Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, , 7:59:01 to 9:36:00
The Bureau of Meteorology defends its website redesign and provides a breakdown of IT contracts and labor hire costs.
Topics: Government IT systems, Procurement, Public safety
Speakers: Dr Stuart Minchin, Hon Sarah Henderson, Susan McDonald, Nichole Brinsmead, Dean Smith, Dr Peter Stone, Hon Murray Watt, Katrina Maguire, Malcolm Roberts, Michael Logan, Peter Whish-Wilson, Varun Ghosh, Vicki Manson
>> Thank you very much. On that note, um I will move on from outcome 2.3. Thank you to the officials who have um given evidence and been here to give evidence on that outcome and um invite the um officers from the Bureau of Meteorology, Australian Climate Service to come to the table. And while they're doing that, if broadcasting, we'll just suspend for U broadcasting if we could come back on. Thank you very much. Um and I call officers from the Bureau of Meteorology and I welcome Dr. Stuart Minchin, Chief Executive Officer and Director of Meteorology. Welcome. Um and your colleagues. Uh do you wish to make an
opening statement? Uh Stuart mention CEO. Uh thank you chair and given you were so generous. Uh last time we appeared no we won't make a an opening statement this time.
>> You have my gratitude. Um all right. Well then in which case I'm going to go to um the coalition for questions to the >> Senator Smith.
>> Thank you very much chair. I just have general ones. Um the The National Water Information System has been in operation, I think, since 2008. Can you give me an indication of how much money has been expended thus far on the National Water Information Center
>> Uh, thank you, Senator. I'm going to call my colleague
Yes, Peter Stone, uh, Group Executive. uh, thank you for the question. Um, since 2007, uh, the bureau has received, uh, $78.6 million.
>> I thought the act was 2007.
>> I'm sorry.
>> I thought the act was 2007.
>> Yes. And since 2007, the bureau has received 708.6 million $78.6 6 million across three separate funding allocations.
>> And what were the three separate funding allocations?
>> Yeah. Uh $419.6 million from 20078 over 10 years as part of the national plan for water security. $268 million from 201718 over nine years to deliver [clears throat] uh essential Commonwealth water functions under the water act uh and $21 million from 2324 over 3 years to uh deliver water market
So, um, is the National Water Information System at a level of maturity that it doesn't require the hundreds of millions of dollars invested in it that happened earlier in its life? Is that a is that how I should read the significant drop
off in funding? Uh so so it it's remained at um uh roughly for for the essential commonwealth water functions it's remained at roughly um you know $29 million over that full period >> and occasionally there's extra investment to uh create u particular uh artifacts that meet particular needs. So there's more recently been investment to um enable provision of um real time
>> Okay, I understand that. So for for each of those three tranches, can you just provide on notice just a summary of the initiatives that were included in those
quantums? Yep. Yeah, I can say that they're um less initiatives than um
program
>> uh pro ongoing provision of um
>> services,
>> a whole range of services. Yeah, >> I can [snorts] go through those now if you wish.
>> That would be great. Yes, please. Y
>> uh I mean there are 15 major um functions that delivered. So there's water data online and let me know if you just like little details in each of these. um Australian groundwater explorer uh provides access um to data for over 900,000 groundwater bes um the Australian water resource assessment landscape [clears throat] design rainfalls um which are used by um engineers and planners um as a fundamental reference in hydraological and engineering design um hydro hydraological [clears throat] reference stations um which allow for uh detection and attribution of uh long-term stream flow uh variability in the country. Um uh sixth uh water storage information so a provision across the country of uh water storage levels and volumes um for over 300 sites across Australia. uh the the Australian water uh resources information system um which generates consolidated uh water storage information. So uh surface water, groundwater, water trading and um the Australian hydological um hydraological geospatial fabric or geopric um it's a system that maps the inter relationships between key hydraologic features. So, rivers, dams, lakes, aquifers, um, etc. Um, the National Water Account. >> Um, the the National Flood Forecasting and Warning Service, uh, was was provisioned under that. Um, Australian Water Resources. So, annual national assessments of water resources.
>> annual, did you say annual?
>> Annual. Yeah. >> Um, two more. um for a considerable arrangement known as WADA so the water information research and development alliance um that actually did a lot of the the science around um hydrarology that enabled a lot of those functions that I've mentioned to be delivered accurately um and um finally just in terms of the ongoing uh services are the Australian uh water data service. Um so that makes the information available um via things um like uh APIs um uh uh a range of websites and and reports and just to give you an idea of uh how frequently those uh things are used. So the design rainfall uh function that I mentioned uh is used um uh around 400,000 times a year. Groundwater explorer is accessed um about 58,000 times a year. The National Water Account about 55,000 times a year etc etc. So, a lot of them used a
>> So, I I think I've got >> 13 there. Uh 13. Um we'll use the word program loosely. Um did you say 15 in
>> No, sorry, you're right. 13.
>> Right. Um so then finally, um is this exercise possible looking at the $78.6 6 million across those 13 programs. Is it possible to disagregate the 78.6 million across into that? >> Oh, >> so we can see over which years it's
>> I understand what you're saying. It it'd be a bit made up. Uh that they're highly
>> So not completely accurate.
>> Sorry, it wouldn't be. No, it wouldn't be all all that accurate. Would it help
me get an indic W would it be indicative of where the money It would be indicative though wouldn't it
>> sorry
>> it would be indicative in terms I mean
we could we could have an indicative one
>> and just just caveat it to say that whatever is the scientific word loose >> great thank you very much >> sorry >> it's Senator Smith's Latin um thank you very much for that that's most helpful just turning um some questions of the climate uh the Australian climate services. I can ask those here as well I >> Thank you very much and welcome. So when the national climate risk assessment project was being undertaken, it was my understanding that there were positions which were timelmited and specifically established to support the delivery of the national assessment. Um and I was under the impression that there were 20.4 new ASL positions in 2023 24 and 18.9 ASL positions in 202425. Have I understood that correctly?
>> Yes. Uh Vicky Manson, head of the Australian Climate Service. Uh that's
>> And so what are those positions doing >> are they still engaged in the national assessment work?
>> No. No, that national assessment work is sort of drawn to an end. The Australian Climate Service >> staff are doing a range of engagement and activities to communicate the national climate risk assessment, but those ASL are no longer allocated to the to the ACS. So, we balanced um so some of them were not ongoing staff and have left and others might have been redeployed to other either parts of what the partners do or or parts of things within the Australian Climate Service.
So um how many people are involved in communicating the climate risk assessment report at the
moment? So I have three climate uh communications staff but I would say that the every staff member of the Australian climate service has a role in communicating the national climate risk assessment in the way we work with government to help them understand government and industry understand what the risk assessment means for them.
>> So how many people are employed in the Australian climate services group as of >> do we call it a group? Do we call it a division? An agency?
uh 37 ASL.
>> 37. And so, and what are they doing now? these 37 people.
>> So the Australian climate services role is to provide authoritative data and information on climate risk. So that ranges from uh information on climate and hazards from understanding exposure vulnerability um integrating that into climate risk and providing a range of services to both government and industry. So there are a wide range of projects that we're working on. Some of those are improving the way we we can access data. um helping people visualize that data. Um some some data um in its current format isn't useful to be able to look at it for climate risk. So a good example of that is uh business location data. Um prior to the Australian Climate Service, it wasn't spatially enabled. So we really couldn't tell you what the impacts to businesses were. So we had to do a bit of work to update and improve
on notice a list of the projects that the Australian Climate Service is currently working on?
>> Happy to.
