The Digital Culture Public Sphere Submission Paper (6MB PDF)

The submission was the result of a seven week consultation with over 800 individuals and organisations from across the digital culture sector. The consultation used the award winning Public Sphere methodology which blends online and offline channels for discussion.

“Participants  contributed their thoughts through social media such as Twitter, Facebook and my blog, or used more traditional media -  including post, email and phone – or made face to face contributions at the live event,” Senator Lundy said.

“We then collated these into an open editable wiki and invited participants to shape the submission contents.”

The consultation was undertaken across five sectors: games development, film and animation, media and music, digital arts and cultural heritage.

“The Digital Culture Public Sphere was designed to represent voices from the digital arts, creative industries and cultural heritage in the development of the new National Cultural Policy and ensure there was time to develop and engage with ideas so policy makers understood their issues and their plans,” Senator Lundy said.

“I would like to thank everyone who contributed to this submission and made the discussion so lively and fruitful. I commend this submission to the National Cultural Policy Taskforce,” Senator Lundy said.

Senator Lundy said she was pleased to see a strong cultural heritage participation in the consultation from around Australia.

“Canberra is home to many our national cultural icons, including the National Library of Australia, the Australian War Memorial and the National Film and Sound Archives. The submission highlights the significant role our iconic institutions have in a national cultural policy and the potential for engaging more fully with our cultural heritage online.”

For more information about the National Cultural Policy visit http://culture.arts.gov.au/discussion-paper or to review the submission visit http://katelundy.com.au/

Background information:

• The Digital Culture Public Sphere Submission Paper (6MB PDF)
  
• The Digital Culture Public Sphere DCPS Report Appendix (18MB Zip) – includes all source contributions including papers, Tweets, wiki edits, votes, comments, etc
  
• The Digital Culture Public Sphere blog  with links to the wiki, IdeaScale and other tools used – http://www.katelundy.com.au/2011/09/06/the-digital-culture-public-sphere/
• The Public Sphere methodology - http://www.katelundy.com.au/2010/11/03/speech-at-cebit-gov-2-0-conference/#publicsphere

Kate

Thank you for your letter on the issue of the indexation of military superannuation. I appreciate the time you have take to write to me. I apologise for the delay in answering your letter and thank you for your patience, as I have received a large amount of correspondence on this matter.  

I certainly DO acknowledge the unique nature of military service and our debt to our servicemen and women. 

The Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits Amendment (Fair Indexation) Bill 2010 was referred to the Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee in March this year.

The Committee found problems with the Bill and in their final report advised against passing it.  For more information on the Committee report please see the following link: http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/fapa_ctte/defence_retirement_benefits/index.htm

Of particular note, this Bill applied to only a section of the Defence superannuants, and unfairly overlooked 7,200 current Military Superannuation Benefits Scheme superannuants, as well as the future beneficiaries of the MSBS, and, of course all other Commonwealth superannuants including those employed in the Department of Defence. 

I remain committed to continuing the campaign to improve the indexation methods applying to military and civilian Commonwealth pensions, and will continue to work closely with the representative organisations such as DFWA, SCOA and ACPSRO.  I am, of course, convinced that the CPI no longer provides the kind of indexation that responds to the cost-of-living needs of this group of superannuants and pensioners, and I have been seeking the development of the new analytical living cost index which would reflect more accurately the cost of living needs of military and civilian superannuants.

I will continue to post details of the campaign on my website at www.katelundy.com.au 

Thank you again for your comments.

The Final Submission was submitted to the Minister on 21 October 2011.

• The Digital Culture Public Sphere Submission Paper (6MB PDF)
  
• The Digital Culture Public Sphere DCPS Report Appendix (18MB Zip) – includes all source contributions including papers, Tweets, wiki edits, votes, comments, etc

UPDATE: you can browse the content from the day in the schedule below. We are adding notes and links for all talks.

The National Cultural Policy itself covers three major sectors:

• traditional core arts such as opera, dance, theatre, literature, music, visual arts and craft,
• creative industries such as games development, film, animation, media content, architecture, fashion, design & publishing,
• cultural heritage such as the work done by cultural institutions (regional metro & national galleries, libraries, archives & museums) and Australia’s Indigenous culture.

The Office of Senator Kate Lundy in collaboration with the Office of Minister Simon Crean is running a Digital Culture Public Sphere consultation to look specifically at the digital arts and industries as well as opportunities for cultural institutions around digitisation, public engagement and collaboration.

