Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee, , 2:58:05 to 3:06:29
Senators inquire about the availability and cost of video broadcast kits for remote committee hearings and the technical difficulties in integrating feeds from state parliament broadcast systems.
Topics: Infrastructure, Government IT systems
Speakers: Senator David Shoebridge, Nicola Hinder, Speaker 3, Mike Webb, Jaala Hinchcliffe
>> Um the only other matter I'd seek to raise here is about video coverage of committees when they are remote. >> I understand that there is one team established to do remote um videos. Can you
>> We currently have one kit for the remote videos um to take uh to take video in in remote uh locations.
>> What was the cost of that?
>> Uh Senator, the cost of that was if you give me one second. Uh so the total hardware cost at the beginning of actually setting all of this up. So first of all, the kit was developed in 2023. there was a pilot. Um the total hardware cost of the kit was $160,000 at that time. That was the hardware cost for the kits. There's annual license fees and subscription costs involved with that as well of around $8,500. >> That cost was taken from departmental baseline funding at that point. to be
I'm not criticizing the cost in terms of um and I just want to acknowledge the the work of the the teams who do it. They're very professional and capable. Um in my experience, the work of committees remotely, if we're out in a remote First Nations community, we're out in regional parts of my beautiful home state of New South Wales, we're out in the community, that committee work is the normally the most valuable part of the work. um and being able to bring the evidence from regional Australia, from remote communities into um the work that we do is I think incredibly valuable. What I find deeply frustrating is that it's almost impossible to get a booking for this because there's only one team >> and there's multiple committees out there. um uh what is the plan to expand it so that that remote working committees can actually be covered and that critical evidence can be seen by
>> Uh Senator, that's active that's under active consideration at the moment.
>> Is there a budget for it?
>> Uh Senator, that's under active consideration at the moment.
>> What does what what does that mean
we will need to go through a process in order to be able to demonstrate um to decision makers that that funding should be applied for that purpose.
>> All right. Um is it in is that going through this current budget cycle?
>> Uh Senator, I'm not certain when that will be considered or progressed.
>> Who makes that decision?
>> Uh Senator, we seek the authority from the presiding officers to be able to bring forward proposals.
>> Thank you. President, are you intending to bring that forward in this current?
>> That's a bigger question, Senator Shoebridge, because the whole issue of how we manage Hansard uh in this parliament and remotely is under consideration and kits and away committees and providing staff is just
one element. Well, could I ask one of the other frustrations I found is we're often in state parliaments where they have quite sophisticated broadcast equipment. And I was recently found myself in the New South Wales Parliament in a room that I'm very familiar with that has a a very capable broadcast system. And I was told that um that that that could not be used because there had been no arrangements between the New South Wales Parliament and the Federal Parliament to get the feed in. >> Surely that can be fixed. I mean it's surely that can be fixed.
>> Senator, that's not quite correct in terms of arrangements. We work very collegiately with all state parliaments around Australia. In this circumstance, the technologies just didn't equate.
>> Yeah, Senator, it's it's uh it's much more complicated than just um receiving a single feed. Um obviously the uh the streams through to YouTube and PAL view the transcript services a whole range feed into a whole bunch of systems and support the federal parliament and so it in it is often significantly more complicated and more risky to the operations of that feed for us to leverage a different provider than to host the services ourselves. Well, but
the end result is there's no video. Like the there is no video. It's just a it's just a a voice recording.
>> The audio audio.
>> So So are there efforts being made to fix this? We we go to state parliaments all the time. >> They're sitting there. We're sitting in front of video cameras that are just turned off. Are there efforts being made
is that um the broader approach around the video uh coverage for away committees is the um is the best uh strategic direction for us to continue um rather than leveraging complex integrations that are temporary with other parliament uh broadcast kit.
>> Well, can I just ask about staffing then in the parliamentary broadcast um service section? Is is that the appropriate description of them?
>> Our digital recording services branch.
Yes, Senator. digital recording services branch. Can you provide, if you have them, staffing numbers going back over the last four years and current staffing numbers?
>> Senator, I'll actually give you the question on notice in the last hearing where we responded to that question. So, we've provided those staffing figures over the last 5 years.
>> Okay. And are they are they now compared to 5 years ago? Are they
>> they've increased over five years, Senator?
>> Okay. Thank you. And can you provide an update as today?
>> Yes, senator. I'll provide that update
as well. So Senator is shu if I could add and it might be of interest to the committee um because it's a way I haven't thought about handside reporting before is DP it's DPS's responsibility to of course provide hands and provide a way committee report but it doesn't have any control over the volume of committees coming to it so I think last Friday we had nine >> um week Friday week ago we had nine committees that required hands staff so it's a bit it's a bit like a peak in a trough. Sometimes they're super busy and sometimes they're not. And I'm not suggesting I understand your frustration. All I'm saying is DPS is providing a service but it doesn't have any control over income.
>> No, I understand they're at the other end of the pipeline. They're not feeding in. They're receiving at the other end. I get that. Um but but I think one of the things that's opaque to me is how um how how DPS resolves when there are multiple requests for the one service how that is resolved um to determine which committee and
where gets it to me it's well it's shared because we've also got the house committees >> as well um but as I said to you before that whole area of Hansard is something we're trying to look at how we best provide the best service. Um, so it's a it's it is a complex issue.
>> President, could you provide on notice how you understand competing requests for that one?
>> Could probably be answered here. It
>> How is it resolved? You have four away committees. They each want the video. Who how is it resolved?
>> We work very cooperatively and collegiately with colleagues in the Department of Senate and the Department of the House of Representatives. We do not wish to be the deciding voice that provides the VCAC kit to one committee as opposed to another committee. We do though have a look to see where the VCAC kit is. So if for instance if has already been allocated to a hearing that's being undertaken in Perth, dispatching that kit the very next day to a committee meeting that might be happening in rural South Australia is is not going to be physically possible. There have been occasions though where the chairs of committees have worked between themselves to be able to determine which committee receives the kit. Um and we are very grateful for the work of those committee chairs to be able to have those conversations because again as the service provider we want to provide the service. We do not want to be the decider upon whom and where that service is provided.
>> All right. So it's a it's an arm wrestle amongst the chairs. um is the end result. Um I'm [laughter]
>> rock paper scissors. Maybe Senator, I'm not certain.
>> Thank you. Thanks, J.