Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee [Part 2], , 52:10 to 1:07:03
Senator Hume tables a letter from industry associations raising concerns about 10-12 day consultation periods for complex legislative and regulatory reforms.
Topics: Law reform, Integrity
Speakers: Senator The Hon Jane Hume, Joanna Abhayaratna, Speaker 3, Unknown Speaker, Speaker 5, Interjection, Speaker 1
>> it looks to us as if the other document that um M. Amaratner had is a a similar version of the the document you've just
>> right? It was probably in letter form as opposed to something that was published on a website, >> right? I wouldn't have the letter form >> Okay, happy to table it. >> Okay, fantastic. Thank you. Um so the time frames that are identified in the letter around consultations were of concern. So for those that are not aware, the letter identifies several recent examples around um consultation time frames around capital gains tax and negative gearing legislation that was introduced and passed within a month of the budget announcements. Treasury consultations on several tax measures that allowed just 10 to 12 business days for responses. There's also consultations on tranch 2 of the privacy act reforms that commenced after earlier legislation has passed. There's a 65day business a 65 business day review of the wheat board code and a 41 business day consultation on the commercial supply of genetically modified chicken vaccines. So there's an awful lot of things that this letter is covering off on. Can I ask whether the office of impact analysis considers a consultation period of 10 to 12 business days sufficient for stakeholders to provide meaningful input on significant and complex reforms which is what you referred to um for uh on um on you know complex exposure draft legislation is that adequate 10 to 12
Senator, you'd have to refer specific questions around specific consultation processes to the relevant departments.
>> So, the Office of Impact Analysis though sets out the guidelines. You must have an opinion.
>> Well,
>> I don't think the um official's opinion um is something to be exercised here that doesn't
>> All right. Well, let me phrase it another way. Has the Office of Impact Analysis reviewed the examples that have been identified in this letter or raised any concerns with the relevant departments around the consultation time
I'd >> have to take that on notice for to on the specific details. Senator
I would like to understand on notice whether
>> I apologize what what was the question because I don't think What was the question that's taken on notice? The
question is whether the examples that are identified in the letter have been um reviewed by the office of impact analysis >> and whether the office of impact analysis has raised any concerns with the relevant departments >> about those >> con consultation time frames. Let me understand this because by the sounds of things >> I can't get your role has changed. Does the office of impact analysis have the authority to recommend extending a consultation period where it considers time frames for consultation inadequate?
Thanks. Thank you.
>> Sorry, S. Can you repeat the question?
>> Yes. Does the Office of Impact Analysis have the authority to recommend extending a consultation period where it considers uh the time frame for consultation is inadequate.
when a department or agency engages with us senator we can provide um guidance and um you uh and advice but it would be the role of the agency or and all the relevant a uh ministers to make decisions around consultation periods
>> right so how often do they engage with
it would depend on the specific process um senator. Um so again the framework changed so agencies are now um are required to assess their own um impact analysis framework but we do encourage um agencies to reach out to us if they have any questions or require guidance or assistance.
Does the office of impact analysis maintain any comparative data on consultation time frames across comwalth agencies?
No Senator, we don't have comparative data, but once uh an impact analysis um a relevant policy has been announced, those impact analyses are still published uh which can cover the seven questions. So, so that information still available within the impact analysis on the office of impact analysis [cough]
>> Has the office of impact analysis raised any concerns with treasury specifically about the duration or the sequencing of consultations in the last two financial
I'd have to take that on notice,
>> Can't remember
>> given the time frame that you're requesting. Um, I'd have to >> again I'd have to check the details because we would look at thousands potentially proposals. So, I wouldn't know off the top of my head that a response to that question.
>> Forgive me, I'm being obtuse, but I don't understand. If each department marks their own homework and does their own assessment, why are you looking at hundreds of proposals? And if you are looking at hundreds of proposals, but you're not responding to them or making recommendations around them, what's the office of impact analysis's role in this process?
>> Senator, the framework was changed on one July this year. So, um, in the 12 month that you refer to, we were still reviewing all policy proposals uh, coming forward.
>> Right. So once the rules changed and now departments mark their own homework, what's going to be the office of impact analysis role going forward? The office
of impact analysis again works with agencies to ensure the publication of ongoing publication of impact analyses on the office of impact analysis website. We also uh provide support and guidance where agencies request it.
>> But they do they often request it? We haven't got there yet, have we? And you >> Do they request help?
>> We do engage with agencies and we provide Chinese uh training and workshops on on the uh requirements within the framework um and and engage with agencies um throughout the process. is just the um some of those processes around uh when when an impact analysis required and uh the assessment of impact analyses is now um uh require agencies are responsible for making those decisions but again the office of impact analysis will support agencies uh with advice in in helping them work through those requirements.
>> Okay. Can you just on notice provide me uh a list of the the number of workshops that you've provided since the 1st of July when the role of the office of impact analysis changed and where that decision was made? This is the first I've heard of the change of the role of the office of impact analysis. Where did that authority to change the role of the office of impact analysis
come from? So that the um Australian government um impact analysis framework is an Australian government guide. So it's a decision of the government.
