Below is both our Questions on Notice submitted, as well during the live Hearing, and the responses.  To view the full hearing head to: https://tv.parliament.qld.gov.au/?reference=0Mba20220803_090013

PREHEARING QUESTIONS ON NOTICE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND MINISTER FOR JUSTICE, MINISTER FOR WOMEN AND MINISTER FOR THE PREVENTION OF, DOMESTIC AND FAMILY VIOLENCE

Question No. 19:

With reference to the budgets of integrity bodies (Attorney-General Service Delivery Statement Pages 27, 40 and 73) and that the Coaldrake Review recommended parliamentary committee involvement in the setting of budgets and key appointments for integrity bodies, will the Attorney-General commit to a cooperative “co-design” process with these Committees in determining how this new role for committees will be established including consideration of an own motion power for committees to initiate investigations into systemic and budget issues for integrity bodies?

Answer:

The Palaszczuk Government is committed to implementing the recommendations of Professor Peter Coaldrake’s, Let the Sunshine In: Review of culture and accountability in the Queensland Public Sector Final Report (the Coaldrake Review). A Taskforce, led by David Mackie, Director- General of the Department of Justice and Attorney-General, has been established under the Department of the Premier and Cabinet to implement the Coaldrake Report recommendations.

The integrity bodies housed under the Justice Portfolio – the Crime and Corruption Commission, the Office of the Information Commissioner (which includes the Right to Information and Privacy Commissioners), and the Queensland Ombudsman – will work with the Taskforce, central agencies and key stakeholders on implementation of the recommendations. The specifics of how each recommendation will be delivered will be worked through by the Taskforce and stakeholders.

Question No. 20:

The Department of Justice and Attorney-General’s Service Delivery Statement states on page 57 that the Government is providing funding to facilitate preparations for the state and local elections in 2024. An issue of concern is the continuing potential misleading of Queenslanders when political parties send out postal vote applications to constituents and obtain information from those applications before lodging with the Electoral Commission. As part of the preparation for the 2024 election will the Government ensure political parties inform voters via the reply-paid envelope they provide, that their postal vote application will be returned to a political party’s office before being sent to the Electoral Commission (and set a requirement and fixed time to lodge the information with the Electoral Commission)?

Answer:

The Palaszczuk Government is committed to protecting the integrity and transparency of Queensland’s electoral processes.

Members of Parliament and political parties are able to access electoral roll information under the Electoral Act 1992 (Electoral Act), and may use this information to engage with electors.

It is a matter for individual electors how they choose to apply for a postal vote, and there are a range of options available to them including applying directly to the Electoral Commission.

In addition, if Members of Parliament and political parties do choose to distribute postal vote applications, the Electoral Commission’s approved form as published on the Commission’s website must be used.

Under the Electoral Act, it is an offence to fail to send a postal vote application to the Electoral Commission for someone else. Section 192 of the Electoral Act provides that, if a postal vote application is given to a person to send on to the Electoral Commission, that person must promptly send the application unless they have a reasonable excuse. The maximum penalty for this offence is 20 penalty units ($2,875) or six months imprisonment.

Regardless of how an application for a postal vote is made, when it is time to vote, the Electoral Commission will send eligible electors their postal ballot and the completed vote is returned by electors directly to the Electoral Commission.

It is also relevant to note that under the Electoral Act it is an offence to mislead voters and a person must not publish or distribute anything that is intended or likely to mislead an elector in relation to the way of voting at an election.

ESTIMATES PRE-HEARING QUESTION ON NOTICE – MINISTER FOR POLICE AND CORRECTIVE SERVICES AND MINISTER FOR FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES

No. 19

QUESTION:

With reference to page 130 of Budget Paper No. 4 which reports that the additional funding for Safe Night Precincts concluded in 2020-21, and states that from 1 July 2022 police operations in Safe Night Precincts will transition from temporary funding to permanent business as usual operations, will the Minister identify what funding will be provided for extra police patrols in the Noosa electorate for targeted operations to address alcohol fuelled violence?

