STANDING COMMITTEE ON RURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORTAustralian Quarantine and Inspection Service
Estimates Hearings 18.02.08
Senator MILNEI would like the department to indicate why the Ernst & Young report into the cost-effectiveness of AQIS has not been made public. When will it be made public and will you now provide a copy of it to the committee?
Mr HunterThe report was the subject of a freedom of information request. It was released under the FOI Act probably around a month ago and then was the subject of a media story resulting from that. We have under consideration at the moment the release of the report more generally.
Senator MILNEI am specifically asking: will you provide the report to the committee? I understand that it is a 279-page report and it was on the cost-effectiveness of AQIS. I think this committee has worked very hard on these issues and deserves to have a copy of it. I would like an undertaking that you will provide a copy of that report. Further to that, following on from what Senator Scullion said before, that report is extremely damning if what was in the media is true. So I would like to go through some of the allegations and I would like a yes/no answer as to whether it is true.
In relation to what Senator Scullion raised about the Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy, what is alleged is that there are no screening targets or effectiveness benchmarks for the Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy, despite the threat posed by illegal fishermen, boat people, free movement from the Torres Strait islands et cetera. Is that true? Are there effectiveness benchmarks and screening targets for that strategy?
Mr HunterSenator, to go to the first part of your question, we would be happy to provide a copy of the report to the committee.
Senator MILNEThank you.
Mr HunterThe second part of your question mentioned that you were concerned about some of the allegations in the reporting of that report. Before Ms Gordon answers the specifics of your question in relation to the Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy, perhaps I could just quote to you the reports high-level conclusion, which stated that Ernst & Young analysis indicates that AQIS has implemented the governments quarantine border security policies, delivered improved results against performance targets and has actively and effectively managed the costs of delivering these services whilst remaining within comparable benchmarks. That was the broad conclusion.
Senator MILNEI am very well aware that they are saying that within the resources you have got you are doing a good job, but how effectively you use the resources does not necessarily relate to the outcomes, which goes to the questions I am asking. So that is the first question I am asking. There was also a statement, which I was horrified to see, that New South Wales ports have not met the sea container effectiveness benchmarks at all. I have seen that AQIS has not met the effectiveness targets for screening vessels at seaports since 2003-04 despite the considerable risks associated with biosecurity with those port issues. I will go through them all in a minute. I would like to know about the screening targets and effectiveness benchmarks for the Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy and I would like to know what you are doing about the fact that New South Wales ports have not met the sea container effectiveness benchmarks at all.
Ms GordonMy first comment is on the NAQS performance indicators. One of the reasons I think the conclusion was drawn that NAQS does not have performance indicators is a misunderstanding about the difference between the governments mandatory performance indicators and performance indicators that have been developed within the program.
The Ernst and Young review was looking at the allocation and the effectiveness of use of the border security funding, and within that program NAQS does not have mandated performance indicators. But I might indicate to you that the report itself actually noted the program does not have mandated intervention or effectiveness targets under the quarantine border security measure. A large component of work undertaken by the program, which is monitoring for quarantine risks facing northern Australia, is undertaken through a program of scientific surveys. Reporting accurately on the effectiveness and efficiency of this type of quarantine surveillance is challenging.
The NAQS program has recently received additional funding for quarantine border security which is largely about Torres Strait interventions, avian influenza and illegal foreign fishing vessel initiatives. Specific performance targets have been provided for the AI and foreign fishing vessel initiatives. The recommendation for AI targets, meaningful and complete sets of performance indicators for the program
CHAIRMs Gordon, I am sorry to interrupt. I will let you continue but I want to urge honourable members and department officials that there are a lot of questions to be asked today. I have noticed a lot of reading. If we are going to read verbatim, can we table it? If we have a question, we will either answer yes, no or take it on notice, because there is a lot to get through. I am aware that you have to be somewhere else at five oclock.
Ms GordonThank you, Senator. I think, therefore, once we have provided you with a copy of the report you will see that many of the conclusions drawn by the journalists were inaccurate or taken out of context.