This consultation will result in a submission that will be presented directly to the Minister as part of the broader National Cultural Policy consultation.

Minister Crean strongly supports the initiative:

“The Digital Culture Public Sphere consultation is a breakthrough exercise in bringing together ideas and projects, working them through and providing a rich base of information and pathways for Australia’s digital cultural challenges and opportunities. It will provide a valuable contribution to the National Cultural Policy Consultation which is an important opportunity to examine how the Australian Government should support arts and culture in the 21st century.”

“We are laying the foundations for the broad cultural arts and industries in Australia at a time when high speed broadband will provide a platform to use our cultural collections and creative skills for new applications, education and research services. I welcome contributions from the digital arts and industries as well as cultural institutions across Australia”.

Australia is ideally positioned for strong digital arts and industries in the global context, with a highly skilled sector, ubiquitous high speed broadband being rolled out, a high quality of life and our multicultural character. All these elements contribute to a unique creative and cultural footprint. Digital Culture is something for which Australia has an international reputation. Not surprisingly there are significant social and economic opportunities available through the creation of a strategic approach across the sector.

This Public Sphere consultation is being done in collaboration with the broader digital arts and industries community. The aim is to draw together expertise and diverse ideas from individuals and organisations right across the digital arts and industry spectrum, and from all around Australia.

We look forward to your participation in this important piece of policy development, whether online or in person.

If you want to be kept up to date with progress of the consultation, please register for the Live Event either as a Regular Attendee or as an Online Participant, as we will email updates to those lists.

For more information about the Digital Culture Public Sphere please see below including how you contribute. Or you can contact the Public Sphere Coordinator, Pia Waugh on 0400966453 pia.waugh@aph.gov.au

How to Contribute to the Consultation:

• Wiki: Edit the draft submission directly by going to the Digital Culture Public Sphere wiki.
• Blog: Post comments, links to papers, case studies and ideas to the comments below – which will then be summarised and presented at the event as part of the proceedings.
• Twitter: Tweet with #publicsphere so we can find your ideas, collate and include them as part of the feedback.
• Facebook: Post your ideas on the Facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/digitalculturepublicsphere
• Email or snail mail: You can also contribute to the topic by emailing or sending us a letter, but please note all topic correspondence will be published here on the topic blog for public transparency and peer review.
• Run a roundtable: Run your own discussion or roundtable event and post the outcomes here in the comments.
• Live Event: Join us for our Live Event (Sydney), which will be video streamed online so you can participate remotely. Please register to reserve a spot because spaces are limited to the venue capacity. Please see the full schedule below
• Live Streaming: You can watch the Live Event remotely and participate in the online discussions on the day through http://www.livestream.com/publicsphere
• Video: Submit a (maximum) 10 minute talk by video submission by adding a link to the comments at the bottom of this post.
• Endorse: Endorse the ideas that you think are most important, ideas will be put into an endorsement system from the 6th October till the 20th October and will be linked here.

Outcomes and the Consultation Framework:

All contributions to the Public Sphere – including the talks and discussions at the event – will be collated into a draft submission including the ideas put forward through the comments on this blog, Tweets to the #publicsphere hashtag, posts on the Facebook page, comments on the wiki, talks and live-blogging. The draft briefing paper is on the wiki and will be publicly editable until the 15th October. The briefing paper is then finalised, published online and then presented to Minister Crean before the 21st October.

The final submission will directly reflect the vision and ideas of the participants.

The consultation approach aligns closely with the National Cultural Policy discussion paper, incorporating specified by Minister Crean in his introduction, as well as ideas about the digital components of each of the policy goals defined in the discussion paper background.

1. A vision and success for the different sectors of the digital cultural landscape, and then ideas for how to reach each goal. Participants are encouraged to consider areas such as skills development, funding & entrepreneurialism, new opportunities, existing challenges, emerging business models and technologies, the current state of each area, public access & participation and case studies that showcase excellence in each area:
   • Games development
   • Film & Animation
   • Media & Music
   • Digital Arts
   • Cultural Institutions (GLAMs) looking at opportunities for collaboration, digitisation, access and public engagement in cultural heritage
2. The Big Picture, the role that arts and culture can play in meeting Australian aspirations and what success would look like for digital culture in Australia:
   • To ensure that what the government supports – and how this support is provided – reflects the diversity of a 21^st Century Australia, and protects and supports Indigenous culture.
   • To encourage the use of emerging technologies and new ideas that support the development of new artworks and the creative industries, and that enable more people to access and participate in arts and culture.
   • To support excellence and world-class endeavour, and strengthen the role that the arts play in telling Australian stories both here and overseas.
   • To increase and strengthen the capacity of the arts to contribute to our society and economy.