ANSWER:

This Government has committed to the biggest boost to policing in Queensland in three decades, providing the Queensland Police Service (QPS) with more than $3 billion in 2022-23 to enable it to continue efforts to reduce crime and enhance community safety.

This record police budget supports the rollout of an additional 2,025 police personnel including 1,450 sworn officers over five years from 1 July 2020.

I am advised by the QPS that of the 1,450 additional sworn officers to be delivered over five years from 1 July 2020, the Police Commissioner has determined that at least 150 positions will be located in the North Coast Police Region, which includes the Noosa Electorate.

The allocation of police resources is a matter for the Commissioner of Police based on operational policing demand and direct service delivery requirements to ensure a fair and equitable service is provided throughout the State. I am advised these requirements can change as new policing issues emerge.

I am further advised by the QPS that it applies an intelligence-led, police service delivery approach in all Safe Night Precincts (SNPs), which continues to play an important part in improving public safety in Queensland’s night-time economy.

Further, the QPS advise that the policing of SNPs has now transitioned from a temporary funding arrangement to a permanent business as usual funding arrangement. The QPS has confirmed that as a result of this transition, the level of policing in SNPs has remained consistent.

While there are no SNPs in the Noosa electorate, I am advised by the QPS that the police personnel deployed to the North Coast Police Region (which includes the Noosa electorate) are committed to addressing any alcohol related violence in the Noosa electorate and maintaining community safety more generally and will continue to deploy the necessary police resources as required.

No. 20

QUESTION:

With reference to the Queensland Fire and Emergency Services Service Delivery Statement page 2, and the budget funding to modernise and maintain the Queensland Emergency Operations Centre, will the Minister confirm whether this funding will enable early alert systems for bridges and crossings to provide consistent and accurate early notification of flooding for emergency response agencies and the public, similar to the Flooded Road Smart Warning System in the Logan Council area?

ANSWER:

Additional funding of $12.836 million over four years and $0.6 million ongoing to 2027-28, held centrally, is being provided for the upgrade of ICT and audio-visual hardware of the Queensland Emergency Operations Centre (QEOC) which is utilised by the following capabilities:

  • State Disaster Coordination Centre;
  • QFES State Operations Centre;
  • Queensland Police Service Disaster Management Unit;
  • QFES Brisbane Regional Operations Centre;
  • Queensland Ambulance Service Brisbane Operations Centre;
  • QFES Brisbane Regional Headquarters;
  • QFES Specialist Operational Services Unit;
  • QFES Fire Communications Centre, Brisbane Region; and
  • QFES Strategic Content and Services.

The additional funding is for the costs associated with implementing a modernised technical refresh of the QEOC’s audio-visual hardware and video conferencing solutions only. The upgrade will include:

  • Hardware and software;
  • Vendor services including decommission of the old hardware, installation

of the new hardware, configuration, testing and end user training;

  • Project resources;
  • Ongoing support and maintenance; and
  • Project Assurance.

Funding for alert systems for bridges and crossings is the portfolio responsibility of another Minister and accordingly the question should be directed to the appropriate Minister.

QUESITONS ASKED IN ESTIMATES COMMITTEE HEARING

Topic: Coaldrake Review recommendation implementation, Co-design with Committees

Ms BOLTON: Minister, prehearing estimates response No. 19 stated that the integrity bodies will work with the implementation task force, central agencies and key stakeholders on the Coaldrake review recommendations. Can you confirm that this committee is a key stakeholder and that the implementation task force will work closely with the committee on the specifics of how the Coaldrake recommendations will be delivered and that appropriate funding will be allocated?