>> Yep. Thank you very much. Has any effort been made to um clarify correct any of the data that was in the most recent climate risk assessment
Um so we have received uh information from some people where we've um had some errors and we we're in a process of doing some addendums. There are
>> so the climate risk assessment report contains errors.
>> Um they're they're typos so it's not um
>> not substantive ones.
>> Yeah. Not substantial ones. That's not
completely true because we've talked previously at estimates in terms of the calculations that were used to um estimate you know collapses in Australian property values.
>> So I stand by that we did a systems approach and we looked at a range of data and there was multiple lines of data that we used including the source that you're referring to.
>> So you stand by the suggestion that Australian property values will collapse by $770 billion in the next 5 years. I
think if you look at the whole system analysis in in that that chapter, I think that this the risk of climate change to to property and other parts of our economy is substantial.
>> On notice, could you just provide to the committee a list of those errors or changes that have been necessary to incorporate into the and where they've and where they've come from?
>> Yep. On page, I'm going to make the call in a minute or two.
I think I might be able to do it in a minute. Wonderful. >> 42. Um, in the climate assessment report on page 131, it includes a table. It [clears throat] includes a table which talks about key climate hazards for the system. And it suggests that and I think there's been some commentary around uh some of these figures already, but it suggests that gust events which are identified as separate from cyclones. Have you got that in front of you there?
>> Uh yeah.
>> Gust events are identified at item well line four and cyclone events identified at line five. And it estimates that there'll be 584 5 564 deaths in the period 1967 to 2022. I've read that correctly.
>> That that's correct.
uh deaths again from 1990 to 2022 of 509. So the percentage increase has gone from 16.4 to 21.5. How is that figure calculated?
>> So that's done by Risk Frontiers who provide um they do peril Oz data analysis do a lot of work for the insurance sector and others. Um I can take that on notice and come back to you on on how that's calculated but but that's sourced directly from their work.
>> And what sort of independent verification does the Australian Climate Service do on that data that's provided?
Uh it a a a range depends on on the the source. Um for that one in particular uh we've spent a lot of time looking at some of the risk frontiers data for how we applied in other areas. So I'd have to check specifically for that table
>> So for that table um has that table been provided by the same um source the risk frontiers did you say or
>> so? So risk frontiers are consultants who deliver services >> and they produce a report and there's a database that we have drawn on from
>> You're quite right. It's there in the in in the footnote. So can you just on notice just provide the committee with some information about how the Australian climate service has verified and satisfied itself that that um information provided by Risk Frontiers Perry Oz data has been um verified.
>> Senator Smith, I'm going to >> if you have a final question.
>> Um, no. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you, Senator Wish. [snorts]
>> Oh, thanks, Chair. This might be very short. Could I just um just check um if there's any plans for a new um separate bomb funded website for climate There's obviously on top of the the the bomb website that's been done and the robust project like is there any any plans for another another website?
>> So the Australian Climate Service already has a website. So acs.gov.au.
>> Yeah.
>> Uh we've had it since we established.
>> but is there any plans for another for a new a new one >> on top of that?
>> Not not a new website. That's our website. will obviously over time continue to improve it um to align to our role of making data and information more accessible for Australians.
>> So there's no there's no contracts plans for contracts for for a separate funded website for climate risk data at all or you just or updating the current one?
>> No, no, we are we do have some procurements underway that would be related to the website but it's not a website procurement.
>> well can tell us about those
procurements. So, uh, well, as part of our role to provide data and information, >> um, we need to have a secure way to share data across the partnership and with with other providers and, uh, we didn't have that capability and we're looking to to build that capability and exploring ways to do that at this stage.
>> Okay. And what what contractors have you awarded a contract for that? No, it's
it's
>> it's all internal, is it?
>> Yeah, still under consideration.
>> Okay. Um my my last question, Ch, I told you I'd be brief. Um I'm just wondering um whether there's been any conversations between bomb executives and SRO executives about I suppose backfilling um climate services capability with the CSRO job cuts about to get underway.
Um so the way the Australian Climate Service works is we have um four partners and we work with government to identify priorities for what we work on. already provide resources to all of those agencies to do the work that we um we haven't allocated resources for the next financial year and as part of that we'll clearly be talking to executive and the Bureau of Meteorology CSRO Australian Bureau of Statistics and Geoscience Australia but >> not specifically about um backfilling or utilizing staff from Syra but we in the context that we're all working in that's clearly something that we will think about and talk with our executive colleagues in those partner agencies.
Okay. So, I mean, I know you can't obviously can't speak for CSRO. Um, Minister has said publicly that um that the possibility is for some of the scientists who who are going to be made redundant in CSRO could be re-eployed in other agencies. Has there been any discussions with Minister Z's office about this, Dr. Mitch?
>> Uh, no. There hasn't been any direct uh conversation about redeployment of uh of um uh climate science uh capability. Um I think uh it's worth mentioning that ACS is not the only um uh source of climate science funding uh and and activity. Of course, they're a key uh user of uh our climate science capability. um and uh uh but our climate scientists are engaged in a whole range of other um uh you know modeling uh processes as well. So um there's clearly still a strong need for climate science capability in the country.
>> So you you you were specific about your comment there about re no discussions about redeployment. Has there been discussions about loss of loss of uh capability um intellectual property and a whole range of other things with job losses at CSRO particularly at the environment and climate division
>> um CSRO have uh have shared with us that they're looking at um their their own capabilities more generally not just in climate science but prioritizing their capabilities but as I understand there's no decision being made uh about those changes and uh if if they
>> well I would hope to talk to you about before they do make those decisions in the collaborative highlighted and the same for Australian climate services.
>> Yeah. So they've certainly highlighted that they're um thinking about prioritization and we're engaging with them on that but there's to my knowledge there's been no um specific decision made by CSRO or anyone else. I'd direct your questions to them on that issue.
Well, you know, we have we have seen an inquiry into it very very shortly, but so but so there has been some top top level discussions or they've consulted with you.
>> Look, they're partners with us on ACS, for example. So, it's normal for them to uh to share what uh what um constraints they're facing in uh in the future. And um yeah, we we continue to uh to engage as as partners and colleagues on uh on the Australian Climate Service.
Thank you, Senator Wish Wilson. Senator
>> thank you, Chair, and thank you for appearing again today. And good evening. Who issues the extreme weather warning? Sheep, grazers, snow, ice, extreme heat. Who issues them?
>> Uh, well, the bureau does. Senator,
We had a few days of hot summer weather recently, apparently. A few days down in Melbourne, a few days in Sydney. However, we were getting extreme weather warnings for days below 30°. What temperature is the trigger or the threshold for an extreme heat warning?
>> Um, Senator, I might uh ask my colleague uh Nick Logan up to the um the table, but let me start uh with a uh a general kind of observation, and that is that uh um our warnings will often come before events. Um so uh while you may be experiencing a 30°ree day in a particular location in Australia um other parts of Australia u may be experiencing much hotter events what we saw in this recent heat.
>> I appreciate that. Excuse me for interrupting but I appreciate that. I'm talking about um extreme weather warnings when the temperatures in a locality when the temperatures were under 30°.
>> I I will uh throw to my colleague uh Mick on that. But heatwave um warnings are not just about the temperature on the day but in many cases a cumulative impact of of heat waves. So I'll pass to uh to to Mick to give you some more detail on that.
