SENATE

Wednesday, 1 March 2017 Senate Page 27
Senator KIM CARR: I just want to make sure I get the right designation. In regard to the Defence media, the
department has a separate unit entirely for Defence media?
Mr Richardson: We have a communications branch and there are some media advisers elsewhere in the
organisation.
Senator KIM CARR: How many are there?
Mr Richardson: I will need to take that on notice.
Senator KIM CARR: Has there been any assessment of the length of time it takes to respond to a media
inquiry?
Mr Richardson: Yes.
Senator KIM CARR: What has been the result of that inquiry?
Mr Richardson: I get a weekly printout of all media inquiries which are outstanding as of that week. Most
media inquiries are handled expeditiously. However, there are some which take an inordinate amount of time to
answer.
Senator KIM CARR: Has there been any change in the length of time it takes to respond?
Mr Richardson: I think we have improved over the last 12 months, but I am quite certain you would be able
to talk to some journalists who would have had pretty unsatisfactory experiences in the last few months.
Senator KIM CARR: It is not unusual to have a conversation of that type with journalists. I am wondering if
you have done any assessment of the claim?
Mr Richardson: No. I am very conscious of it, because it was precisely because of concerns expressed by
some journalists that I asked to get a weekly printout of all outstanding—
Senator KIM CARR: I see—that is what led you to this thinking?
Mr Richardson: Yes, that is what led to—
Senator KIM CARR: And your suggestion to us is that the evidence is not there to sustain the claim?
Mr Richardson: No, the performance is mixed. Most inquiries are answered expeditiously; others are not. I
think our performance as a department in responding to media inquiries is mixed.
Senator Payne: Similarly, I would observe and I think you might agree, Senator Carr, that most inquiries are
reasonable and others are not in terms of the expectation from members of the media from time to time. Most are
reasonable; some are not.
Senator KIM CARR: That is often a highly subjective assessment, though, isn't it. Is there an assessment of
the proportion of responses that need to be cleared by ministerial offices?
Mr Richardson: Basically, the rule of thumb is that, in respect of most media inquiries, we do ensure that
there is consistency with the minister's office. I think that is standard practice across any sensible government.
Where the media is asking to interview an individual, I am involved in that and I always ensure that the minister's
office is comfortable with that.
Senator KIM CARR: Again, it is not unusual practice across governments, I would have thought.
Mr Richardson: Yes.
Senator KIM CARR: Has there been any—have you noticed any change in the amount of time it takes to get
a clearance from ministerial offices?
Mr Richardson: No, I myself have not. I think it is fair to say that the minister's office is pretty good at
responding promptly.
Senator KIM CARR: I want to go to this issue because there are substantive policy questions that arise from
this. It is not just a question of whether or not journalists are happy with the treatment they get. It relates
specifically to another aspect of the communications work and that is in regard to correspondence, which then can
blow up into significant matters of public interest. Do you have a target time on the response to ministerial
correspondence? In terms of responding, how long does it take? How does that work?
Mr Richardson: We do. Ms Crome will respond.
Ms Crome: Routine correspondence we seek to turn around within 10 business days.
Senator KIM CARR: What do you regard as routine?
Ms Crome: General correspondence from members of the public on routine matters. I am sorry; it is a bit
vague.
FOREIGN AFFAIRS, DEFENCE AND TRADE LEGISLATION COMMITTEE