Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee, , 8:31:40 to 8:38:48
Senator Payman questions the department on why information like Cabinet seating and NSC meeting counts is no longer disclosed.
Topics: Prime Minister and Cabinet, National security, Integrity
Speakers: Senator Fatima Payman, Pauline Sullivan, Hon Penny Wong, Dr Steven Kennedy, Unknown Speaker
>> Thank you chair. Good afternoon. Um last estimates I asked a question on notice about cabinet seating plan which received this response and I quote consistent with longstanding practice the department of the prime minister and cabinet does not disclose information about the business and operations of cabinet. End quote. Um, in responding to a question asked under the previous Labor government, the department broke this long-standing practice and provided an outline of where cabinet ministers sit when the cabinet meets. Um, so my question is when did this long-standing practice come into existence? Um, because 16 years ago it didn't exist.
>> Uh, Senator, I'll just ask my colleague Pauline to come to the table and take that for you. she would have prepared the response as
>> Good afternoon, Senator Pauline Sullivan, First Assistant Secretary of Cabinet Division. Um, I am not aware of the seating plan having previously been
>> Um, I've got it in question PM11, uh, 18th of October in 2010. >> there you go. And I mean I can uh circulate it if you would like
>> but >> I think the answer is the answer as you've read out.
>> Okay. So all right. Um how long does a practice have to stand before it becomes
>> Ah that's probably asking for an opinion but certainly since I have been at this role my understanding is that matters relating to the business and operations of cabinet aren't released. That does include seating plans. I'm not sure what occurred in 2010. I wasn't in this role as far as I know. No other
>> to comment on that.
no. No, I'm not aware of what occurred. >> I have I haven't followed the seating plan debate to be honest with you, Senator, but
>> because I'm curious why PMNC were able to identify who sits where in cabinet 16 years ago, but not this year. Um, and it's the issue isn't where in cabinet people sit, but it's just concerning that it's not even up for discussion. and something as benign as a seating arrangement, why is that being obiscated
>> Well, I think um, Pauline's given you the answer that's been prepared in consultation with the government. Does
PMNC believe this conduct assists with providing, and I quote, the freest possible flow of information to the parliament as set out in the PMNC guidelines for official witnesses?
>> Sorry, what was that again, Senator?
Sorry. So does this conduct of obviously not having the information available or in accordance with the PMNC guidelines for official witnesses um which basically says the freest possible flow of information to parliament. Senator,
that you asked a question. I noticed we answered that answer is based on my knowledge and also our sort of long-standing understanding of what has previously occurred. Um, in terms of free flow of information, I'm happy to answer any questions that I can answer to the extent that I could answer them.
>> Okay? Even though I've given an example that it's not really long-standing practice, but I've got another example. Um, in another question, I asked for the number of times the National Security Committee of Cabinet met in recent years. Uh the response referred to a previous answer which noted the same long-standing practice of non-disclosure on cabinet matters. In responding to a question under the Gillard government, the department broke with this long-standing practice to identify that the NSC met eight times to date in 2011 uh and 21 times in 2010. So, the 2011 answer notes that the government publicly reports the number of cabinet and committee meetings on an annual basis. Was this a long-standing practice? And if so, when was that long-standing practice replaced with a new long-standing practice which is the opposite of the previous long-standing practice?
>> Um, so Senator, once again, I'm not aware of the circumstances in which that question was answered. Um we have made comments before here at estimates that where for example so a good example is after I guess the Bondi incident um the prime minister has done press conferences where he has talked about having the NSC has just met um we will disclo because he has disclosed it and he is chair of the committee um we may count those up but if it hasn't been disclosed by the prime minister it is standard practice not to disclose the number of committee meetings.
So, is it standard practice or long-standing?
>> I do not know what the circumstances were to the answering of the question in 2010 and 2011.
>> Okay. Well, um, just for your officials who may note, the question is PM24, 15th of April, 2011. Um, >> I'll raise more examples on notice, uh, because we could be here all day. Um but more generally the responses to these questions I feel not only serve as an indicator of feel like this government's addiction to secrecy uh and the increasing politicization of the public service but also represents a decline in the department's ability to respond to questions on notice compared to years prior. Um would you say is the PMNC a department of diminished capability?
I would, you're asking me for a comment. Given you're commenting on my area, I'd prefer to say that we're not an area of diminished capability.
>> Um, so how would you explain why the department cannot answer these questions that it was previously able to?
>> Well, Senator, I don't think it's fair to go to capability in these circumstances. you may well I hadn't finished if if that's okay let me just finish my then >> um you can ask a question um the the officer has given the answer about why we don't that the government is not providing information in relation to the number of national security committees you may not agree with it I you're entitled not to agree with it but I think that goes to the capability well you don't you don't agree with it that's fine but that's not an issue of the capability of the department it's a case of having a different position
>> I think Sullivan said that she is not aware of that long-standing practice back in, you know, 16 years ago, back in 2010, why that took place. She basically just said that that's not something that the current government does. So, I'm just trying to understand why it was the case 16 years ago, but no longer is the case now. And I I was hoping that Dr. Kennedy could shed light given his years of experience in this position, but um yeah, we'll leave it at that. Thank you. Thank you, chair.