>> Yes. Uh thanks Senator. Um Michael Logan, general manager of the National Production Services Program. That's the crux of it is that the heatwave warning isn't based on just the single heat for a day. It's like accumulative accumulated heat over a couple of days. And so if you have a significant spike day within that 3-day period, and it's also the overnight temperatures as well, the humidity and whether you're at the start of the season or towards the end of the season. So there's a few factors that go into it, but if you do have a cool change coming at the end of that 3-day period, the heat wave warning can still be out for that day. or if there's a cooler day right at the start of the period followed by some extreme heat and some hot nights, then the heat wave will cover those that sort of 3-day period. So, it's an accumulation across that period and that's what's going on.
>> So, thank you, Mr. Logan. If if the heat wave is passed, you're saying it continues under the
time you get to so if it's over a three-day period and by the time you get to the third day and that cool change has has gone through then that sort of would be when we're at the tail end of
that heat wave. Okay. Using Thank you. using data straight off your website the Mjura Post Office page shows temperatures in January 1908 range as high as 50.7° and only fell below 30° twice. February 1908 was the same until late in the month. A national heat wave in December 1895 to January 1896 caused 435 deaths nationally. Temperatures were over 40. Not well you didn't give me a trigger. So not not your temperature. I accept a heat wave can kill. I certainly do accept that anywhere in the world heat waves can kill. Nothing new. Can you please substantiate the decision to give heat warnings on what is nothing more than a normal summer's day which averages 28.5°?
>> Certainly. I mean, we can go into details and provide uh the triggers for a heat wave, but as I mentioned, they're the main ingredients. It's uh the accumulated heat over a 3-day period. And so, if there is a a cool day that's in there, but that accumulated heat, particularly if it's at the start of the end of it, uh the heat wave product can still be triggered.
>> Okay, let's go. Thank you. Let's go back to um the new weather weather radar. implementation of the new weather radar Has anyone been fired for wasting $96 million of taxpayer money?
>> Well, I don't think we we have gone over this at the last estimates hearing. Um I think you talking about the up [clears throat] the change to the the bureau's website rather than a weather radar. Yeah. Um and it was explained at the last hearing that the portion of money attributable to the website costs was partly about an overall systems upgrade across the bureau's meteorology systems in general. Uh so with that introduction
>> might want it has tarnished the uh reputation of the bomb made a lot of people unhappy with with the bomb service. Um so I'm wondering if anyone's been council counseledled demoted or had a note on their service >> for this failure.
>> I'd need to have Dr.
>> Senator I'm not aware of of anyone that's been uh uh fired or de demoted uh on this basis. Um what uh Senator as you I think you may be aware uh I joined the bureau about 3 weeks after uh the website was was launched. My focus as CEO is on uh moving uh forward and uh and as I said at last uh hearing um I accepted that uh the website uh redesign had not met all users needs and that we were working hard with the team on uh on addressing uh the feedback that we've received. We've received significant feedback from the Australian community and we are actively working on uh making releases to the website to improve it to meet people's expectations. Um my uh um uh philosophy on this as as CEO is uh um that I have a very very um committed team who are working uh incredibly hard to meet uh Australian public's expectations. That doesn't mean we get it right all the time. And uh uh I'm very confident that the team is totally focused on uh on the task of improving uh Australians access to weather information including through upgrades to the website as it goes forward.
>> So I accept that uh Mr. Dr. mentioned that sometimes it's not appropriate to chastise who knows the until you know the source of the problem. But has anyone been questioned about it? Have you done an investigation into it because it seems to be significant funds and and you've got to make sure that it doesn't happen again. What reassurance can you give us that it won't happen
>> Well, thanks Senator. What I can say is uh I I I don't believe the website uh is a complete failure and I've been public in in saying that before. I think what has happened is it's uh it's met uh 80 80 to 90% of of uh of its uh intended outcomes and it's missed the boat on a few key um user experiences uh for for some parts of the community and we are working hard on addressing those. So it's clear the radar is part of the assessment. We moved quickly to adjust the the view of the radar to improve that. We've made adjustments to the navigation of the website and we have a number of other rollouts happening over the next few months that will improve that. Um I can uh absolutely assure you minister that the the team within the bureau are really dedicated to their task u and uh totally focused on improving the situation so that we can uh uh so that all all Australians can have access to the weather data that they require.
>> Thank you. Have you required contractors to complete the fixes for free owing to their failure to uh or are you throwing more money tax from taxpayers at the >> Are you rewarding contractors for for failing?
>> Uh well, I don't uh you you've categorized this as a a contractor failure. The contractors have done what we asked them to do. What what I think is very clear is we did not get all of the user uh experience testing uh um did did not capture all of the uh um subsequent detail that and feedback that we've received from the community. So, we're working hard on addressing that. That will uh inevitably require uh investment, but that investment was already part of and planned for as part of the website release. We always knew that there would be fixes that would be required. What probably caught the bureau a little bit unawares is the is was the extent of the um u the feedback that we received but we're working through that very actively.
>> Thank you. It was pretty strong. So looking at topography the color gradations graduations used to be based on topography. Now the national parks are just all green. Did the people who did the map understand topography?
Uh sorry, Senator, are you referring to the uh the the radar map? The
>> Yes, I'm sorry.
>> Okay. So, the background to the radar map um will uh um is is uh um a compromise always of uh the um the features that are of interest for the uh the community primarily about the townships. We are adjusting that uh just as one example of an upcoming upgrade is we will be um uh bringing that into line with our uh app uh our iPhone and Android app that actually shows a background of the uh the reach of the radars as well. So uh it will be clear um where radar coverage exists and where it does not within the country. So um that's an evolving uh process. I should also highlight that uh the public can choose their view of what appears on that map through various choices in the settings of the uh of the map view.
Thank you. I noticed that the or I'm told that the old map which did show topography color graduations is appearing to visitors who search something like weather Brisbane rather than the new site but the address is the new site. Have you gone back to using the old site for certain
Um so thank thank you Senator. The um uh there I think what you're referring to is that there are a number of third party providers who will provide our our radar data and other information uh through their applications. they receive those through our FTP um service that they they they don't access it directly from the website and in some cases they choose to uh visualize that data differently to the way that the bureau chooses to do that. I think that's actually a good thing uh meeting different user needs out in the community. Um but um uh that access uh they're still accessing the the same information. Um but it is uh as I said coming through our registered user services um which is not through the the website itself.
>> Thank you. Two more questions. J >> The usability of the website is poor. Users are complaining it takes multiple clicks to see what used to be available at a glance. What time frame can you give people to provide to get the new site up to standard of the old site? Uh
will there are ongoing releases happening over the next few months? Uh uh Senator um we we accept as I said that some users have found aspects of the website uh difficult and we and have been providing feedback on that. Another uh good example is um uh on navigation. Uh we'll be rolling out uh the ability to navigate by postcode in in uh in one of the the next releases. Um, and we're continually bringing those updates on board so that uh, as we get feedback about what is useful to the community to make their experience with the website better, we're acting on that and we're rolling that out with uh, regular updates.
>> So, what time frame can you provide to get the new site up to the standard of the old site?
>> Well, I don't I don't accept that we're trying to reach the standard of the old site because the old site was uh, was a problem. It was very difficult to navigate. it was uh it was unaccessible to many sectors of the community. Um but we hope uh you know website updates will never finish uh as new information, new products come on board, we will continue developing the website but uh we are hoping to address most of the major uh tranches of concern by uh in in releases over the next six months.
>> Thank you. The old radar is still available on the Reg subdomain, I'm Will you give an undertaking the old site will remain available until a new site can be made to work?
>> We certainly will not be turning off uh our regge uh capability uh until we are confident that the Australian community are comfortable with um uh our new uh radar capability. Thank you.
>> Thanks, Chair.
