selection criteria for the firm that acted in the capacity of quantity surveyor or head contractor; (b) how many firms were considered for the project; and (c) what tendering process was followed for the selection of the successful firm.

(4) With reference to the report by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, Defence Science and Technology Organisation rationalisation project, Melbourne (5 th report of 2000), tabled on 22 June 2000, in which it was reported that non-construction fees comprised one-quarter of the total project costs of $56.171 million: (a) what was the amount of consultancy fees agreed for the head contractor at the commencement of the project; (b) to date, what has been the total amount of management fees paid to the head contractor; and (c) what fees payable to the head contractor are outstanding at this time.

(5) (a) Has the rationalisation of facilities at the Fisherman’s Bend site been completed; and (b) when did the new facilities become fully operational.

(6) How many Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO) staff members are now stationed at the Fisherman’s Bend site.

(7) (a) How many staff members from the DSTO Maribyrnong facility have been transferred to the Fisherman’s Bend site; and (b) when will the DSTO site at Maribyrnong cease operations.

(8) What other departmental sites currently house DSTO operations.


 1333  Senator Bishop: To ask the Minister for Defence—

(1) With reference to the discovery of unexploded ordnance in Princess Royal Harbour, which falls within the jurisdiction of the Albany Port Authority in Western Australia: has action been taken by the department to identify the types of ordnance that are in the harbour; if not, why not.

(2) (a) What specialist advice has the department made available to the Albany Port Authority to investigate the ordnance find at Princess Royal Harbour; (b) how many specialists were made available by the department; and (c) what were their areas of expertise.

(3) (a) What on site investigations have been carried out by departmental specialists at Princess Royal Harbour; (b) which specialists attended the site; (c) when did the investigations take place; and (d) what were the findings of the investigation.

(4) What research, if any, has been conducted on the quantity and type of ordnance disposed of, and the area and route taken for its disposal.

(5) What assessment has been made of the likely condition of the ordnance.

(6) What steps have been taken by the department for the removal or disposal of ordnance from Princess Royal Harbour.

(7) Has the department prepared or commissioned any legal advice in regard to its liability for the removal of, or damage caused by, explosive ordnance in Princess Royal Harbour; if so, what was the substance of that advice.

(8) Regardless of legal liability, what responsibility does the department have for such a task.

(9) (a) On how many occasions has the Government attended mediation meetings with the Albany Port Authority and or the Western Australian State Government to resolve the issue of liability for the removal or disposal of ordnance in Princess Royal Harbour; and (b) when and where did the mediation meetings take place.

(10) Was a case management Directions Status Conference held at the Supreme Court of Western Australia on 27 July 2005; if so: (a) did the Government argue against the matter proceeding to trial; and (b) what was the rationale for this decision.

(11) (a) Is the Minister aware that consideration is being given to the development of the Southdown iron ore deposit by Grange Resources Limited and that, should this project proceed, it will increase port activity at Princess Royal Harbour and necessitate further dredging at the site; (b) what time frames have been put in place for the removal or disposal of ordnance in the harbour; (c) what agency within the department will oversee the removal or disposal of ordnance in the harbour; and (d) what is the estimated cost of the removal or disposal of ordnance.

(12) What financial contributions will be made by the Government to meet the additional costs of dredging Princess Royal Harbour as a result of explosive ordnance found.

(13) (a) In the past 5 years, on how many occasions has the department considered ordnance recovery; (b) at what sites; and (c) with what outcome and cost in each instance.


 (14) With reference to a letter dated 30 May 2005, in which the Federal Member for O’Connor (Mr Tuckey) states that he has made representations to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence requesting that the Navy Clearance Diving Team undertake clearing areas where it is anticipated further unexploded ordnance might exist in Princess Royal Harbour: has any consideration has been given to this proposal; if not, why not.