Annual Report 2005–06
PDF
1246 KBOutput Group 4—Committee Office
| Outputs | ||
|---|---|---|
| Provision of secretariat support to the Senate legislative and general purpose standing committees, select committees and certain joint committees. | ||
| Performance indicators | Performance results | |
| Quality | The degree of satisfaction of the
President, Deputy President, committee members and senators,
as expressed through formal and informal feedback mechanisms,
with the quality and timeliness of advice and support and the
achievement of key tasks. Advice, documentation, publications and draft reports are accurate and of a high standard. |
Formal and informal feedback mechanisms
continue to show that senators consider the support provided
by the Committee Office to be effective. Chairs and senators, when debating committee reports, recognised the high quality of services provided by secretariats in:
|
| Timeliness | Meetings held, documentation provided and reports produced within timeframes set by the Senate or the committee, as relevant. | Committee secretariats organised meetings, hearings, briefings and inspections in accordance with committee requirements, within constraints arising from the availability of members. |
| Tabling deadlines met in all but extraordinary circumstances. | Reports were drafted and presented to the Senate in accordance with the timelines set by committees and deadlines set by the Senate. | |
| Quantity | Documentation is sufficient for committee purposes and material available to the public is available promptly, electronically or in hard copy. | Committee staff provided committee
members, witnesses and others with documents, in accordance
with secretariat procedures, orders of the Senate and committee
requirements. Upon tabling, reports were promptly made available to senators and others in both printed and electronic forms. |
Analysis
During 2005–06, the Committee Office provided secretariat support to Senate and certain joint committees by:
- giving accurate and timely procedural advice and administrative support to facilitate and expedite the work of committees
- arranging responsive and timely meetings and hearings in accordance with committee decisions
- providing comprehensive and timely briefings and research papers
- drafting quality reports which accurately canvassed and analysed the evidence from submissions and hearings and reflected the requirements of committees (and assisting, as necessary, in the drafting of minority reports)
- communicating effectively with witnesses and members of the general public
- being proactive in anticipating requirements of committees and chairs.
Figure 16 shows the structure of the office.
The workload for committee secretariats was uneven during the year. This was reflected particularly in the work of the legislative and general purpose standing committees. Although the total number of references to those committees, 73, was the same as last year, references to legislation committees increased from 45 to 61 and references to references committees fell from 28 to 12. Sixteen proposals to refer matters to references committees were negatived during the year, compared to seven negatived in 2004–05 and three in 2003–04.
The smaller number of references to references committees led to a tightening of staff numbers. However, the workload fell unevenly across committees, and some secretariats had a sustained and heavy workload, while others were underutilised. One references committee (Economics) had no new references during the year, and another (Finance and Public Administration) received its first and only reference for the year on 20 June—just before year’s end. Three other committees also received only one reference during the year. Most of the references committee work was undertaken by Community Affairs (four new references); Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts (two); and Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport (two).
The uneven spread of work led to a greater than normal temporary reallocation of staff. Tighter deadlines for committee reports also placed demands on staff supporting busy committees to work extended hours and weekends.
The number of reports tabled fell slightly from 90 in 2004–05 to 84 (not counting reports on estimates or annual reports in either year, and not counting 19 interim reports and reports recommending the re‑referral of references presented prior to, or just after, the commencement of the current parliament).
The number of meetings of the legislative and general purpose standing committees was steady, and the number of hearings held increased slightly. The number of witnesses heard increased from 1,419 in 2004–05 to 1,895 in 2005–06 (excluding estimates hearings).
Tighter deadlines resulted in the average time for a bills inquiry falling from 39 days in 2004–05 to 27 days in 2005–06. That some initial deadlines may have been unrealistically tight or unnecessary is evidenced by the increased number of time extensions the Senate gave committees to report on bills (35 in 2004–05, 55 in 2005–06). Legislation committees examining estimates sat for fewer hours in the 2005–06 budget hearings (May–June) than they did for the budget hearings in the previous year.
The trends outlined here are illustrated in Table 4.
In part reflecting the overall reduction in committee work, Committee Office staff numbers dropped slightly from 62 in 2003–04 and 58 in 2004–05 to 56 in 2005–06 (54 in the last half of the year). The average cost of supporting a pair of legislative and general purpose standing committees was $458,000, compared to $510,000 in 2004–05, principally reflecting the reduction in references committee work.
| 2003–04 | 2004–05 | 2005–06 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| References to: | Legislation committees | 61 | 45 | 61 |
| References committees | 14 | 28 | 12 | |
| Total | 75 | 73 | 73 | |
| Reports presented | 84 | 90 | 84 | |
| Meetings held | 306 | 249 | 254 | |
| Hearings held | 215 | 143 | 164 | |
| Witnesses heard | 2,067 | 1,419 | 1,895 | |
| Extensions of time granted | 103 | 35 | 55 | |
Note: Statistics for legislation committees exclude those relating to legislation committee work on the estimates and consideration of annual reports.