>> Thank you very much, Senator Roberts.
>> Oh, while we're talking about the as an avid user of the bureau's website, and coming from a community that everybody has it saved on their phones, it is probably the most looked at uh, fe uh, website. Um, I'm interested that you said that the old website wasn't fit for purpose and yet all the feedback I've had from that community, so regional Queensland and Australia says that it was fit for purpose and they were able to access the information they wanted. So, what specifically did you find about the old website that is not fit for purpose?
>> Uh, thank you, Senator. I'll share with you uh just uh it's repeating what I said last uh estimates but but I I think it's worth uh highlighting again the old website uh was uh insecure so we were hacked in 2015 uh and uh the the um the website infrastructure including all the connections to our in in situ instruments in the field were s were were vulnerable to hacking. Um so uh those communities would not be happy if someone took over or or or cancelled access to to that data uh through through a hacking event. So this was about hardening uh the website. Secondly, accessibility um the old website was not because it was very graphically based uh was was actually not accessible to all sectors of the community. So disabled people with site impairment for example that rely on text readers uh for for websites were unable to access the data in the website. Also much of the content we had 77,000 web pages on that website. Uh most of the content uh on those pages was written in some cases to the point that you needed a PhD to understand it. Um and uh the focus of the new website is to make the the whole weather information accessible to the broader community. So, I fully understand that people got used to the old website. I fully understand that people were very comfortable with once they found what they needed uh with with uh utilizing the old website. Um, but it really wasn't meeting uh all of the community's needs and we needed to act on that to make it more secure, make it more accessible, and make it more understandable to much of the community. Now, um, [clears throat] as I said, we clearly didn't get it right for every sector of the community, and we really do value the feedback that we're getting from all of our stakeholders, including in uh in in your area, uh, to to help us make it better and to meet those uh,
expectations. So I think what's happened is that everybody I know has got the the young person in their life to save to their phone or their you know device the link to the old website and uh so just while Senator Roberts was talking I took the opportunity to go back to the new one again and still find it almost impossible to navigate simply and easily to get the information that I'm looking for. and uh and so I take on board everything you've said and I just think that the design of the new one remains problematic and uh without being a web designer myself I I remain optimistic that you'll be able to take the look and feel of the old one and translate that into a more secure robust site because um yeah the new one just isn't it's not very handy and I'm sorry to say. All right. Um, and you're not going to turn off the old one anytime soon?
>> Um, no. The the reg site is there for registered users primarily. Uh, so that will uh continue to be available. Um, but we uh we hope that uh with working on uh improving uh the the details of the new website that over time the use of the regge website will will diminish. Um it is primarily uh used by a a small sector of the community at the moment. Um so it's not the majority of the use and um and in fact most people are using our app for access to weather. 6 million users a day uh for the app about 2 million uh for the uh the new website and uh and roughly at its peak about 400,000 for the reg site.
I suspect that the people using the new website don't have a young person who's given them access to the old website. Anyway, um I want to talk to you about the floods in North Queensland recently and the um and the flood gauges. I understand that the Bureau of Meteorology is taking over the flood gauges from local councils and state uh and want to talk to you about that no, let's start with that. So, have you taken over has the bureau taken over all of those flood gauges yet?
>> Uh well, Senator, it's important to realize that our flood warning network uh nationally uh is um is a complex beast. It has uh many different owners of uh flood gauges. Um so in in uh in total we own about onethird of the the flood gauges and and operate and and maintain about onethird of the the gauges and about 2/3 are owned and operated either by state government entities uh local councils in the case of Queensland and and uh other uh uh entities. So, um the uh the FWIN program, the the flood warning infrastructure network program that was funded by by the federal government um uh is aimed at us acquiring a uh number of those sites about 1,600 across the country that uh and bringing them into the bureau's network where we are responsible for u monitoring, maintaining and uh and ensuring that their high quality uh data flow there to to to harden if you like the the operation of the network. So there's no doubt that um uh uh at the moment the the challenge is uh different people operating with different standards, not always replacing uh equipment or not uh not having a a structured maintenance program like the bureau does with its network.
>> So and just to be clear, Senator, it's it's not that the bomb is taking over all gauges across the country. I think the number is about 1,600 >> uh nationally. Um uh the majority of those from memory are in Queensland >> um in recognition of the flood risk posed in Queensland. Um and the the the choice if you like about which gauges the bureau will take over and the priority order for taking them over has been made in conjunction with the states because obviously within a particular state or even within a particular region there are some gauges that are very high priority and some that are lower priority.
>> Okay. So um if I talk specifically about the Mai Moranni region of North Queensland during the life cycle of extropical cyclone Cooji um the flood gauges in that region and tell me if I'm being too broad but the flood gauges in that region were they have they been taken over by the bureau or are they ones that are still being managed by the council? Uh so
Senator, I can give you um uh the overall uh picture for Queensland because the uh flood warning information uh sorry infrastructure network uh program has only been going for just over a year and um year and a half. Um Queensland has been the the first priority of that program uh very clearly as as uh the minister mentioned um about 1100 of the 1600 uh gauges will be uh in Queensland. Uh so far as of 27th of January 685 site assessment reports have been completed. This is just Queensland. uh 365 sites have confirmed scope of remediation because many of these sites require um engineering works to to bring them up to to standard. Uh 275 sites have been acquired from uh the the other owners and 113 transfer of equipment agreements with councils for signing where they have to sign over the assets. Uh 260 sites are undergoing 10ear finalization. 88 sites having uh clearance with the Aboriginal cultural heritage act, 71 sites undergoing clearance with the native title act. So these are complex processes of land acquisition and uh and ensuring that we can manage those sites. Um 287 sites undergoing environmental assessments. Um so to to answer your question specifically for Mai I'd have to take that on notice but what I can share is that uh up while the floods were happening in those um coastal catchments I believe there were four monitoring sites that the bureau managed that were not operating. Now two of those were from previous floods where those sites have been washed away and they had been prioritized as part of the flood warning uh infrastructure network program. and two of those uh were uh uh had had recently before the flood season failed and had been notified to the local emergency management. So adjusted service levels had been agreed. So none of those were a surprise to the the councils in those areas. There were a number of other gauges that were not working but they were not bureau gauges.
>> Okay. So on notice then if you wouldn't mind taking that question about the um the flood monitors and perhaps if you could do them by region. I'm specifically asking about Mai Moranny at the moment because it's my understanding that all the flood gauges were offline in that area.
>> No that's not true. So
>> okay. >> So if you could clarify that then. um I also have you know specific examples of flood gauges that were reporting water levels that were between in one and 2 mters difference to the manual reading at the site um that was north of Julia Creek. So, but again, I don't know which who was the owner. And so, when you provide me with the information on notice, that will be really handy to be able to understand which is council and which is uh which the bureau is taking over.
>> So, Senator, could could I just to um help you a little bit more, could I highlight that um because it's very important, I think, that the public understand this um that flood gauges are only part of the process for flood warning. We have we use satellite images. We use radar data. We use rain gauges in the catchment. We use complex numerical models of the stream flow. One gauge or two gauges not being there makes it can make a big difference to the local community nearby that gauge because it they they know that when it gets above a certain level, the bridge might flood or but it doesn't actually impact our ability to forecast the the flood overall. Um so the community should be very confident in the flood warnings that we provide and listen to that um and fully understand that that situational awareness from particular gauges is something that's very valuable for the community. But it's actually not that important to us forecasting the overall flood because we we use key high priority gauges as as our calibration points uh for the flood warnings overall. and that's why they've been prioritized in the flood warning infrastructure network program.