Ms FENTIMAN: I thank the member for the question. On 30 June the Premier announced that the government would accept all of the 14 Coaldrake recommendations and work has begun on all of those recommendations. As the Premier said, we are implementing them lock, stock and barrel. David Mackie, the director-general of my department, is leading the integrity reform steering committee and the task force which is overseeing the implementation of recommendations. The task force will also be considering the recommendations from the strategic review of the Integrity Commissioner, the Yearbury report, where they align with Professor Coaldrake’s recommendations. They will be coordinating the implementation, as I said. That has been established. They are scaling up the task force.

At this stage the task force is in place for six months, although it may be extended. The task force is currently developing a detailed implementation plan. Stage 1 is to identify those recommendations that can be implemented easily and quickly and, of course, to identify key stakeholders such as the committee. I anticipate that the cost of some recommendations will be absorbed within existing departmental budget—for example, the cost of the Public Interest Disclosure Act review will be absorbed by my department—but others will require additional funding. The task force will be identifying those financial implications for the government to consider.

Essentially, it is early days. They are doing that work. In my view, the committee is a key stakeholder when it comes to these integrity bodies. You do have functions to oversee them and in my view you will be consulted as part of that process.

Topic: Ongoing funding increase for the Office of the Commissioner for Body Corporate and Community Management

Ms BOLTON: Minister, the budget provided one-off funding for three years to incorporate the Building Units and Group Titles Act changes. Can you outline how the commissioner is to assist with this as well as the ongoing and growing number of complaints by Queenslanders living in bodies corporate without any additional permanent funding?

Ms FENTIMAN: As I am sure the member for Noosa is experiencing in her electorate, more Queenslanders are now living in community titles schemes, with more than 51,000 community titles schemes now in Queensland and over 500,000 individual lots. The Office of the Commissioner for Body Corporate and Community Management has never been so important, providing valuable dispute resolution and information services to support the self-management of schemes in Queensland. I have to say, despite the increased demand that the office has experienced, the body corporate and community management office have minimised delays. They have reviewed all of their internal processes. They have engaged in targeted community engagement—a very proactive approach—so that parties can manage issues without the need for dispute resolution. As you have identified, additional funding of more than $1 million and three full-time employees over three years has been provided. The office has also received additional funding of $2.45 million and six full-time employees to support the implementation of the amendments to the Building Units and Group Titles Act.

I would like to take the opportunity to thank the Office of the Commissioner for Body Corporate and Community Management. They achieved a clearance rate of 94 per cent in 2020-21. That increased to 101 per cent in the last financial year. They are getting through the work, despite the increased demand, and they are maintaining a high-quality dispute resolution and information service. We are resourcing them in the short term. They will have some additional dispute resolution because of the amendments we are making to modernise the framework for the Building Units and Group Titles Act, which is quite an outdated act now, and they are doing everything they can internally to make sure they are getting through the work. As I said, a clearance rate of 101 per cent is pretty impressive.

Mislead electorate regarding postal vote return application address

Ms BOLTON: I direct my question to the Electoral Commissioner, please. My question relates to the response to estimates prehearing question on notice No. 20. It said that it is an offence to mislead an elector in relation to the way of voting at an election. However, we are seeing that electors are being misled when they believe that their postal vote applications are going direct to the Electoral Commission when often they are not, due to MPs and political parties not providing clarity around where the reply paid envelope actually goes first. Why is this practice allowed?

Mr Vidgen: There are two issues the member might be referring to, at least in terms of how I interpret that. The provision you referred in terms of misleading voters in relation to how they vote specifically refers to how they complete the ballot paper. Certainly, that is a matter the commission does look at very strictly. If issues come to our knowledge with regard to people being misled with regard to how to fill out the paper incorrectly or illegally, that is something within our jurisdiction.

The other matter to which you refer is the one with regard to postal voting applications. There is a difference in terms of the application of the law, which you referred to, and how we look at the postal vote application process. Obviously this is a matter you have raised a number of times in various forums. I appreciate that it is a matter you have great interest in. I refer to the response from the minister with regard to that question in that there are a number of ways in which voters can apply for a postal vote. I reiterate that the contents of that response are correct and lawful.