Only one select committee operated during the year—the Select Committee on Mental Health, which was established on 8 March 2005 and presented its final report on 28 April 2006. The 2005–06 financial year was the first since 1996–97 during which there was no appointment of a select committee.
The Committee Office continued to support three statutory joint committees until 23 March 2006, when the Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Account ceased under a legislative sunset provision. At the end of the year, the office was supporting two joint committees, those on the Australian Crime Commission and on Corporations and Financial Services.
The cost of the Committee Office in 2005–06 was $8.2 million, a decrease of $0.6 million on 2004–05. The costs included staff travel, accommodation and venue hire, and the costs of some non‑government witnesses. Supplier expenses also included the costs of a consultant to one committee. The costs of senators attending hearings are paid by the Department of Finance and Administration.
Executive |
||
|---|---|---|
John Vander Wyk, Clerk
Assistant Maureen Weeks, Senior Clerk Procedural advice Planning and coordination Secretariat staffing and resources Statistics and records |
||
| Legislative and general purpose standing (legislation and references) committee secretariats |
Select committee secretariats |
Joint statutory committee secretariats |
| Community Affairs Elton Humphrey Economics Peter Hallahan Employment, Workplace Relations and Education John Carter Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts Ian Holland Finance and Public Administration Alistair Sands Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Kathleen Dermody Legal and Constitutional Jonathan Curtis Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Roxane Le Guen |
Mental Health Ian Holland |
Australian Crime Commission Jonathan Curtis Corporations and Financial Services Kelly Paxman Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Account Jonathan Curtis |
Note: Secretaries for committees are shown as at 30 June 2006, except the Select Committee on Mental Health (as at 28 April 2006) and the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Account (as at 23 March 2006).
Procedural changes and advice
Secretaries continued to provide procedural and strategic advice to committee chairs and members. Higher level advice was provided by the Clerk, Deputy Clerk, Clerk Assistant (Committees) and Senior Clerk of Committees. The advice, both oral and written, covered many parliamentary privilege issues and matters such as the power of committees to call witnesses, adverse reflections on persons made in evidence, and protection of witnesses. Advice was also provided on a number of matters arising out of estimates hearings, including chairs’ ability to rule on questions of witnesses and the extent of questioning allowed under orders of the Senate.
The annual report for 2004–05 noted that significant numbers of questions on notice from estimates hearings remained unanswered after the deadlines for answers set by committees. The matter was considered by the Procedure Committee. As an outcome of that consideration, on 9 November 2005 the Senate amended standing order 74(5) to enable a senator, 30 days after the date an answer was due, to ask the relevant minister in the chamber why an estimates question on notice was not answered.
Another procedural change relevant to committees occurred on 6 October 2005, when the Senate, on a Procedure Committee recommendation, adopted a sessional order on the unauthorised disclosure of committee proceedings. The order provides guidelines for committees when considering matters arising from the possible unauthorised disclosure of committee proceedings.
Legislative and general purpose standing committees
The 16 legislative and general purpose standing committees are divided into two groups—eight legislation committees and eight references committees. Legislation committees inquire into and report on bills, estimates of proposed expenditure, annual reports and the performance of government departments and agencies. References committees report on other matters referred by the Senate (usually subject-oriented matters). The committees, established under standing order 25 as permanent committees, exist for the life of a parliament. They are re‑established at the commencement of each new parliament, with their membership determined by the Senate.
During 2005–06, legislation committees had 61 matters referred to them, including 59 bills or packages of bills, and tabled 65 reports, excluding the 15 reports on annual reports. By contrast, in the previous year 45 matters, including 42 bills or packages of bills, were referred and 49 reports were tabled. Details appear in Figure 17. During 2005–06, the committees sat for 349 hours, conducting the majority of their hearings in Canberra, with 13 per cent being held interstate. These statistics do not include information on legislation committees’ consideration of estimates, which is detailed in Figure 18. Nor do the statistics for 2005–06 (with the exception of ‘matters referred’) include the committees’ work on reviewing annual reports.
All legislation committees are required by standing order 25(21) to report regularly on the annual reports of departments and agencies within their portfolio responsibilities. Legislation committees tabled 15 reports in accordance with this requirement in both 2004–05 and 2005–06.