>> So I appreciate what you're saying. I'll give you a reverse example of um the Baron River at Canes the flood there um two years two Christmases ago. Um, we are still having disputes with insurers because the flood gauge was out and so they're using flood gauge measurements at the airport and then much further up the catchment and it's making it very difficult for the property owners to be able to manage their information with the um with the insurers. So, it's not just for the purpose of the flood in advance. It's also you know that data behind. All right. Um when will the automation of gauges project be complete?
>> So the upgrade project is a 10-year program. As I've mentioned the uh there's a lot of effort that goes into uh acquiring these gauges including engineering works uh acquisition of land uh in installation of telemetry upgrade of equipment. Um and the priority of that is uh as the minister mentioned uh done in conjunction with um uh uh the uh state governments and local councils. Um so uh that that said not all gauges will be automated. So there will still be manual gauges. And perhaps uh Senator just one other bit of information for you. Um, our new website uh has made a change in the way that we report the gauges. The old website uh if we had a manual gauge for example that had no reading, which is entirely normal in some of these floods, the old website would not show that gauge. We now show that gauge with a zero reading. Um, and that's what has confused, I think, some members of the public who think that that gauge is broken, but it may not be broken. It may be a manual gauge that is only read at certain points of the hydrograph. >> Right? So, it's um I wouldn't want people to think that a blank line next to a gauge means that that gauge is automatically not operating anymore. It just may be that it's a manual gauge and it's not part of its normal program to send someone out during a flood to
>> Might have to give it a different symbol or something to make it clearer. Senator McDonald, may I just inquire as to just a couple more, maybe two or three questions more. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Uh, so, um, so not all of the gauges will be automated. Um, it's my understanding that some of the gauges weren't uh weren't measuring because they needed to be regassed or that that maintenance program that you're talking about. Um, is there and and also it's my understanding that there is new technology and new gauges that are available to be used that would require less of that kind of um maintenance. is the bureau, what sort of process are you going through to examine the technology that you're using on gauges that would be fit for purpose for these remote locations?
>> Uh, thank you, Senator. So, great question. There's always advancements in technology and we're always assessing what's what's possible. I would highlight that that it is um these equipment are sitting in very exposed conditions in uh in very uh remote locations in many cases. Um the uh and and many people don't quite understand why it might uh be be difficult to to manage or or why it might cost a lot to put one of these gauges in when you can see for example that you can buy a rain gauge at Bunnings for a few hundred, right? The reality is to get that level of accuracy that we require um it costs a lot more relative um to to get that level of accuracy and reliability that's required. We always go out and test the market on on these things on a regular basis. So we're very open to new technologies when they come along, but they have to meet the um the accuracy and reliability standards that we require. the we do have um it's important to realize we have hubs uh in each state that um are our maintenance and uh and fieldwork hubs. They are there and they they go out and do preventative maintenance uh and and when a a gauge or a radar or something fails, they're out there fixing it straight away. So they have to have the spare parts for that. So if we have a mix of different technologies, it makes it more difficult. So it's uh it's very much considered by us as part of the the
program overall. So, as part of the answer to my questions on notice, please would you be able to list me the um the gauges, the location, the tech that's been used, whether or not it's in service, because what we found in North Queensland was during these most recent floods is that the gauges just weren't reporting at all or like the example I gave you were meters difference on the flood level. So appreciating that the bureau wants to be very accurate and that's very commendable but the difference between no information and some information would be really helpful. I mean these were devastating floods and you you um are aware of that.
>> Is there is there a particular geographic region that you'd like the bureau to focus on in its answer because that could be a pretty massive task.
>> Yes, I know. I know. Well, why don't we start with North Queensland then? Because there was the you know the >> Yeah. Well, it was it was the North Queensland floods, the Ethridge floods, the Mai >> and it was the same issue just kept coming up over and over that they think
the bureau defines regions, you know, there's a tropical north region or so maybe we'll try and pick up the catchments or the regions that cover that mai north and up into the Gulf.
Yeah, I appreciate that that that's a big task otherwise, but I think it would be really helpful to the community to be able to see and then hopefully assist with um with understanding at the bare minimum, but at a at a higher level what the bureau can and can't do. But the the feedback from this latest round of floods was they were very disappointed in the data that was available and uh and because the floods were devastating that that just compounded the
>> I think I think there was also a lot of misunderstanding as to who owned what gauges and who was responsible. So you may have seen me push back on certain comments that were made by certain state and local government reps in North Queensland saying it was all the bureau's responsibility when actually they were criticizing the failure of their own gauges in some cases. So and I think there was this misunderstanding. Um the other thing you might if you haven't heard this already Senator McDonald Dr. mention at his own initiative last week went to Mount Aiza to meet with the new Northwest Queensland region organizational councils. >> to have a direct com conversation with them which I've had very good feedback about. So it was great that he he did that and hopefully we can see more of
that. >> Well, thank you. That is incredibly valuable and uh hopefully they took you on a tour to some of the locations and
that would >> it was a wonderful meeting. Uh, Senator, it's important to me to hear from uh all the regions as well that are that are impacted by this. If I could just give you one one extra bit of information, Senator, because I think it's relevant. Um, the there is this perception uh in in Queensland that the bureau dropped the ball on a bunch of gauges. And I I can highlight that for the flood warning network our availability uh for for gauges in the December January period was 95% for the flood warning network and 97% for the priority one sites in the network. So um and that includes scheduled downtime or maintenance downtime. So the the when the bureau takes on these gauges as part of its network, uh it does an enormous amount of work to maintain and and and uh manage those gauges. Um that's not to say that they won't fail because they're they're sitting in a in a river system. Sometimes they get washed away, sometimes they get vandalized, sometimes, you know, unforeseen things happen. Um but the Australian public can be confident that when that does happen to the small number of uh you know three or 4% that that aren't working. It's not impacting on our ability to issue the warnings that they require. So uh I don't want people to feel that this gauge issue is is reducing their confidence in the warnings or that we provide because it's really critical that people listen to those warnings and act on them. Um it and and we are committed uh and we are funded to bring more sites into that network and and bring them up to that level if we like.
>> Right. Last question chair. So you've just given me a statistic 97%. But I'd like to know [clears throat] of what number gauges that is because you know it might be three.
>> I know no it's it's it's uh over one 1200 gauges I think that we currently uh manage in Queensland.
Queensland that number. Uh yes. No,
that's the national number.
>> So that is that is you're [clears throat] absolutely right. That is the community's perception that the bureau failed >> and uh regardless of who owned them, the data wasn't there to have satisfactory um data coming back from it. So >> I'd appreciate whatever information you can give me to assist me um communicate that. >> Thank you very much, Chair.
>> Thank you, Senator McDonald. I'm going to go to Senator uh Wish Wilson for one follow-up question and then I'm coming back to Sen Senator Henderson for a short block and then we are going to endeavor to move on.
>> Thank you. One one question. Um speaking about flooding, um obviously there was some community feedback or push back on the flash floods on Great Ocean Road. Um we saw the cars getting washed in the ocean at Wire River. Um, is there been any any any consultation with the community or the Victorian government or have you got anything to say about the the capability there? I understand it was a record rainfall in that area. It is prone to flash flooding, but it was a record rainfall at the time. Y
>> uh certainly uh thank you Senator. Um, so I I I will pass in a moment to to Mick to just explain the the detail, but my understanding is that uh a very localized and intense event like this notoriously hard to predict, but we actually uh in this case were able to predict uh uh 2 hours beforehand and and and issue warnings during that time. Okay. So this was a it was it's not one that I would promise we would get in in in other locations because it's so uh localized and and very difficult to to forecast. But perhaps Mick, if you want to share the timing of our warnings.