In summary, there are two different issues. One relates to the incorrect direction on how you complete the ballot and the other is about the postal vote application process. Currently, political parties are able to access details on the electoral roll via the Electoral Act and they can contact electors in terms of communicating with them, and that is what they do with the postal vote application process.

Ms BOLTON: Again, I will ask—the community and people feel that it is misleading—why the Electoral Commission actually allows it to occur.

Mr Vidgen: At the moment it is a lawful act. It has been that case for some time. It is also common in other jurisdictions. We would encourage electors, and certainly candidates, if they have concerns with regard to how people may apply for a postal vote—our preference is that they come to the commission directly, which they are able to do. In that way they can be assured that the line of sight with regard to the request for a postal vote application is directly to the commission and back. Again, I reiterate: everything that has occurred to this point in time has followed the law. It is a lawful practice which has been followed.

Funding for DFV accommodation

Ms BOLTON: Minister, regarding the increased funding for domestic and family violence in response to the Hear her voice report, relating to pages 7 to 9 of Budget Paper No. 4, can you provide some details around any funding increases for the desperately needed emergency accommodations, improvements to the funding models for our refuges and also support on exit from the refuges, including transitional housing?

Ms FENTIMAN: I thank the member for the question. I am advised that refuges received over $36 million in funding for this financial year. That includes $2.2 million in additional funding through the $30 million boost for frontline services that we announced last year as well as national partnership funding, which is matched funding between the state and the Commonwealth. The refuges are funded to provide housing, counselling as well as case management support to women and children who have fled domestic violence. They also have additional funding that can be used for additional staff to provide counselling or specialist children’s counselling. They also receive client related brokerage funding, so that can include funding for medical costs, medication, transport, security upgrades or rental assistance to help women transition into safe accommodation. Refuges are able to best determine how they use that additional funding, but it can be used for both, as I said, women’s counselling and children’s counselling.

I have set up a round table with Minister Enoch and the sector to talk about some of the challenges that women and children face to transition from refuge into affordable housing. There is significant investment in the housing budget, including our $1 billion Housing Investment Fund, to support vulnerable families. The purpose of the round table, as I said, is to really work with both departments—my department is obviously responsible for the policy and funding of refuges with the housing department—and the primary goal is to ensure that women seeking safety have a streamlined pathway from refuge into affordable housing. I want to thank all of the stakeholders on the round table for working with us. They have provided firsthand examples of how we can better streamline the system for women and find good pathways in terms of long-term safe, secure housing. Of course the Minister for Housing recently announced increased funding for headleasing, so that is about working with people who own investment properties to lease to government so that we can provide that safe accommodation for women and children.

Ms BOLTON: Just to clarify regarding that funding for the clients of refuges, previously it was a single amount that only achieved CPI increases, so from my understanding it did not matter whether there was one child or three; the amount stayed the same. That made it very difficult to provide those counselling services and support services to spread that amount between them, so has that been rectified?

Ms FENTIMAN: Yes. All of our services have received an increase in the last two years as a result of the COVID boost money, but significantly how refuges use that brokerage money, which is that flexible money, is how they can support those people, particularly when they have children staying with them, to provide specialist counselling. A number of the refuges that I visited are using that additional brokerage money to put on children’s counsellors, so that money can be used flexibly. If there is demand for children’s counselling, they can use that money in that way.

Ms BOLTON: Of that allocation, how much has gone to the Sunshine Coast and Noosa region?

Ms FENTIMAN: I am happy to take that on notice and get you that information.

Ms BOLTON: Thank you.

Ms BOLTON: Thank you, Chair. Minister, going back to the perpetrator programs and the increase there, will they be mandated for those under DVOs?

