❓ Mr. Wyatt questions the Department of Aboriginal Affairs (DAA) on heritage management efficiency, specifically regarding statutory approval processing times and stakeholder satisfaction. The Minister provides data and explanations, including challenges related to the Marapikurrinya Yintha site.
AnsweredQoN 5838Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(1) I refer to the key efficiency indicators for the Department of Aboriginal Affairs (DAA) with respect to Heritage Management, and I ask: (a) what
was the actual average processing time per statutory approval request granted
by the DAA for the 2015-16 financial year: (i) is
this in-line with the estimated actual of 98 days reported in Budget Paper One
of the 2016-17 State Budget; (ii) what
methodology did the DAA use to estimate the actual average time for the
completion of statutory approvals for the 2015-16 financial year and will the Minister table the data used to derive this estimate; (iii) for
requests for statutory approval completed for the period from 1 July 2015 up until May
2016: (A) how many requests were approved; and (B) how
many days did each request take; (iv) for requests for statutory approval completed for the period from May 2016 until 30 June 2016: (A) how
many requests were approved; and (B) how
many days did each request take; (b) will
the Minister table the employee perceptions survey undertaken within the
DAA and if not, why not? (2) I refer to the “Estimated Actual Key Effectiveness Indicators” published in the 2016-17 State Budget in relation to the percentage of direct stakeholders satisfied with the services provided by the DAA in relation to the management of Aboriginal Heritage, estimated to sit at 80 per cent, and I ask: (a) can the actual figure now be confirmed: (i) if yes, what is it; and (ii) if not, why not?
was the actual average processing time per statutory approval request granted
by the DAA for the 2015-16 financial year: (i) is
this in-line with the estimated actual of 98 days reported in Budget Paper One
of the 2016-17 State Budget; (ii) what
methodology did the DAA use to estimate the actual average time for the
completion of statutory approvals for the 2015-16 financial year and will the Minister table the data used to derive this estimate; (iii) for
requests for statutory approval completed for the period from 1 July 2015 up until May
2016: (A) how many requests were approved; and (B) how
many days did each request take; (iv) for requests for statutory approval completed for the period from May 2016 until 30 June 2016: (A) how
many requests were approved; and (B) how
many days did each request take; (b) will
the Minister table the employee perceptions survey undertaken within the
DAA and if not, why not? (2) I refer to the “Estimated Actual Key Effectiveness Indicators” published in the 2016-17 State Budget in relation to the percentage of direct stakeholders satisfied with the services provided by the DAA in relation to the management of Aboriginal Heritage, estimated to sit at 80 per cent, and I ask: (a) can the actual figure now be confirmed: (i) if yes, what is it; and (ii) if not, why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
19 October 2016
Responded by
Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs
Response time
35 days
1(a) - (i) The average processing time per statutory approval was 106 days. Two section 18 applications were unable to be progressed in a timely manner because they were associated with the Marapikurrinya Yintha site that had not been progressed earlier due to the complexities following the legal challenge involving the site. If the two applications are excluded from the figures, then the average days for processing section 18 applications was 95, an improvement on the estimated 98 days reported in Budget Paper One.
1(a)(ii) The figures provided are calculated from the total processing time of section 18 applications, which begins from the advertised closing date for submissions for an Aboriginal Cultural Material Committee meeting, to the date the Minister makes his decision. The figures provided above are from the same source used to calculate section 18 processing figures that were tabled in the Department of Aboriginal Affairs Annual Report on 22 September 2016.
1(a)(iii)-1(a)(iv)See tabled paper no. The graph shows that for the 2016 calendar year, section 18 average completion days for four of the five months were well below the estimated 98 days.May 2016 was the only month for the 2016 calendar year where processing days exceeded the estimated 98 days. This was due to the consideration at the May 2016 Aboriginal Cultural Material Committee meeting of two section 18 notices associated with the Marapikurrinya Yintha site that had not been progressed earlier due to the complexities of the legal challenge involving the site.
1(b) No. I am advised that the Public Sector Commission is the owner of the Employee Perception Survey.
2(a) Yes.
2(a)(i) The actual stakeholder satisfaction rate was 72 per cent, seven percent above the target.
2(a)(ii) Not applicable.
1(a)(ii) The figures provided are calculated from the total processing time of section 18 applications, which begins from the advertised closing date for submissions for an Aboriginal Cultural Material Committee meeting, to the date the Minister makes his decision. The figures provided above are from the same source used to calculate section 18 processing figures that were tabled in the Department of Aboriginal Affairs Annual Report on 22 September 2016.
1(a)(iii)-1(a)(iv)See tabled paper no. The graph shows that for the 2016 calendar year, section 18 average completion days for four of the five months were well below the estimated 98 days.May 2016 was the only month for the 2016 calendar year where processing days exceeded the estimated 98 days. This was due to the consideration at the May 2016 Aboriginal Cultural Material Committee meeting of two section 18 notices associated with the Marapikurrinya Yintha site that had not been progressed earlier due to the complexities of the legal challenge involving the site.
1(b) No. I am advised that the Public Sector Commission is the owner of the Employee Perception Survey.
2(a) Yes.
2(a)(i) The actual stakeholder satisfaction rate was 72 per cent, seven percent above the target.
2(a)(ii) Not applicable.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.