Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee, , 3:09:04 to 3:51:51
The committee examines humanitarian risks associated with El Niño in the Pacific and the effectiveness of the Foreign Arrangement Scheme in securing university research.
Topics: Climate change, National security, Pacific relations
Speakers: Julie Heckscher, Hon Penny Wong, Senator Jessica Collins, Senator David Pocock, Natalie Cohen, Dr Fiona Webster, Jan Adams, Senator Raff Ciccone, Speaker 22
>> Yes, thank you, Chair. Um, I wanted to ask about uh a deeply concerning case involving an Australian university student who participated in an Engineers Without Borders um humanitarian design summit in June some of the allegations about what happened uh during that um summit and and I'm really keen to understand what DEFAT has DEFAT has done since becoming aware of those allegations and what assurances it can provide that other students will not be exposed in similar uh ways.
>> Could you provide a little bit more information?
>> We couldn't hear the name of the
So design summit in in Vonoatu in June this year supported through the new Colombo plan. Um a student has provided a detailed dossier alleging that she was sexually assaulted by a doctor while seeking emergency medical treatment and that an engineers without borders facilitator witness incident but failed to intervene and that uh EWB subsequently mishandled both the incident and then her personal information. And I was wondering when DEFAT first became aware of this alleged sexual assault.
>> That's exceptionally um disturbing information, Senator, and we are not aware of it at this point, but just ask some colleagues to come up.
>> Thank you, Senator. It's Chris Cannan, First Assistant Secretary of [snorts] the Global Health and Education Division in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Um, I'd like to take that question on notice if I may. I'm not aware of the details of that case. Um, but certainly it's something that uh obviously sounds like it's of concern and that I'll seek to get details and come back to you as soon as we can.
>> Okay. We can we can maybe um leers through the minister's office to to to make sure you have the right um details then. Thank Thank you. Um, I might ask preparedness for El Nino and what we're our our neighbors Um, what's the department's assessment of the humanitarian risks associated with the 2026 27 El Nino in the in the Pacific and T-O lee?
Thank Thank you, Senator Natalie Cohen, the acting deputy secretary for development multilateral in Europe group. Um yes, we are monitoring and tracking very closely the El Nino and we are seeing that um the Bureau of Meteorology is estimating that those conditions will worsen in coming months. We expect there to be a peak between uh October now and December of this year with the worst conditions in Papa New Guinea T or less in Indonesia and then we think that that will move eastwards into this first half of 2027 where we would see more impact in Vanuatu, Tonga and Fiji for example. with um tracking weather conditions that are affecting things like water shortages, um reduced agricultural production, obviously leading to food security issues, impacts on public health, and impacts on hydroelect electric generation and power supply. And we of course are also aware that these things can lead um be drivers to community tensions and and conflict and violence as well. And some of this is compounded too by the Middle East conflict and the impact on fuel um and energy supply in the region. The UN is estimating that El Nino could result in an additional 8.2 million people facing acute food insecurity in Asia and the Pacific. And so in our development program um and our preparedness through the humanitarian program, we're looking at how we can adapt to these evolving circumstances. We've got flexibility built into many of our programs so that we can adjust to the situation as we discuss what's happening with partner countries and organizations in those countries. To date, we've committed more than $26 million to build community resilience and to respond to the impacts of El Nino. And we can go into more detail about that if you'd like it.
>> Thank you. Is that >> Um, is that additional
remember that. I distracted your answer to a question, Minister. Won't do that
>> Um, thank you, Miss Cohen. Is that money additional or is it repurposed from
>> Uh, that money is um funding that's either within our existing flexible mechanisms that where um under our humanitarian program or funding that uh is within our bilateral development programs.
And how much is from from the existing programs or is it just all from existing programs? Is there any new funding in
>> Well, the the the the ODA pro program from which this comes uh is obviously by definition new funding every year. Uh, and we rebuilt not, you know, I know my friends, our friends in Akid want more, and that's fair enough. That's, as I said to them, it's your job to argue for that. Um, but we rebuilt substantially the the base of ODA funding and continued um, indexation. Um, so that by definition is new. Uh, but within the aid program, have we set up a new stream on this? I think probably the answer is no because climate change adaptation and resilience has been part of how we have dealt particularly in the Pacific for uh a long time. So those programs are about recognizing the reality of um uh the changing climate what that means for particularly people who have and communities that have very little >> So but Mr. Scott is much better than I at all bits bits of the development pro and listen Cohen but so I'll let them deal with it
>> then. M Miss Cohen um just following on from from the minister's um answer there. Have you been allowed to see the ONI's climate risk assessment that they did looking at the Pacific?