Target Audience for the Public Sphere:

1. Digital Arts & Industries – games development communities and companies, film, music, media, animation, data visualisation communities, augmented reality communities, a broad representation of industry, creatives and community.
2. Cultural institutions including regional, metro and national galleries, libraries archives and museums – specifically looking at digital cultural assets, online engagement & access initiatives so facilitate public engagement with our culturally diverse heritage and generating ideas for how cultural institutions can collaborate.

The Public Sphere Methodology

Conversations (weeks 1-5)

In this phase:

• the consultation is launched as a blog with a corresponding wiki and Twitter hashtag (#publicsphere),
• the blog is promoted throughout identified communities of interest and participants are encouraged to comment on the blog, wiki and on established social media networks (all to be collated for the consultation),
• the Live Event creates the opportunity for discussion time to share and develop ideas. The Live Event is live streamed over the internet for public discussion and peer review,
• the community is encouraged to run focused roundtables with their sector to contribute to the Consultation and to participate in the discussions online during the Live Event.

Consolidation & Submission (weeks 6-7)

In this phase:

• all input collated is published in one place (on a wiki) for public review along with a draft submission paper based on the input for public feedback,
• after the Live Event the ideas are all put into an endorsement system for quality assurance,
• the wiki is closed on October 15th and submission is finalised and published online,
• the submission is then presented to the Minister prior to the 21^st October for consideration and the participating community contributions are recognised through a public thanks.

The Digital Culture Public Sphere Live Event

The Live Event will be on October 6th in the Sydney CBD. Details are being confirmed and will be announced on this blog in the coming week. To reserve a place at the event, please register. Please note that this event will be live streamed online so anyone from around Australia can participate in the discussions, and give their feedback on the ideas presented on the day.

Please note that contributions made to the consultation prior to the 6th October will be consolidated and presented to the Live Event as part of the schedule to feed into the discussions, so please contribute your ideas before then!

Date: 6th October 2011
Time: 0900 – 1700
Location: The NSW Teacher Federation Conference Centre, 37 Reservoir Street Surry Hills NSW 2010. Limited parking available, short walk from Central Station and buses.
RSVP: Either as a Regular Attendee if you want to participate in person, or as an Online Participant if you want to be kept up to date with announcements. Register at http://digiculture.eventbrite.com/

The Live Event Schedule

Speakers to be announced closer to the date so stay tuned. Please note, all talks will be designed to stimulate discussion.

Sponsors

Finally, an enormous thank you to our sponsors for their support in running the Digital Culture Public Sphere Live Event:

Google Australia

Google’s search technologies connect millions of people around the world with information every day and its targeted advertising program provides businesses of all sizes with measurable results. Our Sydney office is a central hub for Google in developing innovative products and partnering with Aussie businesses to help them take advantage of the digital economy. With over 500 employees, Australia has produced exciting global projects like: Chrome, Maps, Docs & App Engine. We were voted BRW’s Best Place to Work in 2009 and 2011.

iGEA

iGEA is an industry association representing Australian and New Zealand companies in the computer and video game industry. Our members publish, market and/or distribute interactive games and entertainment content.

Screen Australia

Screen Australia is the key government agency supporting the development of a creative, innovative and commercially sustainable Australian screen production industry. Screen Australia offers funds for the development, production and marketing of Australian screen content, as well as for the development of Australian talent and screen production businesses.

Cisco Systems

Cisco Systems, Inc. is the worldwide leader in networking for the Internet. Today, networks are an essential part of business, education, government and home communications, and Cisco Internet Protocol-based (IP) networking solutions are the foundation of these networks. Cisco hardware, software, and service offerings are used to create Internet solutions that allow individuals, companies, and countries to increase productivity, improve customer satisfaction and strengthen competitive advantage. The Cisco name has become synonymous with the Internet, as well as with the productivity improvements. At Cisco, our vision is to change the way people work, live, play and learn.

