Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I present two government responses to committee reports as listed on today's Order of Business. In accordance with the usual practice, I seek leave to incorporate the documents in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The documents read as follows—

Australian Government response to the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit Report No. 449

Regional Development Australia Fund, Military Equipment Disposal and Tariff Concessions:

Review of Auditor-General Reports Nos 1-23 (2014-15)

February 2016

Response to the recommendation

Recommendation No. 3

The Committee recommends that the Department of Finance, in consultation with the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO), update, as required, the Commonwealth Grants Rules and Guidelines to reflect recent ANAO audit findings concerning departmental grants administration, including further reinforcing the requirement for decision-makers to record the basis for funding decisions.

Noted

The Commonwealth Grants Rules and Guidelines (CGRGs) were introduced in July 2014 to reflect changes in legislation, Government policy and recommendations of ANAO audit reports. The CGRGs explicitly state that decision-makers who approve a commitment of relevant money in relation to a grant must record, in writing, the basis for the approval relative to the grant guidelines and key consideration of value with relevant money (CGRGs 4.5 and 4.11).

In addition to the CGRGs, the Department of Finance (Finance) has published guidance on the Finance website to assist entities and ministers comply with the requirements, including in Resource Management Guide No. 412 Australian Government Grants - Briefing and Reporting. Finance will continue to periodically update this guidance material, including taking into account recent ANAO audit findings.

Australian Government response to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement report:

Examination of the Annual Report of the Australian Federal Police 2013-14

December 2015

Government Response to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement report:

Examination of the Annual Report of the Australian Federal Police 2013-14

The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement (the committee) tabled its report into its Examination of the Annual Report of the Australian Federal Police 2013-14 on 14 September 2015. The report makes two recommendations. The Australian Government's responses to the Committee's recommendations are provided below.

Recommendation 1

3.22: The Committee recommends that the Australian Federal Police include greater detail in the Annual Report with reference to all category 1, 2 and 3 complaints, including the period in which they are received, how long they take to investigate and resolve, how many are 'carried over' financial years and what proportion are substantiated.

The Government agrees to the Committee's recommendation.

Following the tabling of the Committee's report on 14 September 2015 and, in response to Recommendation 1, the AFP included the additional data in its 2014-15 Annual Report.

The AFP will include this additional data in all future annual reports.

Recommendation 2

4.21: The Committee recommends that the government introduce legislation to re-establish the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement's oversight function with respect to the monitoring, reviewing or reporting on the performance by the Australian Federal Police of its functions under Part 5.3 of the Criminal Code.

The Government does not agree to the Committee's recommendation.

The oversight of AFP's functions under Part 5.3 of the Criminal Code was transferred to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) in late 2014.

The Government supports the transparency and accountability afforded by appropriate Parliamentary oversight of the AFP's functions and activities. However, legislating for the Committee to have duplicative oversight of the AFP's functions under Part 5.3 of the Criminal Code in addition to the PJCIS would create an unnecessary administrative burden on the AFP.