>> Probably contributed
>> the department that has Yes.
>> Okay. Miss Cohen, have you you managed to have a look at it?
Um, I can't recall, Senator.
>> I don't think uh, Miss Cohen was in this position when that assessment was done.
>> I assume it's fairly it's still fairly relevant. Um was the assessment helpful for for DEFAD in in trying to plan for the the kind of um changes in in climate and these sort of cascading and compounding climate fueled um events and disasters that the our neighbors are are likely to see. I
think I would say that uh I mean DEFAT has had responsibility of different parameters of the the climate change
>> I mean none of this is a new and none of this is a surprise. I mean I remember arguing this when I was climate minister and being shouted down by some parts of Liberal Party, Malcolm Turble and others agreed um that the climate impacts are not just temperature u they are um they have um I think you use cascading impacts you know that there are a multiplicity of effects um not just on the climate system but on um human beings um whether that is access to you know whether it's food security access to fish stocks capacity for you know where where arable land is and what what agricultural production is affected um as well as the security of people and you know we we are aware of this senator I mean you know the two valu agreement the very first one we signed included a
>> and so miss Adams I take it that it was helpful in in trying to
>> I I well I don't think the that assessment and I'm not going to talk about a national security document but I think um much of what you are referencing has been public and discussed whether it's Cyro uh or the IPCC uh or um Australia's chief scientist or many others over many many years this is not a point in time assessment um is not the key point. The po the point is this has been building for some years and in fact what is happening to open ocean temperatures is probably at the higher end of what was predicted and anticipated.
>> Um have the findings of that um OI assessment been shared with our Pacific neighbors and and countries like Tim
Oh well, I think the as minister says the those issues are completely uh part of our not only our climate work and our international climate engagement but of course our work with the Pacific countries. So >> uh those issues are are well known. Some of them are more focused on in the Pacific than others. Of course, sea level rise has been uh the current issue.
>> But Mr. Adam, my my question was we we know that um we know the public commentary, the the science, but the Australian government uh got the ONI to do a report looking at the risks in our region. Um have those findings been shared with our neighbors saying, "Hey, we've got this work done. This is what's coming."
>> All right. Or not. I'll leave that to
>> Well, I think I'm not going to comment on a National Security Committee document, but what I will say to you is we have a very open and um honest dialogue with Pacific neighbors. >> these arrived and then disappeared. We have a very open and honest dialogue with our Pacific um uh neighbors as a member of the Pacific family. Um uh and these are issues that are front and center in our in our discussion and I would just say to you and I I don't think you you were intending it it in any patronizing way but I don't think they need us to explain to them the consequences.
>> That's not what I'm saying.
>> I'm just I'm just saying that like they are they live this.
>> Yeah. And so trying to get us to take it
more seriously. I don't think you need to tell me to take them more seriously, Senator PCO. I always have.
>> All right.
>> And we do.
>> Last question. I might as well rotate the
last question then, Minister. If if it is being taken um so seriously, you know, fossil fuel projects and extensions aside, surely something like a national um climate risk assessment should be released in some sort of public form, a declassified version uh as is done US, UK. Why is this a
It's a National Security Committee document. We don't release them.
>> But you release declassified versions of
documents all the time. >> What we we
>> the defense strategy, the all sorts of things. I'm I'm interested why this one why is this secret?
>> Well, Senator, um I've tried to understand you want to make a point about this. I've tried to explain to you the way in which um uh the Australian government over a long period of time, less so obviously under Tony Abbott who and others who thought this was some sort of left-wing conspiracy. Uh we take climate change seriously. We take the analysis of the risk seriously and we are uh we it informs our policy. It certainly informs uh the our approach to our humanitarian assistance and development assistance. uh and um I think Pacific Island leaders have been ahead of most of the world when it comes to understanding the risks and consequences of climate.
>> Thanks J.
>> All right. Thanks a lot. >> Now Senator Collins, have you got some
>> Thank you very much. Sh. I'd like to ask about the foreign arrangement scheme. Okay, Minister. Um, the PJ CIS warned in paragraph 3.21 of its August report that researchertores researcher arrangements are not captured by the foreign arrangement scheme and can carry material risk. Yet, your original bill on the foreign relations uh amendment uh these types of arrangements weren't included. Why was that?
