Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee, , 3:06:55 to 3:17:54
Discussion on the administrative burden caused by the high volume of parliamentary questions and orders for documents.
Topics: Integrity, Government spending
Speakers: Senator David Shoebridge, Hon Murray Watt, Senator Jana Stewart, Stephanie Foster, Unknown Speaker
Um we now might go to um uh to actually some of the delay that has become apparent in in the answers. Um and Minister Um we looked at um you recall on the last occasion, I think there were some 40 questions that were answered 8 p.m. Um the night before, sometime between 8 p.m. the night before and 9 a.m. on the morning of estimates. Do you remember that exchange, Minister?
Oh, I remember us discussing questions on notice pretty much every estimates hearing, Senator Shoebridge.
So just to refresh your memory, uh what I'll ask is for each of the 40 questions that are answered, and this is in the 26th of May. For each of the 40 questions are answered between 8 p.m. last night and 9am this morning that were finally put on notice. When did the minister get the proposed answer by the department and when was it provided? When was it provided to the Minister's office? And Ms. Foster, I recognise your reticence today, partly because of we had this exchange, you said we can take that on notice for you. Um I remember that moment. Yep.
And Senator, I believe we have answered that question.
You did. And and the answer that came back was the answers to questions on notice that were provided to the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs Secretariat on Tuesday, the 26th of May 2026 and Wednesday, the 27th of May 2026 were first provided to the Minister's office between 17 November 2025 and 12 May 2026. Minister, um I know this isn't your portfolio, but can you seek an explanation from the Minister about why a draft answer sat on the Minister's desk from the 17th of November 2025 and wasn't provided until 26 or 27 May?
I I can take that on notice, yeah.
Um and Minister, you know, in in your ministerial responsibilities, in terms of your responsibilities to the Parliament, do you think a more than six month delay in a matter having sat on a minister's desk, even though you've been given the pre-tude answer from the department? Do you think that that's consistent with responsible government?
Well, I'm not going to give an opinion. Um you would be aware that um at estimates um opinions are not provided. Um as I've repeatedly said to you, Senator Shoebridge, every time we have this discussion, um the government, whether it be ministers, public servants, ministers' officers, uh do everything they can to respond to the exponentially growing number of questions on notice that we receive. Um I mean, in this portfolio at the budget estimates this year in May, one So when we're seeing a 50 per cent increase in the number of questions on notice, in addition to the doubling of orders to orders to produce documents, that is jamming up the system. So I recognize I've recognised previously that while the Greens are contributing to that increasing number, primarily the increasing number is coming from the coalition and from one coalition senator in particular, being Senator Hume, who's consistently submitted over 70 per cent of all questions on notice that are asked at each estimates. So this has consequences, I'm afraid.
Well, Minister, it's still I cannot I can't conceive of what reasonable explanation there can be for a draft answer sitting on the minister's desk from the 17th of November 2025 2025. It's been drafted by the um by the department with their expertise assistance. I cannot conceive of what possible satisfactory explanation can be given for then sitting for six months in the minister's office, being dusted off once a month and not being provided.
I've taken that on notice.
All right. Um Minister, you you would have heard my questions to the Secretary the Secretary about in circumstances where the delay has made the data stale. Um is your government open to, in those circumstances having a quick exchange with the department to ensure that the information that's been provided to the Parliament is timely.
Well, I also heard Ms. Foster take that question on those, and I think it's appropriate that she has the opportunity to respond. Um what I would say on behalf of the government is that a substantial reason for what you you argue are unreasonable delays is the sheer volume of questions on notice that we are having to answer. And you know, I know it must be frustrating for you that answers take longer than you would like to be provided. Um but we can pick out isolated examples. Well, there are 40.
I go for the 100.
We can we can pick out isolated examples of questions of and of draft answers that are remained with ministers' offices for a period of time. It's not as if they're the only ones they're dealing with. I mean well, 1,211 just from the last budget estimates.
I'm I'm not here, I'm not here to answer Senator Hume. I was asking about the 40 questions. It's not as that's not isolated examples. And of course, Minister, if your government committed to actually providing timely and direct answers in the course of these proceedings and giving the data that's requested, the answers that are requested in the course of these proceedings rather than taking so many questions on notice, you would save yourself a lot of work because it's much simpler to simply tell us the answer in these proceedings rather than have it churn its way through the notice process. That commitment from your government would go a long way to addressing this.
And that's why, Senator Shoebridge, in my experience, as someone who sits through pretty much every day of estimates and every night. Um the overwhelming number of questions that are asked at estimates hearings are answered during the hearing. Um but of course there are going to be questions that uh require a level of detail that those appearing at the table don't have or that discussions need to be held as to whether a public interest immunity needs to be claimed. There are always going to be questions that need to be taken on notice. Um I know from your point of view you don't want your answers being slowed down by Senator Hume, for example, asking 10,657 of the 14,400 questions on notice that were asked at budget estimates, but we have to we can't sort of show preferential treatment to one senator or one party over another. There's there are thousands of these. If these processes, questions on notice, orders to produce documents, all of the other processes that are available are used in a more responsible and targeted manner.
Well, I think we come back to this point. There is a potentially mutual frustration here in the delays in answers, and I with all respect, um the I just I will take issue with your view that answers are largely the questions are largely answered in proceedings. That's not my experience, and I don't think it's the public's experience when they watch these exchanges. Um but this is at the end of the day, the public deserves this process to work. And they deserve timely answers. This is public money that your government is spending. It's these Ms. Foster is paid by the public, um, Ms. Tressler is paid by the public, Mr. Burgess is paid by the public, and you minister are paid by the public. And to retain trust with the public, timely answers about where money is being spent and about how policies are directed is critical. And when when I know that we've seen, you know, the Secretary of BMNC and others critique um sharing some of the frustrating engagements that we have. But if you're talking about making the process work and we're committed to restoring trust, can I urge you to do whatever you require on that side of the table to take less questions on notice to answer questions simply and fairly, um, and let's make it a joint project in restoring the trust.
We we are happy to do that. We equally would um request Senators to use a little bit more judgment about what is actually required to be put on notice, and to give you some comfort, Senator Shoebridge, in this portfolio of the 1,211 questions that were asked on notice at the May estimates, only nine are outstanding. Of the 860 questions that were asked in February this year, only three are outstanding. It is a very small proportion that remain outstanding of a large and exponentially growing number of questions that are asked.
Thank you very much. Uh I would also remind Senators that we do have to ask some questions in Senator Esperts rather than just statements, but I will share the call and go to Senator Packers.
And sorry, and just sorry, Senator Shoebridge, just one further point. Um it's not only, of course, the questions that are asked in the hearing on notice. Foster has just pointed out to me that of the 1,211 questions on notice that were asked in this portfolio in the May estimates this year, 1,033 of them were submitted after estimates as written questions. Well, so which means that for all of your claims that we continually take questions on notice, that works out to about 80 questions that were taken on notice out of one in the hearing out of 1,211.
Well, well, I have to tell you hearing 80 times the questions have been taken on notice in the course of these. You may think that's a small number. Um I have to tell you it's out.
Let's count up the number of answers that are given, like the one I just gave right there second.
Okay, I feel like this is a potato A say for the. I feel like this is entirely unhelpful. I am going to share the call. Thank you very much. Uh Senator Payman, you have the call.