>> Yeah, certainly. And for these events, it's not just about the warning itself because they're very localized. So they they can be a challenge. But there were thunderstorms on the forecast 4 days in advance of that event. And um and we were briefing them, you know, in our regular briefings with the Emergency Management Victoria talking about the possibility of heavy rainfall in those thunderstorms the day before the event itself. And and as Stuart has mentioned, there were warnings out with 1 to two hours lead time just as that intense rainfall fell and it was a very localized warning targeted in on that area. Um uh but that doesn't obviously you know for the local community there was obviously still devastating impact that actually occurred from that. Um we did have one of our staff members go down and visit the local community afterwards as well available to talk through the nature of that event but at that point in time and the feedback that we've had is they're very appreciative of having someone there but they were very focused on recovery you know response and recovery really at that point and we haven't had too much feedback around uh concerns in terms of the the forecast and warning systems leading up to that event. That's not to say that we don't continue to review talk to emergency management Victoria about these events and and try and learn, but this is one localized event where there was warnings in place and uh these are really hard to predict exactly in space and time. So >> yeah, that's a good result.
>> Thank you, Senator Wish Wilson, Senator Henderson for a short block.
>> Thank you very much, Chair, for your ambition. Uh Dr. Mitchell, I wanted to firstly ask about the concern of the Wire River community uh following that dramatic flash flood a number of weeks ago where cars were washed out to sea and the much of why river was inundated by flood waters. There certainly was some criticism that no one seemed to receive any appropriate warnings in relation.
>> Is this the event we were just talking about? >> It is. >> Senator Wish Wilson just asked these
exact questions. Yeah. No, I'm ask I've got other questions. Thanks. Thanks, Minister. Um, doc, Dr. Mitch, that community has been hit by a number of very dramatic um disasters. Are you able to um give the community some confidence that you have the systems in place to ensure that there are appropriate
>> Thank you, Senator, for the question. Um, as I think we just u elaborated with uh uh Senator Wish Wilson, the um the nature of these very localized events is very difficult to forecast. Uh in this particular case, we did have warnings out uh in the the 1 to two hours before the event happened. So we were able to forecast that there was going to be an intense rainfall event there. um and uh emergency services were aware of those uh warnings as well. So uh I think in this case we did everything we could do uh uh reasonably to to predict what was a very very localized and intense rainfall event. Um and uh and I'm not at all confident that we could do that uh you know um uh you know many times over because the team did incredibly well in picking up the possibility of this really intense localized rainfall uh over the Y River area. So, um I we of course we totally feel for the uh the the campers and and residents in Y River who were impacted. The the the impact of um the flood and the the the cars being washed out to sea was very um uh visible and um and alarming. Um but uh um you know, weather is not uh something that's at that scale. it's very difficult to to forecast this um kind of extreme event. Uh but as I said in this case, we actually got we got it and we we picked it and we had warnings out in time.
So where was the communication breakdown because so many people were taken by absolute surprise and if this had you know after sunset >> uh during darkness it would have been perhaps a really catastrophic result where people couldn't see what was going
>> Yeah. Thank you Senator. It's not our role. Uh so it's our role to forecast as accurately as we can but then we uh partner and rely on uh local emergency services uh local police and others to to take uh that advice and choose and and do warnings or uh community assessments. So as you see during the fires for example we might forecast uh uh the uh the fire risk uh rating but it's not up to us to to uh uh issue the actual uh um the evacuation orders or or anything like that. That's the local
>> sure
>> emergency services. But we we were in communication with the local emergency services before this event and uh and they received our updated warnings at at that time. So
>> if I could just ask on notice for those communications prior to the event >> between the bomb and emergency.
>> Uh yes, it's also in the record. I think uh uh Mick Logan just outlined them uh in the answer to Senator Wish and so that
>> but could I have on notice all of the correspondence? >> Yep. and and we given given the conversations that were had with where did things break down? Are you able to make that assessment?
>> Uh well, I'm not so I'm sorry. I don't believe anything broke down uh from from that perspective. I I think that the community was uh affected.
>> No, the community I'm talking about the communication because so many campers for instance were not aware about this massive inundation of water coming down
the way. I think that's something that we um we we're not in a position to easily answer. That would be a postevent kind of analysis that would need to be done with the um the local emergency services as to why people didn't receive warnings or or other things. Um we we have a set process in place. Um uh do you want to share how how we engage with
take that question on notice very specific details, but just in general um very strong partnerships with all the state and territory emergency service agencies in Victoria. We have embedded staff at the state control center. So it's not just about you. So that that that translation of everything that's going on from a weather and warning point of view translates right through to meet their needs and their understanding of that. And so whenever warnings are issued, we do talk to our emergency partners about what the nature is of that warning. So that trying to make sure that the end to end flow of that information as strong as it possibly can be for the community. Uh that absolutely will have happened in this instance. There will have been no deviation from that with embedded meteorologists out at the state control center. Um but we'll still come back and take that on notice about the nature of the specifics for that event.
>> Thanks Mr. Logan. I guess if you're a camper facing that catastrophe uh and it was very dramatic for a period of time, people are not concerned about who's responsible for what. What I'm asking is where did things break down? Did the bomb undertake all of its communications correctly? Did emergency services not communicate to those
the officials have said this to I don't think it's possible for officials from the bureau to answer that question. Um what the officials can do and have done is tell you what their role is, what they've done, but um beyond anything beyond that is it's not really possible for officials from the bureau to answer
that. Well, Minister, what there may well have been correspondence, say, you know, from the local police service or fire brigade or whatever, I don't know where there may have been issues identified. And that's what I'm I'm not attributing blame necessarily to the bomb. I am just trying to unpack and understand why so many people were blindsided by the river with this inundation of water. Why didn't they receive the warnings? Are you going to conduct a postevent assessment? Dr.
>> That would mean the role of the bureau to do that. That would be the role of emergency services.
>> Please let me just ask that question. Dr. Mitch, are you going to investigate do a post event analysis of what happened?
>> So, uh, thanks Senator. It's, as uh, as the minister's rightly said, it's not really our role to do that. We have, uh, and and, uh, um, Mr. Logan's highlighted that we did send a staff member down after the event to to meet with uh the local community and uh and emergency managers. Um the feedback from uh emergency managers was very positive about the bureau's uh um you know warning being available to them in in time. So, um there may be perceptions out there that we didn't uh warn people, but we we we had those warnings out and the emergency management authorities were aware of that >> you're asking about communication to the
>> Dr. Just to be clear, I'm not attributing blame. Sure. What I'm trying to do is understand what went wrong. I
>> I totally understand your question.
genuinely seeking information because clearly on any sudden event such as this, what the community is interested in, >> including the wonderful people of Y River, is ensuring that whatever went wrong on that occasion doesn't go wrong
Yes, I I I totally understand and I'm sure that the local emergency uh services will be uh assessing what they do in if they receive a warning like this in future. Um you know, there's no um there may be many potential responses to that, but that's not it's not our our role to do that. We will cooperate and engage and continue to work in in partnership with the emergency services to understand how we what we can learn from these events and do better next.
>> Did you um were you able to predict the the level of water coming down the river and the and the level of inundation of the Wire River community? I understand you predicted intense rainfall, >> but my my understanding is that that did not translate to the community understanding that there was this going to be this mass inundation of water.