Figure 17 Legislation committees—activity
Legislation committees considering the estimates of proposed expenditure of Australian government departments and agencies sat for 705 hours for the 2005–06 budget cycle. This cycle commenced in May–June 2005 with the budget estimates, with supplementary hearings being held in October–November 2005 and additional estimates in February 2006. Legislation committees considering estimates produced 16 reports. For details see Figure 18.
At the May–June 2006 budget estimates hearings for the 2006–07 budget cycle, the legislation committees sat for 334 hours and senators asked an estimated 33,700 questions. The comparable figures for the 2005–06 budget estimates hearings were 352 hours and about 35,000 questions.
Difficulties in obtaining timely answers to questions placed on notice continued. As at 10 June 2006, 90 questions from the 2005–06 budget cycle remained unanswered. Of those, 51 had been lodged during the May–June 2005 budget estimates, 19 during the supplementary hearings in October–November 2005 and 20 during the additional estimates hearings in February 2006.
The departments or agencies with the greatest number of answers to questions outstanding were the Treasury (48 unanswered questions in a total of 560), and the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (14 unanswered, 450 total). Some departments provided answers to questions on notice just before, or during, the next scheduled round of estimates hearings, which limited the ability of senators to follow up any issues arising. Delays in providing answers prompted questions from senators on the reasons for the delays, and whether they were caused within departments or in the offices of ministers clearing the answers.
Both the February 2006 additional estimates hearings and the May–June 2006 budget hearings were notable particularly for a government directive to public servants not to answer questions on matters relevant to the Inquiry into certain Australian companies in relation to the United Nations Oil‑for‑Food Programme.
Figure 18 Legislation committees considering estimates—activity
During the year, references committees had only 12 matters referred to them, a substantial fall from 28 matters in 2004–05. While the 28 matters in 2004–05 included matters reinstated from the previous parliament, 19 were new. The decrease in references in 2005–06 resulted in fewer meetings (192 compared with 233 in 2004–05) and tabled reports (19, down from 41 in 2004–05). Details appear in Figure 19. Approximately 35 per cent of meetings were held interstate.
Figure 19 References committees—activity
Select committees
A select committee is an ad hoc committee created to inquire into and report on a specific matter. It usually has a limited life and ceases to exist when it presents its final report.
One select committee operated in 2005–06: the Select Committee on Mental Health, established on 8 March 2005. Its inquiry attracted a large number of submissions (159) and wide public and media interest. The 16 public hearings and six inspections covered every state and territory. The committee delivered two reports, one in March 2006 and a final report on 26 April 2006. The government responded soon after the March report, announcing on 5 April policy initiatives which reflected some of the committee’s recommendations.
In contrast to 2004–05, when the Committee Office supported five select committees (four established in the previous parliament and re‑established during 2004–05 and one established in August 2004), 2005–06 was the first year since 1996–97 in which no select committee was established.
Joint committees
Joint committees comprise senators and members of the House of Representatives. They are established by resolution of each House and, in the case of statutory committees, in accordance with the provisions of an Act.
During 2005–06, the Committee Office supported three statutory joint committees: Corporations and Financial Services, the Australian Crime Commission, and Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Account.
The three committees held 73 meetings (public and private), involving a total of 130 hours. They received 187 submissions and heard 306 witnesses. The comparable figures for 2004–05, an election year, were 48 meetings, 58 hours, 87 submissions and 69 witnesses.
On 21 March 2006 the Joint Statutory Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Account presented its final reports. In accordance with its terms of reference, it reported on the annual reports of the three bodies it monitored. It also presented its final report on the operation of native title representative bodies as part of its responsibility to report on the implementation of the Native Title Act 1993. The committee ceased to exist on 23 March 2006 under a sunset provision in its governing legislation.
On the last sitting day of the financial year, 22 June, the Senate passed the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Bill 2006, which establishes the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity. It is likely that the department will provide the secretariat support for that committee.
Meetings
Senate committee secretariats supported 597 meetings, hearings and site inspections during the year, compared with 773 in 2003–04 and 536 in 2004–05. These figures include statistics relating to estimates hearings held by the legislation committees.
Committee members place considerable value on engaging the community in an inquiry. One means of facilitating such contact is to arrange interstate hearings and site visits. A breakdown of meetings by location appears in Figure 20.