Adobe Australia

We help our customers create and deliver compelling content and applications as well as fully realise their business potential. Together we’re turning engaging digital experiences into more valuable interactions every day — across media and devices, anywhere, anytime. Adobe helps customers create highly compelling content, deliver it across diverse media and devices, and then optimise it through systematic targeting and measurement. Only Adobe offers this complete spectrum of capabilities, providing a critical competitive edge in today’s ever-changing media landscape.

In-Kind Software Sponsors

Leximancer

Leximancer is the latest in text analytics software, allowing powerful insights to be discovered automatically from electronic text in an unbiased way. Leximancer supports the Digital Culture Consultation by providing analytic services to derive insights from the  submissions. Leximancer: From words to meaning to insight.

Palantir

Palantir Technologies is working to radically change how groups analyze information. We were founded in 2004 by a handful of PayPal alumni and Stanford computer scientists. Since then we’ve doubled in size every year while retaining our early-stage values: a startup culture, strong work ethic, and rigorous hiring standards. We currently offer two products: Palantir Government and Palantir Finance. Both are platforms for integrating, visualizing, and analyzing the world’s information. We support many kinds of data including structured, unstructured, relational, temporal, and geospatial. Our products are built for real analysis with a focus on security, scalability, ease of use, and collaboration.

The reasons for the bill’s failure were, firstly, the present budget situation and the need to return to a surplus by 2012-13; and, secondly, that the bill itself was so flawed. I took part in the debate on 16 June to point out some of the problems of this bill and why I was voting against it. In summary, this bill did not provide a sustainable, fair and funded solution to the inadequacy of CPI indexation. Unfortunately a lot of misinformation has since been circulated, either from ignorance or malice. One of these myths is that before the last election I and the Labor Party had promised to vote for this bill.

The facts are that in June last year the opposition put out a press release announcing that a coalition government would index DFRDB superannuation pensions by the same factors as used for aged pensions. This indexation would include a wage related or MTAWE factor, which the coalition government had so strenuously opposed throughout its 11 years of government. However, before this announcement the then Minister for Finance and Deregulation had announced that our government, the Labor government, had accepted the Matthews report and its recommendations. In essence the Matthews report recommended that the method of indexation for Commonwealth defence and civilian pensions should remain indexed by CPI alone, unless:

… a robust index which reflects the price inflation experience of superannuants better than the CPI becomes available in the future.

So at the pre-election meetings last year my colleagues and I were bound by the terms of the Matthews report and, of course, we were criticised by some for this stand. In a pre-election meeting in Canberra organised by SCOA and DFWA on 16 August last year, specifically on the topic of indexation, I acknowledged the government’s acceptance of the Matthews report and I said:

And so my work and that of my colleagues has been to find a way to use the Matthews report to still achieve our basic aim of fair retirement incomes for all ComSuper and Defence superannuants.

Firstly, recommendation 4 of the Matthews report gives us the green light to implement a new and fair indexation method. The shortcomings of the CPI alone as a measure of the cost of living have been acknowledged—even by Matthews! The government in introducing its new index for the aged pension (the PBLCI—Pensioner and Beneficiary Living Cost Index) acknowledged this also, so it is not a point of argument.

I also said at that pre-election meeting:

I do not consider, as the coalition does, that a changed indexation applying to only one section of defence pensions is a fair solution. Of course they deserve it, and of course we owe a debt to those who have served Australia, but we should not seek to water down this campaign, or to divide those involved, by choosing to benefit only one group and not the others. I agree with David Jamison and the DFWA that this political football with veterans should stop.

At this same pre-election meeting Senator Humphries admitted that the coalition had no plans to extend the indexation provisions to other similarly disadvantaged groups, such as the over 7,200 Military Superannuation and Benefits Scheme members or those in the CSS or PSS schemes. I thought it fairly ironic to see that Senator Nick Minchin, who throughout the 11 years of the Howard government so vigorously opposed any change whatsoever to the indexation of military and civilian pensions, was on 16 June paired on the side of supporting the private member’s DFRDB indexation bill.

As I have noted, I have supported the campaign to improve the indexation factors applying to all Commonwealth military and civilian pensions and have sought ideas on how to achieve this within the terms of the Labor government policies. This has included setting up a campaign section on my website. Through this website we have been able to gather information and ideas, to compile some case histories and case studies, and to gauge major areas of need, such as those on the lower pensions. I thank contributors who have made constructive suggestions and comments and those who have raised legitimate criticisms and aired their frustrations.