>> I think that's uh that's a correct categorization. It's very difficult to uh to predict the size and intensity of a flash flooding event like that. um it really depends uh very much spatially on exactly where the rain falls and how intense it it is in at that point in time. So we can forecast rainfall intensity but translating that into an exact flow in the river would be a very very difficult um task that would require a lot more instrumentation um a lot of uh extra modeling effort that is not um able to be done at the scale that we're talking about here.
Given the propensity for very significant rainfall through the outways, have you considered whether you might upgrade the way in which you forecast for sudden inundations of rain?
>> Um so um yeah, please
>> um just just a quick background context on this one. So we're talking flash flooding here um which is obviously very different to the major riverine flooding where there's a bit more response time and the ability to model it. So as was outlined, flash flooding as a real challenge. So the warning service there very much focuses on the heavy rain that could is conducive or could lead to flash flooding. Flash flooding as it's set out in the intergovernment's agreement is not actually the responsibility of the bureau and this is not trying to pass the buck here. It's just part of how the total warning system works because it's so localized in its nature. It needs that deep local understanding. and such. So obviously it's the responsibility of local government and we work in partnership in in how that may work.
>> Mr. Logan, with respect, that wasn't my question. I was asking whether the bomb had looked at how they could upgrade their localized equipment gauges or the like to better determine when you might have those inundations. I understand the complexity, but I'm wondering whether there's been any consideration to, as you mentioned, Dr. mentioned the complexity of forecasting this sort of flash flooding is is very high, but have you looked at how you could better forecast for these types of dramatic
flash floods? Well, we're always looking at how we can better forecast. Uh, >> it's it's not something that we can suddenly um uh react and and and change the way that we forecast uh for Y river at the absence of what we do everywhere else in the country because the next rainfall event will be at Kennet River or at uh you know, some some other location uh with within uh the uh uh you know, one of our uh states. So it's what I would highlight again is that we did get the forecast right for the intense rainfall. This is this really highlights this point uh senator that when we issue a warning of intense rainfall with the potential for flash flooding the public needs to treat that seriously right so it needs to be the understanding needs to be there is a real risk of flash flooding now that won't always eventuate um but in this case it did and uh you know it it it has had devastating impacts um I totally understand your question how does the community differentiate these these issues and that's a a a really difficult question in a in a a situation where there is we've accurately uh forecast the intense rainfall. Um but you can't always uh perfectly predict the outcome of that intense rainfall.
>> All right, Dr. Mitch, thank you. I'll look forward to receiving that information, that correspondence on notice. Can I move to the bomb website? Could you please update the committee on any further costs attributed to >> any aspect of the website or the upgrade of the website?
>> Chair, I'll seek your guidance. We have gone over this earlier and answered a questions from Senator Roberts and given we're hours behind schedule.
>> Well, I've got some Minister I have some other questions to answer. So, I'm >> okay. So, let's focus on the new
Well, I just think for surely for the efficiency of the Can we Can we Can I encourage you to focus on questions that
>> Thanks for your help as always, Minister. >> Um, Dr. Mitch, has there been any further costs incurred?
>> Um, thank you, Senator. Um, I can confirm that uh, as I mentioned earlier, we're continually doing incremental improvements to the website. this is always budgeted uh after a website release there is a need to uh to adjust and that uh across November and December uh 2025 um incremental improvement has cost 1.15 million uh over that period. Um
>> so is that on top of the 96 million?
>> Yes. Uh this is uh all of the upgrades and adjustments that we've made already to to the website.
>> So So we're now at 97.1 million. Is that the total cost?
>> That would be uh Yes. Close. >> Yes.
>> And what is the 1.15 million for?
>> Uh so um perhaps I'll pass to my colleague Nicole to to answer the breakdown of what we've done.
>> Thank you. Um Nicole Brinsme, chief information officer and group executive. Um so as also with our um our app, we actually set aside money every year for ongoing incremental improvements and feature releases uh for uh both the app and the website and we've done that uh for this financial year and we will continue to do that in future years as well. Um, so as we get feedback and as new products and services come online that we will continue to invest and upgrade and enhance the website. So there is always going to be additional investment in the website. That's not going to stop. There's not going to be a day where we stop spending money on the website. Uh, every year we will set aside a budget for ongoing feature releases. And so um, we did that this year. Um, and we've spent as as as um, uh, Dr. commission meant we've spent 1.1 of that this financial year um uh to date.
>> And Miss Benson, can I understand that you're responsible for the management of the website?
>> Uh yes, that's correct.
>> So could I ask you about the indirect costs and other associated costs involving the website because it's my information it's much more than 96 or 97.1 million when you look at all of the associated costs. For instance, uh the website was delayed for several years and during that time there were software licenses and hardware maintenance costs incurred. What were those costs?
>> So so um so they were included in the the $96 million and so so the website um uh build included infrastructure and new channels, platforms and software um upgrades. and and it took a number of years to to build the platforms and all the uh integrations and all the new data feeds and that needed ongoing updating and maintenance over over that year those years as well. So it's not a set and forget environment you need to continue upgrade and patch um that technology to maintain its security its its reliability and its supportability. Um so that so while the program was in flight um the those incremental costs to continue to maintain the licensing and the hardware were included in that 96 million.
>> Could we on notice please have a copy of every contract um connected with the website u both direct and indirect costs. Um my information is that it was well in excess of $96 million when you take into account all >> so indirect costs.
>> So under the so the website was built under the robust program which you know we've we've discussed before was an $866 million um upgrade of the bureau's uh infrastructure and observing um network. And so so there is underlying costs um that uh contributed to the the bureau's network and infrastructure upgrades um that the website um takes advantage of which we would have spent with whether we built the website or not. So I'm not sure what your bite guidance is, but if it's done within the the ecosystem of the whole robust investment um you it's very difficult to sort of hive off this bit of infrastructure was for the network because we use shared infrastructure, shared platform, share share licensing across the whole technology ecosystem. Um and then some of it specific to the website as well.
And Henderson, I'm not sure whether you were here when we talked about this at the last estimates, but it is worth remembering that the robust program which is what is responsible for the vast majority of the $96 million was entered into by the former coalition
>> and yes, I do understand that and for very good grs. Minister,
>> I just got the impression that you were unhappy.
>> No, please don't reflect on me. In fact, the the robust program was not just in relation to the website. It was also about the modernization of IT infrastructure. There was a new super computing capability, improved cyber security, stability and system reliance, upgraded digital platforms and software systems and of course the new public website. So I'm well and the robust program was put in place for very proper reasons. What we're concerned about is how that money is being spent and the blowouts that have
>> involved. The it has been suggested by some on your side of politics that there was a budget blowout of tens of millions of dollars in this program which is not the case.
>> I I'm not suggesting that, Minister. What I'm suggesting is that the indirect uh which concern the website were in excess of $96 million. What's
your evidence for that?
>> And I'm asking the questions, Minister. So, what I'm asking for if I could if we could access and have on notice all contracts in relation to the website the direct and indirect costs and all external contracts under the robust program, please.
>> So, all those contracts
>> because my understanding is that 90% of this money was contracted out to third
of uh vendors and also labor hire. >> That's right. As well.
>> So you know there was a huge and I'd put to you that there was a number of consultants who saw this honeypot of a massive amount of money. We're talking close to a billion dollars. I'm not reflecting on any
government minions were obviously made under the coalition government.
>> Well, what I'm concerned about is the integrity issues of managing these contracts. Uh Miss Bren, sorry. and Brunesme and so I'm seeking details of every contract under this program under the robust program because I don't believe that you have applied proportionally how some of these other contracts also played a role in supporting the website is there any sorry
>> you heard M Brisbane say 5 minutes ago that the $96 million figure included those costs
>> that's right so That was in relation to the software licensing and the hardware maintenance which I asked about. Was there are there any other are there any other contracts that support the website in any shape or form?