>> Uh thank you, Senator Julie Hexer. uh first assistant secretary of the regulatory and legal uh policy division. Uh the scheme originally as conceived in 2020 covers enterprise level arrangements. So arrangements between at the university between universities and foreign government partners. It doesn't cover individuals. um as part of the legislative amendments that were just passed uh it includes now uh researcher to researcher arrangements. Basically, the legislation now imposes an obligation on universities to identify research projects uh that are in place between uh researchers, employees of a university and foreign researchers to have in place procedures and policies to identify the risks to manage the risks and essentially to make sure that they implement those. So, those were part of the amendments just passed.
>> Thank you. And why weren't they included originally?
uh well back in 2020 I can't actually answer uh why individual arrangements weren't covered but essentially the foreign arrangement scheme as originally conceived was focused on uh the regulated community covered by the scheme were universities so university level arrangements state and territory governments and local governments so those were the regulated community covered by the legislation not individuals
>> um not I'm not talking about the 2020 foreign arrangement scheme, but the original bill, the um foreign relations and territory amendment bill earlier
Well, the as the amendments flowed on from the independent review that was undertaken by Dr. Rosemary Huxable, uh the uh legislation reflects the uh recommendations made as part of that independent review. There were 23 recommendations. All of them were accepted or accepted in principle by the government and implemented. There was no recommendation in that review relating to individual level arrangements. In fact, and as I said, the original scheme covered enterprise level arrangements.
>> Was it was there no assessment that there was a risk there? Why? Well, there
are many risks in relation to foreign interference and other issues in the Australian environment. Not all of them are covered in legislation for which this uh agency is responsible. But as I
understand it, there was a bill and then there was amendment to that later on. So why in the original bill put forward by the government um was there not the researcher to researcher arrangement
Well, Senator,
>> the amendment I agreed with Ted. You're talking you're complaining it wasn't in the original bill. Is that is that the political proposition?
>> I'm just asking questions. I'm just trying to work.
>> No, I'm just trying to understand what the point is. So, your complaint is >> Why did the original question, Minister? >> Well, your your complaint is why did the original bill not include the amendment that I eventually suggested and agreed with your shadow?
>> I'm asking Yes. Why wasn't it in the
>> Well, um Ted raised it. Ted raised with me your views on your the opposition's views. I suggested to him this amendment was a way to deal with that. So then there was bipartisan support. I think it's an example of the legislature doing
>> I am going to get to that soon, that part of the process, Minister, and I'm just trying to understand why it wasn't in the original. Um earlier this year, the Australian exposed collaborations involving researchers from the UN University of Sydney, UNSW, and Adelaide University with Iranian scientists on drone technology. And there's also more recent uh reports on research collaborations involving UNSW academics and scientists linked to China's uh PLA. Are you 100% confident that comparable arrangements will now be captured and stopped under your amended legislation if the university was not a party to the
Senator foreign arrangements scheme and the work that we do under it is just part of a whole of government piece of work that happens with universities to look at research security uh at universities including uh researcher to researcher engagement as part of the foreign arrangement scheme. Uh my team spend a lot of time talking to universities, working with universities to lift general awareness of risks to lift due diligence and capability and we do so in combination with uh agencies across the whole of government that includes the department of education which is responsible for universities. It includes the department of home affairs and it includes the intelligence and security agencies. Quite a bit of this discussion happens in EUIT, the university's foreign interference task force uh which is a collaboration between government and universities to specifically look at risks. Now uh that work has been going on for some time. Uh whole of government has been working with universities to actually identify risks to manage risks to do due diligence and to work on them. Foreign arrangement scheme is a very important part of that. uh this new provision uh that as the minister said was a bipartisan outcome of the legislative reform process that has just uh undertaken will be part of that work going forward. Uh we continue to engage closely with universities on how that will be used to actually identify ongoing risks.
>> So DEFAT has assessed whether these types of specific types of collaborations would be captured.
No, we haven't made an assessment as to whether the particular one that you uh have identified would be captured. We will be working with and we are currently working with universities to uh look at what are those policies and procedures that universities will put in place. How do they manage them? Uh what do they need to do to identify and assess risks? It is a new piece of uh legislation, a new obligation, quite a far-reaching obligation on universities and it will be the subject of a lot of work. We haven't actually individually assessed some of these things that have appeared in the media as to whether they will fall within this. We are looking at how will we roll this out with universities to ensure that it is effective, it is uh impactful and to look at what it captures and how it captures them.