Senator MILNEThe second part of my question is: is it true that New South Wales ports have not met the sea container effectiveness benchmarks at all? And, if so, what are you doing about it?
Ms GordonIt is true that they have had declining levels of performance in recent months, and we are looking at the intervention rates and the effectiveness rates to feed back into our risk assessments, as I was describing before, to ensure that we can allocate resources to where the highest risks are.
Senator MILNEBut doesnt this mean at the moment that sea containers coming into New South Wales pose a risk every day that they sail in there and nothing is happening?
Ms GordonIt is not that nothing is happening. It is a matter of identifying where the highest risks are coming from in terms of the contents of sea containers. The governments mandated performance intervention and effectiveness targets are not related to the internal contents of the containers themselves. We are working with our colleagues in the customs area to identify high-risk containers and to review the sorts of intervention measures we have so that we do have available to us better data on which to identify where the greatest risks are.
Senator HEFFERNANAll of this is a bit scary, I have to say. Why is it that the business was declining?
Ms GordonIt is the rapidly increasing amount of trade that is coming into the country.
Senator HEFFERNANSo it is the increasing trade?
Ms GordonWe have large amounts of increasing trade coming into the country from a much wider range of countries. Many of the sources of our trade are from countries where there are significant risks, and as we put in place our intervention procedures we are feeding back in the identification or the information
Senator HEFFERNANDoes that really mean you just have not got enough people, or what does that mean? How would you fix the problem?
Ms GordonIt is a combination of having resources available and also being able to identify where the risks are and which particular containers might have goods within them that will constitute a quarantine risk and being able to identify those largely on documentation. It goes to issues of us assessing, for instance, the likely effectiveness of fumigation on contents that are in a container.
CHAIRSo you have to rely on the consignors telling the truth?
Ms GordonWe rely very much always on documentation. We have procedures in place when we identify that the documentation is not accurate to actually target specifically further containers that have been brought in by those brokers or by those importers. We have put them on lists. We will then target specifically to do physical inspections where we think the risks are until we are satisfied that those brokers and those importers have put in place procedures to address whatever concerns we found.
Senator HEFFERNANWhat is the record of getting a surprise?
Ms GordonI would have to come back with the specific details, but most of
Senator HEFFERNANIn other words, dodgy paperwork.
Ms GordonMost of our physical interventions on containers are random audits. They are not ones where people are advised ahead of time that we are going to open and physically inspect.
Senator HEFFERNANSo, just roughly, is it one in a hundred? How many have a load of hoochie-coochie or whatever in it?
Ms GordonSenator, I think it might be better if I come back with a specific figure on that one.
Senator HEFFERNANOkay.
Senator MILNEFurther to that at this moment in time, could you say that Australians should have confidence that AQIS has got the sea containers covered?
Dr OConnellI think what Ms Gordon is trying to point to is that we are looking to make sure that high-risk issues are well covered. I will ask Ms Gordon to add to that, but the issue that she is trying to explain is the degree to which we need to make sure we cover the high-risk elements. There is then the issue of the total blanket coverage or not, which is moveable, but what
Senator MILNEThis report is clearly saying that New South Wales is a big problem in respect of sea containers and it is also saying that AQIS has struggled to reach benchmarks on the effectiveness of its screening of sea containers all up. From what you have said, it does not matter whether it is a question of resources or a huge increase in trade. What I asked is: at this moment in time should I be satisfied that AQIS is protecting Australia from the biosecurity risk with regard to sea containers? From where I am sitting, the answer has to be no.
Ms GordonI think we have a couple of things confused here. The specific issue raised in the report was about sea vessels, which also goes to passengers. We intervene on passengers coming off vessels with cruise ships et cetera in the same way as we do with people coming off aircraft. So there is a distinction between our intervention with passengers coming off sea vessels to the containers
Senator MILNEI am asking about containers specifically.
Ms GordonIt is a risk management business. We cannot guarantee that we are capturing 100 per cent of quarantine risk items coming into the country.
Dr OConnellBut that is true for all quarantine operations. Without stopping trade, you cannot manage a zero risk. You have to manage a very low risk.