>> So so we have um the Accenture contract is the main contract that that supports the website. Um uh and we we've talked about this extensively um previously. Um we have then the website sits on shared platforms that the website leverages but it's not just the website and that's our data platform and our integration platform and so they are there are contracts in place to support those. They are built as a shared enterprise service regardless of whether the website uses them or not. Um, so the website leverages their technology, but they're shared enterprise platforms that other products and services use as well. So,
>> and so what's the value of those other >> where the website shares some of that technology, but obviously not solely the
Senator, just while uh Mr. Green means looking that up, um I'd highlight again that uh all of the uh contracts that were formed as part of the robust program and of the website have been available on Oz Tender and have been shared with um uh the the committee here previously. Um, we I would also highlight that the robust program overall which includes the website has been subject to
>> Sorry, what was that Dr. I just missed
>> Sorry. the the the robust program overall which includes the website development has been uh subject to eight uh gateway reviews by the department of finance and the most recent review which completed uh in November >> um resulted in a uh green light uh review for the the program as a whole. >> Thank you. uh highlighting that um and and there were also a number of um digital transformation agency uh reviews undertaken throughout the process. So we're very confident that overall the program has delivered uh what what uh value for money and um and uh and delivered uh what it uh set out to do when it was originally designed. Uh
>> thanks Dr. Mitch. Just going back to those additional contracts that support in part >> the website if you could just go through those miss.
>> Yes. So, so we we we've discussed the accenture contract. So, that was the main um contract. Um
>> and what's the cost of that?
>> Uh that's the 77 uh just just well 78 Uh and that is that includes build and ongoing run cost. So, that runs to 2027.
>> and just to be clear, does that is that within the 96?
>> Yes,
>> that's within the 96 million. That's not on top of
>> Yep. Sure.
>> Um, then there was the Deote um user experience design contract which was $3.5 million. Um then uh we have a data management platform which stores our um provides us with the data management platform and metadata management for all our data not just for data that feeds the website. >> Um that's that's 68.4 million. Uh again that's a contract that expires in June 2027.
>> And would with who holds that contract?
>> That's with LOS.
>> Sorry
>> LOS. And then we also have the deote uh contract that manages our integration platform. So that's a platform that manages our data flow across the organization. So it takes all our data in it sort of move you know processes it and put it in different data formats and then it distributes it out to different products and services including the website. >> Um so that um there's two contracts uh there. There's the um it's 90 90 19.7 million uh but the actual spend was 13.9 uh and then there was another additional $3.1 million actually no but that was the contracted but the actual spend was
1.2. Can I suggest, Senator, that on notice we we uh come back to you with the contracts entered relating either directly or indirectly to the website and because obviously some of those figures that have just been cited, some or all of them are contained within the 96 million. Let's let's come back on
>> I'd rather obtain information as as to the extent that I can now. Thank you. I certainly have asked for their contracts on notice, but so far we've got 78 million. Then we've got another 68.4 million. I I I agree that this is you've made it clear that this in part supports the website. Then there's other contracts of roughly another 20 million. >> Uh are there any other contracts that support the website in whole or in part? >> And can I ask about the contract? It's CN362. 3750. It was originally costed at 31 million, now 78 million. Is that the Accenture contract?
>> Sorry, can you repeat that number?
>> Sorry, it's it was the original contract value was 31 million and it's in rough terms it's now nearly 78 million. Is that the accent accenture contract?
>> Could you read the number again?
>> The o tender number is CN 362 3750.
>> Yes, that's the
>> that's okay. Yes, I understand. Thanks, chair. So, that's the total amount of third party contracts which support in whole or in part the bomb website.
>> So,
>> are there any other contracts?
>> So, so it was the Deote user experience design was the 3.5
>> 3.5. Yep.
>> As well as the accenture contract that we just mentioned. Yep. So, those contracts are specific to the website.
And have the other contracts so the $68.4 million contract with Lagos the Deote contract for two contracts were 18 20 million depending on what was contracted and what was spent. Have there been cost blowouts on those contracts? What was the original contracted amount and has that blown out?
>> Uh so I don't have that information right in front of me. um but they were also um uh subject to ongoing um complexity impacted by sort of co and delays as well. So um so the original contracted value um will be different from what the final contracted um what the cost was um for similar reasons that the extension contract also um increased um uh as we did the ongoing discovery and the integration complexity and the delays related with co um we did see um additional effort required to deliver on the scope that was contracted. Senator,
can I just add a bit of context here too because I think it's important that you understand um we've spoken more generally about robust before and robust was originally funded um in the 2017 18 budget. Um and there were three tranches to to robust. So when the contracts were let through tender they they were not just uh a single tender amount for the whole period of robust there was a initial uh you know contract let because we only had certainty of trunch one >> but there were options for trunch two and trunch three already built into that procurement process right so
>> and that's why I've asked for details of every contract
>> so when you say blowout that's not actually a blowout in most cases. This was part of a stepped program of work which was signed off by cabinet at the time. Uh and those three tranches were funded in the budgets of uh 1718, 1819 and 2021 um in three different steps. And each time that that tranch was approved, we were able to then contract uh those extra trunches of uh external providers um uh contract if you like. So they they they initially tended uh for these options for extension if we were successful in gaining the se separate tranches. So I don't want it to be categorized as we we blew out over that time. This was actually a proposed program of work that were relied on coming back to government each year to get the next year of of resources under the robust program.
>> And to state the obvious, all of those stages were approved by the former
much, Minister. As I say, we're concerned about the total costs incurred for the website. Uh, can I just again confirm that there are no other contracts in whole or in part associated with the
Um so there are probably some labor hire contracts of where people are contributing to work but not in terms of consultancy vendor type contracts.
>> Can you tell me the value of those labor
higher? >> I would not have have had that information available to me and over the over the you know the seven-year period that the website was built there was a number of labor hire contractors who were involved um in that process. Um, so I'm assuming if if you're referring to contracts, you wanted to cover that
>> including every every contract. Yeah.
>> But they were they were factored into the 96 million as well. So So the way we collected our costs was if they worked on that project, their costs were attributed to that 96 million as well.
>> And so were they individual contracts or were they through a third party labor
high firm? >> Oh, so they were they were hired through labor hire firms.
>> All right. If we could also have a copy of those contracts as well, please.
>> They were they were they were engaged individually but just they were just hired through a firm. So there won't be one one contract with a labor hire firm. It'll be individual labor hire contracts
>> there. But there would be a contract with the labor hire [clears throat] firm. So, if we could have >> a copy of that and also the the the total cost of each individual employed pursuant to that third party labor hire what what [clears throat] further work and cost will be incurred to on the
website, Miss Brim? So, as I mentioned, >> um, as we do with the app, we set aside, uh, investment every year to continually improve and add additional features and services. And so, um, every year the bureau executive will make a decision on what that investment will be for the next year and we will continue to build out features and enhancements and improvement. Um there's also an ongoing annual amount that obviously needs to sort of manage the support and ongoing maintenance of of all the infrastructure um and and technology licensing as well. Um so there will every year there will be ongoing costs um to maintain and continue to enhance um
>> and given the quantum of these contracts who has responsibility for signing off on them or any upward adjustment? Uh, so
these current contracts, um, the CEO is the delegate for these contracts.
>> All right. I'll look forward to receiving that further information on notice. >> Thank you. Thanks, Chair.