>> Okay. So the obligation is on the universities. Minister, will you actually have the power to cancel these individual researcher to researcher
>> Can I can I make a couple of points? Um and I think the way in which the scheme envisages that is the universities have the duty not the government. And and in part that is uh um ensuring that the people who actually know about it can do something about it from the start. Um um first this is legislation um was brought forward in 2020. Um uh I I thought at the time it was a bit rushed. It was part of um you don't have to respond to this department. [laughter] Uh it was part of the um Morrison government's attempt to um you know promulgate its national security. Um um that's probably a bit unfair, but anyway, um we were critical of it, but I think we uh supported uh we supported the legislation. I I I retained concerns about how they did it because it was I I thought not um uh both not broad enough in remitt, but also um uh very administratively problematic. So that's why we asked Rosemary Huxable who's a distinguished public servant, a former uh I think secretary of finance um to do a comprehensive and independent review. Um and uh she her the bill I think the the proper answer to the why wasn't it included in the bill is is as I think Miss Hexa said is because we followed the independent reviews recommendations. uh we have consistently made clear that uh universities um uh have to play their role in managing risks and that's that's what the legislation does um uh and um you know we we would encourage universities to do that. I think the point here is that national resilience the resilience of the democracy the resilience of particular parts of our polity parts of the community parts of government etc. It is not only done by the government administering a scheme. It is also by Australians in leadership positions and in institutions like um universities being you know risk aware and uh risk you know engaging with recognition in with recognition of the risks and being making informed choices about what sort of engagement and with whom and making sure that is what they implement uh as policy and process inside their institutions. And you know CRA itself cannot regulate all that. We have thousands of researchers, thousands of employees at universities. What we want is the universities to have the to discharge their obligation and we are prepared to and we do engage with them so they are aware of of some of the risks.
>> Okay, I understand that. Um I'm just trying to understand the level of accountability and um I guess the powers afforded to the government to be able to terminate uh any researcher to researcher relationships and whether um it is actually captured in the legislation now or is it just solely on
the universities? I I think Senator um happy to answer that question at the next estimates which will have given us time to actually implement this provision. It's very new and we're discussing it with universities. Now just to follow up the minister's point, this legislation has actually been very effective. Uh when you think that we have had over 23,000 notifications, 84% of which have come from universities um we actually have a lot of visibility now of of what is actually happening at universities than we did in the past. Uh DEFAD is working closely with other agencies particularly education and home affairs which also have a role in this to really work with universities and to actually strengthen their resilience. Uh as the minister said, the situation is evolving. Uh risks appear in all sorts of different ways in new and problematic ways for universities. This has to be a collaborative and cooperative exercise with universities. And it is because if we actually don't do it that way and if universities aren't actually managing the risks, risks will pop up in ways that we don't expect and aren't covered by the legislation. So I think uh we are working currently with education and universities to to work through how we will implement and how they will implement this new obligation on their part. Feel free to ask me at the next estimates how we how we're doing with it once it's actually in force. The provision is not yet actually in force though we hope it will be shortly.
>> Okay. But there aren't really any enforcement provisions. Correct. From as I understand it in this amendment, there's no real teeth to it. It's just an obligation. The onus is on the universities to um oversee, manage the risk uh and terminate any researcher to re look put it this way. I I have I have done 10 and a half years at university. 6 and a half of those uh were postgraduate. I've seen the links that you have. I've seen the conferences that you go to across Australia, international people come from everywhere. the people-to-people links are very very strong around the world. Very very easy for many of these relationships to go unnoticed. Uh so putting the onus of that on universities of which we have many and as you mentioned before thousands and thousands of people working at these universities very very difficult thing to manage. Minister Wong you wrote to universities in 2023.
