THE Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security today commenced a review of the relisting of Islamic State, Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province as terrorist organisations under Division 102 of the Criminal Code Act 1995.

The Australian Government first listed Islamic State in 2005, while Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province have been listed under different names since 2014. The three organisations have been re-listed as terrorist organisations for a further three-year period commencing on July 1, 2023.

The relisting triggers the ongoing application of a number of offences under the Criminal Code which relate to membership of, support for, or association with the organisations.

All three organisations are religiously motivated violent extremist groups which pursue an extreme interpretation of Sunni Islam. Of these groups, Islamic State (IS) has the largest global footprint, and since it was last listed by the Australian Government IS has continued to undertake terrorist attacks in Syria, Iran, Israel, Iraq and Austria.

Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province both operate primarily in Nigeria, and have reputations for adherence to an extremist ideology that promotes sectarian violence. Since they were last listed both groups have undertaken attacks against civilians and government officials.

Under s 102.1A of the Criminal Code, the committee may review listings of terrorist organisations and report its findings to each House of the Parliament within the 15 sitting day disallowance period for the regulations.

Members of the public are welcome to make submissions to this review. Submissions are requested by Friday, August 11, 2023.

Further information on the inquiry can be obtained from the committee’s website.

ends

THE House Standing Committee on Economics will next focus its attention on competition and dynamism in the supermarket, alcohol, and technology sectors, as well as in care services, as part of its inquiry into economic dynamism, competition and business formation.

Peter Harris, former chair of the Productivity Commission, will also discuss competition in the domestic airline industry. The committee’s next set of public hearings will be held via videoconference on July 25 and 26.

Committee Chair, Daniel Mulino, said the committee looked forward to hearing from Coles, Woolworths, Metcash, the Australian Food and Grocery Council, and the National Farmers Federation.

“The grocery retail sector is fundamental to the everyday lives of Australians," Dr Mulino said. "There are also high levels of market concentration in the sector, so it’s vital that we better understand the effects such concentration have on competition, particularly around price, for consumers.

“The supermarket sector also has a strong hold on the packaged alcohol market, which again has implications for consumers around price and on smaller players in the sector.

“So we will be probing this area as well,” Dr Mulino said, “especially with the local craft beer industry gaining in popularity. Australia’s independent brewers are renowned for their innovation so the committee is eager to ensure diversity in the beer industry and that our home-grown companies can continue to thrive."

The committee will hear from Coopers and the Independent Brewers Association.

Peter Harris, former chair of the Productivity Commission and author of the recent review into the Sydney Airport Demand Management Scheme, will also appear.

“Peter will shed light on competition in Australia’s commercial aviation market and on the outlook for business dynamism," Dr Mulino said.

Epic Games and Free TV Australia will also appear at this week’s hearings to give their perspective on the impact of Big Tech companies on their business models and on competition in the online gaming and broadcasting sectors.

Other companies appearing before the committee will be online platforms Mable and HireUp, which work in the disability and aged care sectors. Victorian Government Procurement will also appear, following on from appearances before the committee of social enterprises.

“This will allow the committee to complete its assessments on competition and productivity in the care sector, which is often under-appreciated as a driver of employment and innovative service delivery within the broader economy,” Dr Mulino said.

More details about the inquiry, including the full terms of reference, are available on the committee’s website.

Public hearing details

Date: Tuesday 25 July
Time: 9am to 2.45pm AEST
Location: Videoconference

Date: Wednesday 26 July
Time: 10am  to 4pm AEST
Location: Videoconference

The public hearing will be broadcast live at https://www.aph.gov.au/live.

ends

THE Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA) authorised an Order to be issued on June 27 to Mr John Magerison requiring him to answer questions put to him on April 26, 2023, and summonsing him to appear before the committee in a public hearing this Friday,  July 28..

However, the part of this Friday’s public hearing into procurement at Services Australia and the NDIA which was to hear from John Margerison can no longer proceed.

Mr Margerison’s lawyer has informed the committee that Mr Margerison is now resident overseas, having severed all ties with the country of Australia many weeks ago. Mr Margerison’s lawyer has not disclosed Mr Margerison’s whereabouts.