Unfortunately, because of recent inappropriate, inaccurate and abusive comments which unfairly reflect on many passionate and constructive advocates for fair indexation, I have decided to close this comments section for the time being. Of course, I could have filtered out the abusive comments, but that would bring accusations of censorship. Those interested in the history of the campaign to date can still access it on the website, and comments can still reach me by mail or email.

Together with many other senators and members, I continue to seek ways to improve the superannuation outcomes for those on Commonwealth, military and civilian pensions. Our work in persuading our colleagues of the merits and necessity for this action has, I think, been hampered by a daily barrage of abusive, sometimes racist and inaccurate emails apparently sent to all senators and members as well as staff. This is counterproductive to the campaign, and it has been recognised by the DFWA, who have apologised and disassociated their organisation from such action.

We need to remember that the Labor government, in so successfully tackling the impact of the global financial crisis, took major initiatives to help those on the lowest incomes, and these were welcomed by the superannuants organisations. They particularly noted the benefits, such as the increase in the low-income tax offset, the increase in the tax-free threshold for low-income earners and the 50 per cent tax discount on interest on savings and deposits of up to $1,000. Those on ComSuper and Defence pensions, like others in the community, benefited from the economic stimulus plan and received either the $900 tax bonus payment or the earlier Economic Security Strategy payments to pensioners and carers of $1,400 for singles or $2,100 for couples. They have shared the benefits of the Labor government’s investments in health reform and aged care services. Australians in general, including those on Commonwealth defence and civilian pensions, would not have fared so well under a coalition government and its cuts.

That said, we recognise there is still more to do. That the CPI no longer provides fair indexation is no longer in dispute, and I have sought advice on the development of a new analytical living cost index, or ALCI, as foreshadowed in the Matthews review, to reflect more accurately the cost of living of military and civilian superannuants, including the DFRDB recipients to whom this bill would have applied.

I will continue to consult and to work with representative organisations such as DRWA, SCOA and the peak body, ACPSRO, to whom I am indebted for ongoing advice. A priority of my advocacy within government will be to make the case for recognition of specific cost of living impacts on Commonwealth defence and civilian superannuants and to alleviate the tax burden of those on the lowest incomes. This is a campaign I feel very strongly about, and I commend this issue to all of my colleagues and believe that the campaign is at its best when it is bipartisan in its character.

Transcript from Hansard

It is no secret that I have continued to seek a way to improve the method of indexation for Defence and other Commonwealth superannuation pensions. Unfortunately, this bill is not the answer. We do acknowledge the unique nature of military service and our debt to our service men and women, and I welcome the acceptance of the motion of support to this effect in the House of Representatives on 2 June and support the expression for fair indexation.

I also accept, as I have often argued, that the CPI is no longer an accurate measure of the changes of the cost of living. This has been acknowledged by the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the government, and I have therefore agreed that a better measure of indexation for military and other Commonwealth superannuation pensions should be developed. This was the reason for the Labor government’s development of the PBLCI, the pensioner and beneficiary living cost index, which has already improved the standard of living for pensioners, including those military and civilian superannuants whose Commonwealth pensions fall below the age pension income and asset levels.

That the CPI alone is no longer the best measure of changes in the cost of living was also recognised in the Matthews review of pension indexation arrangements in Australian government civilian and military superannuation schemes. One of its recommendations states:

If a robust index which reflects the price inflation experience of superannuants better than the CPI becomes available in the future, the Australian Government should consider its use for indexing Australian Government civilian and military superannuation pensions.

The government’s commitment to fiscal responsibility and to returning the budget to surplus by 2012-13 is and must be of paramount concern.

This government is proud of its handling of the global financial crisis and the way we are coping with the costs of this year’s natural disasters in Australia—and we are proud of our responses to the disasters and distress of neighbouring countries—but we know that, consequently at this time, all new expenditure must be offset by savings over the forward estimates.

The proposals for this bill do not satisfy this criterion.

In initially providing estimates of the cost of this bill to 2014-15, the Minister for Finance and Deregulation, my colleague Senator Wong, noted that no offsetting savings were proposed.

The bill’s explanatory memorandum proposed only that the costs could be met through the accrued funds of the Future Fund, but this assertion has been challenged by the Department of Finance and Deregulation and by the Government Actuary.