>> Hang on hang on but take that to its logical conclusion. You're saying because there are so many universities can't possibly be aware of them both to which I would say how does a bureaucrat or public servant in CRA therefore aware of them. >> Well, I'm not it's no but it you've got to work out how you make sure that you you know that we actually make the right decisions on these engagements. I don't think you do that by assuming that someone who's in CRA can be aware if the university itself is not aware. The point is the universities themselves need to make sure that their processes and procedures and how they tick off on researcher to researcher arrangements what they expect of their staff are fit for purpose and that's what that's what that provision does. Now this is a work you know the legislation uh which has been amended a few I think
>> once
>> only once um I thought it was twice yeah no the bill was amended by PJIS I think when it first went through >> so right so there were changes proposed when PJC I think PJIS uh when the first bill was was proposed we've um amended it again as a consequence of both um engagement with Mr. O'Brien but also primarily from um M Huxable's report if that I've no doubt you know in the future there may well be changes we think okay this is not working well this is working really well we want to make these changes and I'm I'm open to that you know I don't think this is closed but your point doesn't make Australia safer because it assumes that you know Miss Hexa who works very hard but I don't know that she's going to be across every researcher to researcher arrangement that every university and and in Australia is engaging it
>> and nor should she be minister. What I'm what I'm suggesting is that perhaps the amendment needs some more teeth and uh some enforcement um because you did write to universities in 2023. Minister calling for an end to research collaboration with Iranian institutions and further warnings were issued to 26 universities between March and June this year. Why does a government have to keep repeating these instructions?
>> I can actually say that from a foreign arrangements perspective when we uh took a good look at how many arrangements were actually still in place between Australian universities and Iranian counterparts. uh we had none left in operation that fell outside the exception that was provided in the minister's original letter which was for for some student arrangements. Uh now that doesn't answer your question about the broader uh research potential partnerships between individuals at Australian universities and uh individuals in Iran. this provision uh gets us uh along that pathway. I would also note just going back to your earlier question, we are very conscious that the department of education is responsible for um uh universities and we are working very closely with the department of education to make sure that we are well linked in with the department of education and its administration of universities. What we don't want is uh conflicting uh messages or which there aren't but conflicting obligations or overlapping obligations. So hopefully between us and department of education we will actually make sure that our respective responsibilities and legislative provisions are actually well synced.
How many universities were found to have continued collaborations after um well concerning uh collaborations after the original >> Uh yes.
Uh so as I just said um after the minister's uh original letter in 2024 we did uh we went back to universities and asked uh about the individual uh enterprise level arrangements they had with Iranian institutions and we found none still in operation that fell outside the small exception that had been provided at time in relation to some individual students. uh that is the enterprise level arrangements which to date are the arrangements that are covered by the foreign arrangement scheme.
>> Okay. Where was there any enforcement action taken beyond sending further
>> I'm sorry.
>> Sorry. Was there any enforcement action taken beyond sending further letters?
>> But there were no foreign arrangements still in place.
>> Yes, but I'm just
>> What would we have enforced if they had
already complied? Sorry, but I'm just asking before that because there were repeated letters, weren't there? Am I that's my understanding. Was it just letters and then
>> but but the universities weren't not complying in relation to Russia for example. >> Uh we did the same thing with Russia and Bellarus. Um in uh we sent a similar letter asking after the invasion of Ukraine that there be no further engagement uh with institutions in Russia and Bellarus. Y >> uh in uh late 2024 uh the minister made a rule uh 25 sorry the that specifically brought institutions [clears throat] in Russia and Belarus uh within the scheme uh as institutions that would be covered formally by the scheme. Uh and we again checked whether there were any arrangements still in force. uh we found that there were no arrangements with Russian or Bellarician institutions uh that hadn't been terminated uh expired been suspended etc. So there was nothing still on foot at that point. Uh two proposals were made to enter into uh arrangements with institutions in univers in uh Russia and Bellarus earlier this year. uh the minister issued prohibitions on those arrangements being entered into. So just as a for example uh we find that the scheme has been incredibly effective in giving us visibility of arrangements that our universities are entering into and providing a pathway for us to engage with universities and either turn them off if we need to as the minister did earlier this year or alternatively to work with universities to ensure that the arrangements are not on foot.
>> Okay. what um enforcement pathways or options are available if for instance uh a university hadn't complied with it. Uh
the enforcement pathways under the legislation there is an injunction pathway uh which we haven't had to use to date and there is frankly cancellation and variation powers uh as you'll be aware the cancellation and prohibition powers have been used by the minister under the legislation. uh we find that uh as the minister said earlier we need to actually harden the resilience of the whole sector you know and in fact local governments as well as state and territory governments and universities. So one of the most effective things of the scheme is the way that we have done enormous amounts of outreach with universities at all different levels and with local governments and state and territory governments to work with them on building their own capabilities to building their awareness of foreign policy risks, national interests and to support them in actually uh making making decisions that are in Australia's foreign policy and national interests.