Ms FENTIMAN: I thank the member for the question. Sometimes perpetrators attend perpetrator programs that are mandated as part of probation and parole but, other times, perpetrators are encouraged to attend. Not all perpetrators are mandated to attend men’s behavioural change programs but, often times, they are strongly encouraged to do so by the court. It would be on a case-by-case basis.

I also have some information for the member for Noosa in relation to how much of the funding for domestic and family violence has gone to the Sunshine Coast and Noosa region. In this financial year the Sunshine Coast region, including Noosa, received almost $5 million—$4.9 million in recurrent funding—to domestic, family and sexual violence services, which is an increase on the previous year. Of course, I recently visited Laurel Place, the sexual assault service which had been experiencing very high demand on the Sunshine Coast, and have given them almost a half-a-million dollar increase to deal with that demand.

From 1 July this year, the Sunshine Coast region will receive an additional $288,000 per annum for three years from our enhancement funding. From the national partnership funding, the Sunshine Coast region will receive an additional $642,000 per annum, which is almost a doubling from the previous year.

Specialist DFV courts

Ms BOLTON: Thank you. With the rollout of more specialist DFV courts—you mentioned the ones in Brisbane and Cairns—given that over the last two years Noosa alone has experienced year on year a 30 per cent increase in domestic violence, will a specialised DFV court be situated and more accessible within the Wide Bay and Sunshine Coast areas?

Ms FENTIMAN: I thank the member for the question. Of course, Southport was the first court in the country and has now been evaluated. We have continued that rollout. We have Southport, Beenleigh, Townsville, Palm Island, Mount Isa and now Brisbane and Cairns—I do not think I have forgotten any—but we will continue to monitor where demand is high as we roll out these courts.

Bridge flooding alert system

Ms BOLTON: Minister, with reference to pre-estimates question No. 19, the Minister for Transport and Main Roads has confirmed the installation of early alert monitors on bridges. As a result, can you confirm that the upgrade of ICT systems will connect to these monitors and ensure real-time dispersal beyond the list provided in your response to include councils, volunteer organisations including SES, Google Maps and Apple apps?

Mr RYAN: Member, that is very specific and technical.

Ms BOLTON: I am happy to place it on notice.

Mr RYAN: How about you ask it in the QFES section, because they will be the coordinators around those alerts. We will ask the commissioner for the fire service to provide some details.

Ms BOLTON: We have been seeking the integration of QPS systems with QPWS, DAF et cetera. What progress has been made there?

Mr RYAN: I know that we have been investigating those opportunities. There has been some recent legislation proposed around the recognition of identity cards as well, which is important. I know that there was a question on notice that we provided an answer to previously—I am just trying to recall that—where we said that there is potential for that, but obviously we need to work through the system upgrade. I am looking at Deputy Commissioner Smith. We might try and get some further information for you before the session is over.

Ms BOLTON: I am happy to place it on notice.

Mr RYAN: I know from your previous question on notice on this particular issue that you have raised it, and it is a matter that we would have been investigating.

…

Ms BOLTON: Commissioner, I go back to the response to question on notice No. 20 regarding the ICT capabilities of the QEOC in connecting with those early-alert monitors on bridges and that information will go in real time to council and their disaster management teams, Google Maps, Apple et cetera.

Commissioner Leach: Thank you for the question. The two projects you talk about are not linked. The upgrade to the Queensland Emergency Operations Centre is around upgrading all of the technology in there for the operations of that centre. That includes audiovisual hardware, videoconferencing solutions, and hardware and software upgrades of equipment that is past its used-by date. The important project you talk about, which is around flood warning implementation, sits with another department. It is administered by the Queensland Reconstruction Authority as part of the resilience program for floods in Queensland. There is technology which the Bureau of Meteorology is responsible for, and in some circumstances local government. That information is collected by local government. We have access to that sort of flood warning information data. That data is used to inform hydrology planning. We use that for predictive flood mapping purposes. The network you refer to is being expanded all of the time and is a good outcome for planning purposes and for community safety at the end of the day.