This bill is divisive. A major problem is that it unfairly applies to only a section of the Defence superannuants and debars over 7,200 current Military Superannuation Benefits Scheme superannuants, as well as the future beneficiaries of the MSBS—and, of course, all other Commonwealth superannuants, including those employed in the Department of Defence. This point was made in many of the submissions to the Senate inquiry, even those in support of the bill. The Australian Veterans and Defence Services Council, for example, noted that the bill was ‘a start’ but would not overcome the financial problems of all veterans.

I have had emails and messages from Commonwealth defence and civilian pensioners who have long campaigned for measures such as those outlined in the bill but find that they have been excluded from its provisions. In the context of the bill’s title, ‘Fair Indexation’, is it fair to discriminate in this way?

In March the Senate referred the bill to the Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee, which considered departmental and public submissions and reported on 10 May. The committee recommended that the bill not be passed.

Coalition senators presented a dissenting report. The Department of Defence submission to the Senate committee opposed the bill, reasoning that the military superannuation schemes had been designed to reflect the unique nature of military service and did already provide benefits well in excess of the community standard. Any requirement for Defence to fund the changes proposed by the bill would significantly impact on Defence funding for ongoing programs.

The Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee agreed that the unique nature of military service is already reflected in provisions and entitlements. It also highlighted that significant factors in its assessment were the impact on the government’s fiscal position and the ability of the Department of Defence to deliver ongoing programs.

The committee pointed to the gap between the target level of assets required in the Future Fund and the actual level of assets in the fund and stated that ‘the gap would be exacerbated if the bill is passed’.

I would like to acknowledge the commitment and hard work of those who have made submissions to this inquiry despite the difficult time constraints. Some of the individuals who have made extremely useful contributions were constituents of mine.

I would like to mention in particular the ongoing and valuable work of Peter Thornton and Bert Hoebee. I remain committed to trying to improve the indexation methods applying to military and civilian Commonwealth pensions and will continue to do so within the fiscal constraints and all of those factors that do apply.

I will continue to work with representative organisations such as DFWA, SCOA and ACPSRO, to whom I am indebted for their ongoing advice.

I am convinced, as I think we all are, that the CPI no longer provides the kind of indexation that responds to the cost-of-living needs of this group of superannuants and pensioners, and I have sought advice on the development of the new analytical living cost index to reflect more accurately the cost of living of military and civilian superannuants, including those to whom this bill would apply.

I challenge the empty rhetoric and the feigned indignation of Senator Humphries and others opposite with respect to my constituency here in the ACT. You do not need to look too far into the policies of the coalition and their attacks on Canberra and the Australian Public Service—to the tune of 12,000 jobs; that still stands as a coalition policy.

It exposes the duplicitous nature of their presentation here to feign concern for the welfare of superannuants while attacking the very jobs for the people who will find themselves on a Commonwealth superannuation pension at some point in the future. So let us not stand here and feign indignation. This bill is divisive in its character and nature.

I understand what you are trying to do—tap into the discontent that prevails right across Commonwealth and military superannuants—but this bill does not achieve it.

It is, I think, an attempt to tap into sentiment without providing any solution whatsoever.

Much of our discussion centred on an analysis of the Updated Estimates of the Cost of Alternative Indexation Arrangements for Commonwealth Superannuation Pensions – Summary , released on 17 February by the Department of Finance and Deregulation. This paper includes the assumptions and some base data on which the estimates were made. It was updated again with minor changes to some figures on 8 March.

One positive reaction to this paper is the recognition by the Department of “clawback”, estimated now to be “in the order of 30 per cent”. However none of the tables presented on the costs of changing indexation from the CPI alone reflect the clawback. One assumption made by the Finance Estimates paper that has been questioned is that enhanced indexation would change the percentage of benefits taken as a pension rather than as a lump sum (an estimated 10 per cent higher). Peter Thornton has prepared a paper questioning this and other assumptions of the Finance Estimates paper.

The Minister for Finance and Deregulation, Senator the Hon Penny Wong, has stressed the Government’s commitment to returning the Budget to surplus by 2012-13 and the need to offset all new spending as part of the Budget process. In provided estimates of the costs of the Ronaldson Bill to 2014-15, she noted that to date no offsetting savings appeared to have been proposed by Senator Ronaldson.