Figure 20 Committee meetings, 2005–06, by location
Significant changes in functions and services
As noted in the 2004–05 annual report, the Committee Office was seeking to establish a web‑based information management system to deliver efficiencies and allow easier website management and online communication with submitters and witnesses. The demonstration of a potential system identified a number of problems, including compatibility and security issues. The decision was made not to pursue the system and, at this stage, not to seek a complete package as a solution, but rather to proceed in steps by developing and implementing components one at a time.
The first stage was implemented in March 2006: a public alert service—technically, a really simple syndication (RSS) feed. Members of the public can choose, at no charge, to be alerted automatically to the tabling of committee reports, new inquiries and hearing dates.
Preliminary work began on developing a template for lodging submissions by email. The template will provide benefits to secretariats in managing the processing of submissions.
A Committee Office style manual was finalised, and work was substantially completed on a procedural manual for secretariat staff. The procedural manual will be paired with an administration manual, to be completed in 2006–07, providing advice on administrative matters relating to committee activities.
Work commenced on drafting guidelines to assist committees in making decisions on privacy and other matters related to publishing submissions, particularly on the internet. Generic opening statements for committee hearings were finalised and distributed.
Factors, events and trends influencing performance
We commented in the previous two annual reports on the heavy workloads of committee staff, mentioning in particular the ‘unrelenting pressure to produce’ and the long hours and weekend work required. Overall workload declined in 2005–06, but workload pressures continued for the three or four committees which received a disproportionate share of references.
At the staffing level, the major response was to reallocate staff from underutilised secretariats to those where the workload was greater. Staff responded positively to the temporary dislocation such moves entailed and proved flexible and willing to assist colleagues on the busier secretariats. Nevertheless, the lack of work for some secretariats, and the uneven spread of work, did result in a dip in morale for some staff.
Another factor which had a negative impact was the shortening of timeframes for bills inquiries. From 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2005, the average time for a bills inquiry was 39 days. From 1 July 2005 to 30 June 2006, it fell to 27 days. Many bills inquiries were for periods considerably shorter than the average—several had timeframes of a week or less. A number of inquiries with tight timeframes were inquiries into controversial and/or complex bills which, despite the timeframe, attracted relatively large numbers of submissions. Staff at times felt some frustration at not being able to do full justice to such inquiries. Some witnesses, too, expressed disquiet at the short times available to them to have input into inquiries.
Evaluation
The principal means of evaluating the performance of the department in supporting Senate and certain joint committees is the biennial survey of senators. The latest survey, conducted in 2005, showed high levels of satisfaction with the work of secretariats. The outcomes from that survey were reported in the previous annual report.
Another source of evaluation is comment in the chamber when chairs table reports. As was the case last year, senators were highly positive in their comments, some of which appear in Figure 21. Informal feedback from witnesses also indicated satisfaction with their dealings with secretariat staff.
Figure 21 Senators’ comments on Output Group 4 secretariats
- ‘… diligent and meticulous work in relation not only to the review which produced the report tabled today but also in relation to the overall work of the committee’
- ‘… diligent work, intelligent advice and their commitment to providing good quality input into public policy through this inquiry’
- ‘… the secretariat for their above and well beyond the call of duty efforts in making it happen. I know they have put in a huge effort and am appreciative of their intelligence, dedication and excellent management of the process.’
- ‘… on the hard work they have put into making this report possible in just two weeks’
- ‘… prepared the report under a fairly limited time frame’
- ‘… hard work in pulling together an enormous amount of material in a short time’
- ‘… such talented and dedicated servants of the parliament who compiled this outstanding report’
Performance outlook
The key resource of the Committee Office is its staff. The office will continue to seek to recruit and retain motivated staff with strong research, administrative and writing skills.
While the uneven spread of work continues, the office will also continue its flexible approach to the allocation of staff to committees in order to best meet the needs of committees and to ensure the preparation of draft reports of the highest quality possible within the timeframes set by the Senate. The office will also continue to explore innovative ways of utilising information technology to reduce routine processing work and improve productivity.
On 20 June, the government announced its intention to vary the structure of the legislative and general purpose standing committees by combining the legislation and references committees, possibly increasing the number of committees from eight to 10, and for each committee to have a government chair. After extensive debate in the Senate, the proposal was referred to the Procedure Committee for inquiry and report on 10 August. A new structure may result in a slight increase in staffing if the number of committees increases. Staff will continue to support any new arrangement of committees at the same high standards as they have in the past.
The effectiveness of staff will be enhanced if there is a more even spread of work among committees in the new financial year, and if longer and more realistic timeframes are provided for bills inquiries, particularly those into more complex bills and those for which public input is actively sought.