Ms BOLTON: My question is that there is capacity in this upgrade to integrate in real time so there are not lags. Because it has already been done elsewhere, when the water rises it sends the message straight to the cloud and it goes to Google Maps et cetera, but it really needs to go to all agencies. My question is: does the ICT upgrade have the capabilities?

Commissioner Leach: The technology that we are replacing in the Queensland Emergency Operations Centre is only one part of the overall technology we have there. The answer is yes, we can integrate the information you are talking about into our broader systems—not specifically this program that we are replacing, but the answer is yes.

Police resources for Noosa

Ms BOLTON: Commissioner, I see that we have 150 new sworn officers due to the north coast region, starting July this year, over the next five years. Can you outline what strategy will be utilised regarding our hotspots as in where alcohol is involved—alcohol fuelled violence—so that our councils and businesses are not having to self-fund the overtime hours for police to address those hotspots?

Commissioner Carroll: Member, 150 for a region is exceptional because it really is up to me, the assistant commissioners and the district officers to allocate where we need those staff. In each region now we do demand modelling to see where they are most required. Demand modelling is a lot more complex than people think. It is not just calls for service. It looks at crime, demographics, calls for service and how long it takes; it looks at where your people are congregating. The assistant commissioners for each of the regions have looked at their various areas and are allocating their staff where they need them. I know that your assistant commissioner has already done that, and if it is required in those areas it will certainly be allocated to those areas.

Prison transitional accommodation

Ms BOLTON: Commissioner, page 8 of the SDS speaks about the 108 per cent utilisation for secure prisons. Given that a significant contributor to lowering incarceration numbers and decreasing reoffending is access to transitional accommodation—not only to be able to get on parole but also during parole—can you advise of anything that has been done in this space in terms of not only transitional but also more permanent housing?

Commissioner Stewart: As a result of the QPSR we were funded for re-entry services, and we have a number of agencies that provide those re-entry services to prisoners, both male and female, as they are approaching release to support them through a process of gaining accommodation, identification and many of the things they need on their release. We also have that capability when they are released to follow up to make sure they are. We have a number of programs for housing throughout the state, including the Next Step Home for women prisoners to find accommodation when they leave. We have another program around men who leave in the Moreton area, in Townsville, in Cairns and a number of areas across the state to find housing.

Of course, housing is one of the most critical things for people. Housing, employment and reconnection with family are the most critical areas, so we are very alive to that and work with many other housing agencies as well to do everything that we can to support that. Again, that is something that the Parole Board Queensland is always very interested in—that is, making sure people have safe housing to go to when they are released from prison.

Ms BOLTON: So that means that the issue of those who had previously reported they were not able to get parole because they could not establish and put down three stable addresses has been sorted?

Commissioner Stewart: We do the best we can with what we have in order to help people to get out through that process from a parole perspective. Of course, housing stock across the state is difficult and complex. I will not say that we can get that right 100 per cent of the time, but we certainly do have programs in place to address housing and to support people as they are released from prison.

Funding for frontline services for coastguards

Ms BOLTON: On page 2, there is $8 million for marine rescue services. What proportion is being provided to frontline service delivery for our coastguards?

Commissioner Leach: Thank you for the question. The government announced increased funding of $8 million for the Marine Rescue Service, $5 million of which will be directed to the Vessel Replacement Program. That will bolster the $17.38 million that has already been announced for vessel replacements. This will enable accelerated replacement of rescue vehicles in areas of greatest need. The remaining $3 million in additional funding will contribute to support grants for marine rescue units. That will help them address rising costs of service delivery and drive the Marine Rescue Reform Program. The $3 million is really around helping them to offset costs: electricity, utilities, fuel and a whole range of things.

Ms BOLTON: Essentially, they are still having to buy their own uniforms?

Commissioner Leach: Some of that $3 million will assist in offsetting some of those costs for them.