The Ronaldson Private Member’s Bill, the Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits Amendment (Fair Indexation) Bill 2010. has now been referred to the Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 10 May 2011. Submissions were due by 15 April. I understand that DFWA made a submission, assisted by SCOA. I expect that many submissions will centre on questioning the assumptions and conclusions of this Finance paper.

BTW, with Senator Ronaldson’s private member’s Bill so divisive in its approach, at the very least the debate ought to be informed by public scrutiny of Finance’s estimated costs of any change to the indexation methodology, hence our letter urging their release.

Kate.

PS My continuing thanks to the contributors to this blog!

To download the PDF please click here

I believe that any indexation improvements should apply to all of the relevant Defence and ComSuper schemes. These are the Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits Scheme (DFRDB), the Defence Forces Retirement Benefits Scheme (DFRB), the Military Superannuation and Benefits Scheme (MSBS), the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (CSS), the Public Sector Superannuation Scheme (PSS), the Scheme under the Superannuation Act 1922 and the scheme under the Papua New Guinea (Staffing Assistance) (Superannuation) Regulations 1973.

As John Coleman reports in the latest issue of SCOA’s newsletter Supertime, the Government is seeking to develop a more appropriate living cost index than the CPI, and  I am working to try to expedite this process. While this is being developed, I have suggested that the existing PBLCI which applies to the Age pension could be included as a short-term indexation measure for these Commonwealth pensions.

My work to achieve fair indexation includes persuading Senators and Members of Parliament of the importance and justice of this issue, and in this I have been joined by our local MPs. Mike Kelly, Gai Brodtmann and Andrew Leigh.

Together with the organisations representing you, I have worked to develop a new proposal to achieve a fairer outcome. Our proposals include the development of a new Analytical Living Cost Index (ALCI) tailored to a realistic cost of living assessment for this group of retirees, and reform of the tax treatment of ComSuper and Defence pensions.

We completely reject the cynical attempt by the Opposition to inject chaos and disunity into the campaign by offering a change in indexation to one section only of the Defence superannuants.

I look forward to working with the new Prime Minister and the new Finance Minister in a re-elected Labor Government to achieve the equity we seek.

Thank you for continuing with us the campaign for fairer indexation for Defence and ComSuper pensions.

It’s Don’s first day on the job and our discussions traversed the recent (last few decades) history of procurement policy and experience from a SME’s perspective to things like the challenge of procuring ICT in a way that fosters innovation and nimble adaptation to leverage web2.0.

I was impressed by the fact that Don Easter had already familiarised himself with the report of our 3^rd public sphere: ICT and creative industries development. ICT procurement issues attracted a lot of attention throughout the public sphere and we formally presented Don with the Report for good measure.

Given my strong views regarding procurement and outsourcing of ICT, I firmly believe that our new ICT supplier advocate is in a good position to make real progress solving the well known frustrations experienced by SME’s in particular.

I also want to acknowledge and thank the Minister for Innovation, Senator Kim Carr for this appointment. In further reinforces the central role the ICT sector plays in advancing our collective vision for a productive, expanding, knowledge-based economy.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Transcript:

Kate:

I’m really excited to be able to introduce the ICT supplier advocate, Don Easter. He’s here with me in my office. I had the great priviledge of of course making the public announcement that the Rudd Labor Government was going to appoint an ICT Supplier Advocate and this is our first chance to have a meeting together. Don…

Don:

Thank you very much and delighted to be here. I’ve been meeting with the Ministry today and getting to understand the role better. And certainly I’ve got through the Public Sphere 3 and Gov 2 initiatives and there are some really terrific ideas coming out of you work in your area so I look forward to working with you.

Kate:

Well thank you for that. And it won’t surprise you to know Don that we’re here, one of the things I wanted to do today was to formally present you with the Public Sphere 3, the outcomes of the ICT industry and Creative sector briefing paper. So here it is.

Don:

Thank you very much.

Kate:

It’s on the laptop but we’ll make sure you get all the versions of the copies of it. And I commend it to you because we had wonderful engagement with the ICT sector through this Public Sphere. Their ideas have been collated via a wiki and presented in this report.

Don:

Accepted with pleasure.

Kate:

Thank you.

It’s also important to note the commitment by Minister Carr, our Minister for Innovation and Industry. How he’s been able to push out the Supplier Advocate roles, and as I said I’m particularly pleased to see the ICT industry recognised with their own Supplier Advocate.

Don:

Thank you.