Okay. And just to confirm um that's university to university but if it's researcher to researcher those same powers the injunction the cancellation and variation powers are not available to the minister
>> for the research to researcher
>> for the researcher to researcher that's just just to your you raised before minister about um I guess the bipartisan process that you said about coming to this amendment. Um the coalition did promos propose an amendment to bring significant research to researcher arrangements within the scheme. The government rejected it. >> Mhm. um arguing that the existing national security laws were sufficient and just a day later the government introduced its own amendment recognizing the same risk. Um can you just explain to us what changed within those 24 hours please?
>> Did Mr. O'Brien want you to ask these questions?
>> Pardon?
>> Did Mr. O'Brien want you to ask these questions?
>> This is not an appropriate question to ask.
>> I'm just saying he's the shadow I dealt with him. I'm sure he doesn't want I would have thought he doesn't really want all our discussions aired in estimates.
>> I'm just trying to understand if if if there's >> so soim similar amendments what changed in between those 24 hours?
>> Well, I I think I thought your original amendment let the universities off the hook and was administratively unachievable. Like I don't think first I think universities should be obliged to do what we say that what we've outlined in the amendment, right? because they are um they are responsible for the people that they employ uh and they should ensure that the national interest is served and observed in those arrangements. Secondly, I didn't think Miss Hexa could actually keep on top of all of the arrangements throughout the the the Australian tertiary education system with other um researcher to researcher. [snorts] Um uh but I did think uh uh you know I had some engagement uh and my office had engagement with Mr. O'Brien's office. Uh, and this was the the compromised position uh that we thought dealt with my concerns, but also uh flagged uh the um put put in a legislative um put a legislative duty which uh has not existed before in this way on universities. So it's quite a big if you I don't want to use the word stick but we often do in um legis in the context of legislation but it's a it's a it's a it's quite a substantial legal obligation on them now and I thought we thought that that was a reasonable compromised position to uh deal with some of um the issues that Mr. O'Brien had raised um but also deal with the issues I had raised. So it was I think a good example of the legis legislature working um as it should.
>> I mean just to actually follow up this is not this is not easy going to be easy for universities. Uh we've had a number of webinars and we've got another one my team is having a webinar with universities uh and local governments uh later this week. There's already something like uh 400 individual registrations to participate in that discussion. Uh universities are very engaged on working through what does this look like? How do we deliver it? How do they recognize foreign policy risks and how how do we manage it? And really just to emphasize 23,000 notifications since 2020. 84% of them are from universities and that is just the enterprise level arrangements. We would have had uh tens of thousands uh I think have to come to us if we had uh captured uh under the notification obligation. Um uh tens and tens of thousands I expect uh would have been the the impact. uh it would have been quite hard uh for us to focus on the high risk arrangements with that volume coming to us. The universities are will have to actually work very hard to make sure they have procedures and policies in place to identify and to manage uh risks relating to these arrangements. Uh it's not going to be easy. It is it is a significant obligation on the part of universities.
>> Yeah. But and this is my final question chair. Um the scheme as it stands today as you mentioned um just a few moments ago wouldn't guarantee that the researcher to researcher arrangements such as on drone technology drone research um uh in Iran would be captured as it stands. So, um, you know, we understand that we both can see that this is an issue. Um, but does it not make it clear that we need to go further on this?
>> Well, well, I'm not sure that's what I just said, Senator. I I think what my answer was that I hadn't actually we hadn't actually specifically gone back and looked at all of these individual ones to see if they would fall within the new provisions. uh we're focusing on making sure that we can implement these new provisions with universities in an effective way. They may they probably are covered by them. So that will be that will be something uh moving forward. I think I can say to you that uh universities and the government uh both DEFAT, education, home affairs are committed to working with universities to actually make sure this is effective and that we can work with universities to manage risks including researcher to researcher risks and you fit the university's foreign interference task force which is a collaboration with universities uh is a really important plays a really important part in that as well.
>> Yep. Okay. Well, I look forward to following up with the next estimates. Thank you, Mr. Heska.
>> Thanks a lot, uh, Senator. Now, I've just got a couple of questions myself just with respect to the recent Pacific Um, I might just start with you,