QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
Australian National Academy of Music
Question
Senator MILNE (2.34 p.m.)-My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts, Senator Wong. Given that the government has acknowledged that the artistic program of the Australian National Academy of Music is first class, by appropriating the name and reputation of the institution, why is the artistic leadership being handed over to a university appointed advisory board with not one practising musician of international standard on it, rather than leaving it with the current faculty and artistic director, who, by the way, has just won the Grawemeyer prize for composition, music's Nobel Prize?

Senator MILNE (2.29 pm)-My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts, Senator Wong, and relates to the closure of the Australian National Academy of Music. Minister, can you explain why Minister Garrett has repeatedly raised the two independent reviews of the academy-the Mills review and the Grant review-as justifications for his decision to defund the academy, when both reviews clearly and explicitly called for increased funding for the academy to enable it to grow? Isn't Minister Garrett misleading the Australian community?

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
Tasmanian Devils
(Question No. 3188)
Senator Milne (Tasmania) asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources, upon notice, on 7 May 2007:
(1) Has the department received the Tasmanian Government's options proposal for the ongoing management of healthy Tasmanian devils in the wild, including plans to release them on Tasmanian offshore islands, particularly Maria Island.
(2) In light of concerns raised by community groups, will the department seek public comment on these proposals.
(3) Does the Government agree with proposals to release Tasmanian devils on various offshore islands.
(4) Does the Government consider the island release option an essential part of the long-term recovery plan for the Tasmanian devil in the wake of the transmissible facial tumour disease.
(5) What ongoing assistance is the Government offering to the research effort into devil facial tumour disease and for ongoing efforts to safeguard the species survival in the wild.
Senator Abetz (Tasmania-Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation)-The Minister for the Environment and Water Resources has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question:
(1) No.
(2) If my Department receives a referral from the Tasmanian Government for the release of Tasmanian devils onto Maria Island, or any other offshore island, it will be made available for public comment on the Department's website for 10 business days, in accordance with the requirements of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.
(3) The Government does not have a position on these proposals. If a specific proposal is referred to my Department, it will be assessed, and a decision will be made based on the relevant facts.
(4) As above.
(5) The Australian Government provided $2 million for the 2005/06 and 2006/07 financial years through the Tasmanian Regional Community Forest Agreement, to accelerate research into the Devil Facial Tumour Disease. In the 2007/08 financial year the Australian Government will provide a further $1 million to continue fieldwork that will help suppress the spread of the disease in the wild, monitor the spread of the disease, and continue to ensure that there are populations of Tasmanian devils established in captivity to enable their long-term survival in the wild.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
Devil Facial Tumour Disease
(Question No. 2300)
Senator Milne (Tasmania) asked the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 4 August 2006:
(1) Is there a definitive pre-clinical test that can detect the presence of devil facial tumour disease (DFTD); if not, how can the Government be certain that the devils that have been exported will not develop DFTD at a later date.
(2) Given that Tasmania's Department of Primary Industries and Water (DPIW) state that the wildlife park that was to be used to source the devils for export was located in a region well away from where the disease has occurred: is the Government aware that DPIW maps in fact show that the areas surrounding the wildlife park in question have the highest transmission rates for DFTD.

Senator Ian Campbell (Western Australia-Minister for the Environment and Heritage)-The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows:
(1) There are currently no definitive pre-clinical tests that can detect the presence of devil facial tumour disease (DFTD). Work on a pre-clinical test is being undertaken as a matter of priority as part of the joint Australian and Tasmanian Government's DFTD Programme.
The Tasmanian Devils that were exported were bred in captivity from a disease free managed population.
(2) The Tasmanian Chief Veterinary Officer determined that Tasmanian Devils can safely be moved between managed populations, subject to conditions attached to the export, such as ensuring that the managed population cannot come in contact with wild populations that may carry the disease.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
Regional Forest Agreement
(Question No. 1786)
Senator Milne (Tasmania) asked the Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation, upon notice, on 11 May 2006:
With reference to Commonwealth funding to the Tasmanian forest industry as part of the 1997 Regional Forest Agreement (RFA):

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
Tasmanian Devil
(Question No. 1400)
Senator Milne (Tasmania) asked the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 29 November 2005:
What progress has been made in relation to the Tasmanian Greens' nomination for listing of the Tasmanian Devil (Sarcophilus harrisii) as vulnerable under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

Senator Ian Campbell (Western Australia-Minister for the Environment and Heritage)-The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows:
The nomination for the Tasmanian Devil is currently under consideration by the Threatened Species Scientific Committee. It is normal practice for the Committee to seek and examine expert and public comment on nominations prior to making a recommendation. I am expecting the Committee's advice once this process has been completed.
Under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 the Committee has twelve months from the date of receipt of a nomination in which to advise me.