Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee, , 2:39:02 to 2:41:38
The department defends withholding itemized project costs to protect the Commonwealth's negotiating position, while agreeing to table a document regarding NATO spending methodology.
Topics: Procurement, ADF, Government spending
Speakers: James Paterson, Meghan Quinn, Hon Murray Watt, Robert Chipman, Unknown Speaker
>> As in an itemized list of projects. Again, all of these are subject to commercial conversations and we don't want to we don't want to labor the Commonwealth's hand in those negotiations.
>> Right. So in every single instance, the reason for not providing it is commercial incompetence.
>> That's our assessment, Senator. Yes.
>> Right. And so help me understand that. Are these things that have already been contracted that need to be renegotiated and you're waiting for that to be done before it can be disclosed? Is that the reason?
>> That's potentially a reason. Yes.
>> What are the other reasons?
>> So the other I mean the other reasons are that we might have had an allocation uh in the budget. We hadn't yet entered contract negotiations to say and we may yet still enter into contract negotiations just in a few years time for us to declare the individual capability with the individual funding item would make it uh a more difficult contract negotiation in you know 3 years time if we had revealed the movement of the of the funds. So in that case, so some are contract negotiations, some would be re renegotiating times, some would be revealing information in advance of contract negotiations.
>> In that case, if you for commercial reasons you don't want to release the individual itemized expenses, can you still release the individual items without attaching each of the expenses to each of the items? So the global 2.5 save the list of um projects which that comes from without itemizing the cost
for each one. So, um I mean we can certainly take review um the information against that request um and and we'll we'll we'll apply the same framework that we apply to all of our information and and we'll come back to you.
>> Sure. Can I encourage you in doing so that you um look again, as I'm sure you often do, at the rules of the Senate and the reasons why you can withhold information from the Senate, which can only be done through a public interest
aware of our obligations under the Senate and the and the requirement to provide information and we will review against those those requirements.
>> Thank you. I know the chair wants to rotate the call. Just one quick question. Um in the last round of estimates we discussed this NATO methodology table. Um I think there was a mixup in it being provided for tableabling in a in a literal sense. It was provided to the committee but it wasn't tabled. Can that be now tabled?
>> Uh yes it can be tabled. We did provide it with the expectation that it would be tabled.
>> I'm not holding you responsible. I just want to make sure it happens.
>> I asked about this this morning, Senator. My understanding process-wise is that it's a matter for the committee to decide whether to table the document that's already been provided. So, I don't think it needs to be reprovided or retabled. It's with the committee and you it's up to you to decide whether to table it or not.
>> Okay. Well, I'll put that on the chair's agenda then. >> Thank you.