Senator MILNEI know it is not a zero risk but it seems to me from what I am reading here that the report is quite considerable, because it seems New South Wales is a huge gap in this. The final question in relation to this, because I am mindful of the time, is that the report has also said AQIS and Australia Post have struggled to meet screening targets and effectiveness benchmarks for international mail, especially in Western Australia, and consistently failed over Christmas. What is it about Western Australia that makes them less competent than the rest of the country in terms of screening mail? Since there is a huge volume of mail at Christmas, wouldnt it make sense if you wanted to breach biosecurity to send it in at Christmas?
Mr HunterWell, Christmas always is a challenging time in the mail program.
Senator MILNEWe know that. Why Western Australia, and what are you doing about it?
Mr HunterI do not have the answer about Western Australia particularly, but in relation to the mail program more generally there are additional resources that have been provided to the mail program in the supplementary budget estimates that you are looking at today which are allowing us to achieve our intervention rates closer to the mark.
Senator MILNEWhat about Western Australia? Why is there a failure there on the mail?
Ms GordonI think those figuresand I would have to go back and check myselfwere largely about the time it was taking to clear mail through the mail centres. Particularly at Christmas, as you would appreciate, with high volumes of mail it is often difficult to clear the mail as quickly as one would hope. As Mr Hunter has indicated, we have recently been given additional resources which we hope will enable us to clear mail in all mail centres much more quickly.
The other thing that we have done with that additional funding is to change the way we work in the mail centres so that we are separating out some roles that can be performed by contractors and then use our quarantine staff for the actual inspection of the mail itself, rather than having them opening and closing parcels or mail products. That in itself, we hope, will ensure that we are meeting our targets more effectively.
Dr OConnellWe will check for you, but I think there is a distinction being made between how quickly mail gets examined and whether or not it is examined. I think the mail is examined
Senator HEFFERNANIs it a mandatory process?
Dr OConnellIt is 100 per cent for mail.
Mr HunterPerhaps if I could just draw your attention to table 16 on page 153 of the annual report for the year 2007-08. It indicates the target for each of the quarantine programs that we cover and the actual rate of intervention. Then over the page there is the actual quarantine risk effectiveness at the border. You will see from the quarter by quarter figures that in terms of intervention targets we have met the intervention target in every case, I think, at a very quick look. In the case of effectiveness, that is more uneven. Looking at that table, it does show that in relation to international mail we have had difficulties reaching the target. In relation to just about all the other targets we generally meet or exceed them.
Senator MILNEWhat is your target for international air passengers? How many do you expect to screen? What is your target?
Ms GordonThe mandated intervention figure is 81 per cent, but we do 100 per cent of passengers whom we have assessed as coming from high-risk countries or are likely to be carrying risk products. We set the 81 per cent around a mixture of people who perhaps we have assessed as low risk and those who we would want to always specifically intervene with and look more closely at what they might be carrying. Again, it is very much a risk assessment based on the nature of the passenger, where they have come from and what our data tells us about the likelihood that they may or may not be carrying risk products.
Senator MILNEDid you meet your 81 per cent target?
Ms GordonI think we have consistently exceeded it. Again, the annual report has a set of figures which indicates that generally we do meet, and have met for a number of years, the 81 per cent target.
Mr HunterThe intervention target at airports was exceeded in every quarter.
Senator MILNEWhen can we have a copy of the Ernst and Young report? We would like it as soon as possible. I am sure everyone on the committee would like it.
Dr OConnellWhen you have a chance to look at that report, we would be more than happy to go through a briefing with you on what we understand.
Senator MILNEThank you for that. I am sure this committee will probably want to take it up in our normal course of business because it has a lot of issues in it. Obviously we have not had a chance to look at it. We are only going on media reports of what it says at this particular time. I am happy to move on from that, but I wanted to ask about some risk assessments.
CHAIRSenator Boswell is waiting and I know Senator Heffernan and Senator Fielding are also waiting to ask questions. Bear in mind we have afternoon tea at four oclock. We will keep to a very tight timetable and be back at 4.15. Senator Milne, I will pass over to Senator Boswell.