>> It's a decision of government. Which >> Must be the prime minister. If it's your
department, >> Senator, to be as accurate as possible, No question on
>> Oh, hang on. Come on. >> Part of the department of prime minister and cabinet. The role of that part of the department has been disseminated across other It's the prime minister's department. It must at the end of even if it was a junior minister.
>> Correct. Senator, I'm just
[clears throat] >> it must be ultimately the prime
>> so
>> to change the role of something in his own department.
>> Policy approval can be provided by the assistant minister to the prime minister, the prime minister or indeed the cabinet. And I'm not sure in which particular instance this decision was made. So I've taken it on notice to be accurate with you so that I can give you conf accurate advice about the the nature of the decision.
>> Does the office of impact analysis report to a junior minister?
report to assistant minister Gorman.
>> To Minister Gorman. Okay. So, was the decision for the Office of Impact Analysis role to change Minister Gorman's decision?
>> That's what I've taken on notice,
>> Okay. If it uh was a decision of either Minister Gorman or indeed the Prime Minister, there must be something in writing that says the role of the Office of Impact Analysis is going to change and this is what it's going to be from now on. somewhere.
>> So the uh the revised framework was announced and it is available on our website.
Okay. And with the revised framework obviously the role of the office of impact has changed significantly and now all of these departments are doing their own impact analysis. Um can I ask then whether the number of people in the office of impact analysis has changed?
Senator, the um impact analysis was always developed by relevant agencies. So it was never the role of the office of impact analysis to actually
>> do the impact
>> do the impact analysis. Uh so that that has not changed.
Sorry. Let me be very clear then. What has changed? Because you said that each department has always done its own impact analysis but I thought that that was the role of the office of impact analysis until the 1st of July. Uh so
senator um prior to one July um the office of impact analysis would assess when an impact analysis was required for a proposal
>> when it was required
>> right and we would also the office would also assess the quality of that impact analysis
>> right
>> um since the revised framework uh one of the changes um among others is that agencies so they still um uh draft impact analyses themselves as relevant
decide whether an impact analysis is needed and its adequacy.
>> That's correct, Senator. But also there has been other changes in the framework in terms of the scope and the threshold requirements for an impact analysis.
>> So who looks back and says right of all the legislation that we've passed, the impact analysis that we have undertaken on those was adequate. It's literally the each department individually. It's not a central agency.
So senator yes the um each department is required to provide a statement of sufficiency um that notes that uh the deputy secretary or equivalent has assessed that the impact analysis was sufficient to inform a decision.
>> Right. Okay. So this letter that went to you then um of which I have a version from the BCA's website actually should have gone to each individual department secretary because they're the ones that responsible for deciding whether an impact analysis is necessary and deciding whether an impact assessment was adequate. Is that right?
I couldn't answer who the letter should go to, Senator, but in terms of when an impact analysis is required, that's set out in our the guidance that's available online um that notes the scope and the thresholds for when an impact analysis
is required. So if an organization wanted to a response on the adequacy of impact analysis that were taken, should they go should they write to you or should they write to the individual
>> in terms of a specific policy?
>> They sent you the letter and said all of these impact analyses were inadequate. The consultation periods went well. Yes,
>> you're entitled to press on this, but I don't think you're entitled to say the letter was sent
>> to you. No, sorry. To PMNC.
>> Thank you.
>> Yes, the letter [snorts] was sent. We
don't know to maybe it was sent to others. >> Do do you know that?
>> I've only just understood that there was a letter sent to PMNC. >> So, but it is publicly available. So,
doesn't mean to say that. I mean, it could be that it has been sent. I don't.
It could well be, but the fact remains it was sent to PMNC. But are you telling me that PMNC wouldn't respond to that letter because it's kind of not their purview anymore? It's the individual department secretary's job to respond to a a a request for information about why a consultation period was felt to be
Senator, I mean uh before the change in the framework and after the change of the framework, it has been the responsibility of agencies to make decisions about relevant consultation periods.
>> Okay.
>> It was never a decision of the office of impact analysis around what consultation periods are undertaken.
>> Okay. So my last question on this one ch when you're making these workshops to deliver do you ever use an example of somebody's own work and say hey you know with this legislation you know it was pretty complex 10 to 12 days probably wasn't enough consultation for the industry you know maybe next time we should have a longer consultation period do you use real life examples or what does the workshop
>> oh depends on the we have lots of different workshops senators So um uh at times we'll provide an overview of the framework. We've um undertaken workshop um like information sessions about the new requirements of the framework. Um and then sometimes if a if a agency is looking at a particular policy issues or have specific questions that we'll do a bespoke workshop for that agency around that specific policy issue. Um and we so we'll look at actual work with [clears throat] agencies on their actual impact analysis as they're developing it. So within the context of an ongoing policy process um as well as providing more general training. All right. Thank
you. I'll leave it there. That was very enlightening. Thank you.