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


Previous Fragment    Next Fragment

Notice given 21 November 2005

1364  Senator Evans: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs—With reference to the eight community grants identified as Family and Community Service (FACS) Budget measures in the 2005 Budget:

(1) (a) Under what FACS programs were the eight community projects listed in the 2005 Budget funded; and (b) were they funded on an ad-hoc basis.

(2) Why were these eight projects separately identified in the 2005 Budget, while many other grants awarded by FACS were not.

(3) When did the department last, if ever, identify local community grants as a separate budget measure.

(4) Who made each of the election commitments relating to these grants and when were the commitments made.

(5) Were claims made by local Coalition candidates that they were responsible for securing the funding for these projects.

(6) What role did the relevant Coalition candidates in each of the electorates play in getting the grants approved.

(7) When did the department first become aware: (a) of the eight projects; and (b) that it would be responsible for funding the projects.

(8) Can the Minister confirm that seven of the eight projects (all except the Eastern Access Community Health project) were included in a list of Regional Partnership Program grants administered by the Department of Transport and Regional Services that was circulated in November 2004 after the election.

(9) Had seven of the eight projects been approved for funding under the Regional Partnerships Program.

(10) What was the status of these seven projects under the Regional Partnerships Program.

(11) Was there a decision to transfer these seven projects from the Regional Partnerships Program to FACS; if so: (a) when and why; (b) who made the decision; and (c) why were these projects transferred.

(12) Has there been any other instances in which grants have been transferred to FACS from a grants program in another department.

(13) With reference to each grant, what was the process by which the funding for these projects was approved, specifically: (a) did the department undertake any assessment on the viability and/or quality of the proposed projects; if so, when; (b) did the department provide any advice or recommendations to the Minister in relation to the funding of these projects; (c) did the department provide any information to the Minister in relation to these projects; (d) did the Minister formally approve the funding for the projects; if so: (i) when, and (ii) was this approval in accordance with the recommendations, if any, provided by the department; and (e) under what power was the funding for these projects appropriated.

(14) With reference to each of the eight projects, was there an application made by an organisation in relation to the project prior to the 2004 election; if so: (a) when were these applications received; (b) under what program were they received; (c) had these applications been assessed under that program prior to the 2004 election; and (d) what was the result of that assessment, that is, were they approved or rejected.

(15) In the months leading up to the 2004 election, was the department asked to provide information to a Minister’s office on individual grant applications, which may have included the eight applications.

(16) Has the department provided information to a Minister’s office in relation to grant applications outside the normal approval process; if so, can a list be provided of the instances in which this has occurred.

(17) (a) In terms of the ongoing administration of these projects, are they being treated like other community grants under the Local Solutions program; and (b) is the area responsible for this program administering the grants.

(18) To date, what funding has been paid under each of the eight grants.

1369  Senator Bishop: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Defence—With reference to the Defence Security Project JP2054 Phase 1A:

(1) What is the status of the project; and (b) at which departmental sites has the project been implemented.

(2) Has the project progressed past Phase 1A; if so: (a) what phase is now being considered or undertaken; and (b) what is the expected outcome of this phase.

(3) To date, what is the total cost of the project.

(4) With reference to the answer to question on notice no. 2112 (Senate Hansard , 24 November 2003, p. 17748), which advised that a Business Case Review of the project had been commissioned: (a) what was the result of the review; (b) what action was taken in light of the recommendations of the review; and (c) can a copy of the review be provided; if not, why not.

(5) For each of the financial years 2000-01 to 2004-05: (a) how many in-house personnel worked on the project; and (b) how many consultants were engaged on the project and what was the total cost.

(6) When and why was this project removed from the Defence Materiel Organisation website.