Further, as Mr Margerison claims via his lawyer to now be located and resident overseas, he now considers himself outside the jurisdiction of the Parliament.

Committee Chair, Julian Hill said the JCPAA would consider the letter from Mr Margerison’s lawyer at its next private meeting.

Mr Hill said, “That Mr Margerison’s lawyer now claims he has left and severed all ties with Australia is a somewhat surprising turn of events indeed. Mr Margerison’s whereabouts remains a matter of great mystery.

“Notwithstanding Mr Margerison’s refusal to fully address the questions put to him in April and appear this Friday, the JCPAA will continue to conduct this inquiry in a proper fashion. The committee will make findings based on the evidence before it. It remains within the JCPAA’s power to recommend referrals to other investigative bodies with additional resources and powers.”

The remainder of the hearing – which relates to the JCPAA’s inquiry into annual performance statements – is unaffected and will proceed.

Further information is available on the inquiry website.

ends

THE Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA) has tabled its report on the administration of Commonwealth grants. Four Auditor-General reports and three additional grant programs were considered in this inquiry which informed eight recommendations which, if adopted, will significantly strengthen the processes and transparency around Commonwealth grant awards.

Chair of the JCPAA, Julian Hill MP said, “Clear and concerning evidence of serial non-compliance with the Commonwealth Grants Rules and Guidelines (CGRGs) and program guidelines was presented. The requirements are not overly complex or onerous yet both the letter and the spirit of rules were routinely disregarded by Ministers and officials.

”Instead of transparently allocating public funds, the previous government pursued industrial scale rorting for blatantly partisan purposes. Rorting grants programs in this way not only wastes money, but also degraded public trust. The committee was especially appalled to receive evidence that politicisation of regional grants programs corroded public trust to the point some councils stopped applying due to the belief they would never get a fair go.

“Principles of fairness, a competitive process by default, transparency, and value for money were simply disregarded and records of critical decisions were not made or kept," Mr Hill said.

“It's difficult to know what is more perplexing. That the previous government did what they did with billions of dollars of taxpayer dollars? Or that they still do not acknowledge that what they did was utterly wrong.

“If the first step to recovery is to admit there is a problem, then it is clear from their attitude to this inquiry that the Liberal and National Parties are still in denial," he said.

“It is simply not good enough for those trying to defend the egregious behaviour revealed through the inquiry to say ‘no illegality was identified’ when assessment processes were repeatedly, systematically and systemically perverted. Especially so when funding decisions repeatedly resulted in ridiculously partisan outcomes. Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should.

“Dismissing legitimate criticism of the Liberals’ industrial scale rorting of grant programs as 'politically motivated' is peak irony."

Mr Hill said, “Ministers can and should apply their own critical judgement to and are perfectly entitled to accept or reject departmental advice. What the committee does not accept however is the lack of transparency under the previous government. Ministers are not ‘gods’ and are subject to the law and the rules and must record properly and fully documented reasons.”

The committee is recommending changes to the CGRGs to ensure that competitive processes are used by default and election commitments are clearly defined, that the roles of stakeholders are clarified, that ministerial funding approvals against agency recommendations are clearly recorded and reported promptly to the Minister for Finance, and that any ‘other factors’ by which grants will be assessed are fully transparent.

The committee’s inquiry focused in particular on instances of non-compliance with the CGRGs which are intended to achieve fairness, a competitive process by default, transparency of decision-making, and value for money.

The identified issues included an emerging trend towards non-competitive grant processes, a lack of a definition of election commitments, inadequate records of decisions taken by officials and ministers, and the use of unspecified ‘other factors’ in grants assessments. The committee also considered the future application of the CGRGs to non-corporate Commonwealth entities.

The committee’s report also examined the current use of centralised grants hubs to administer these programs and noted the Auditor-General’s findings that they have only been partly effective in delivering on the intended efficiencies and cost-savings. The committee concurred with the Auditor-General’s recommendations that more effective future planning and performance measures, and improved data quality, were needed for the hubs and has requested that the Department of Finance provide future updates on their implementation.

The committee’s report is available on the Committee website.

ends