Appendix 9

Contents

Appendix 11

Appendix 10 Administration of the Inquiry

Establishment

The Inquiry was established by Letters Patent issued by the Governor-General on 10 November 2005 and was given the powers conferred by the Royal Commissions Act 1902. The initial reporting date was 31 March 2006. The Commissioner commenced his investigation immediately upon receiving his Letters Patent.

The Executive Officer to the Inquiry, Ms Sheila Butler, was appointed by the Attorney-General's Department on 14 November 2005. As the senior official, she was responsible for all budgetary and administrative matters relating to the Inquiry, including liaison with the Attorney-General's Department and the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

On 15 November 2005 the Attorney-General issued a legal services direction under s. 55ZF(1)(b) of the Judiciary Act 1903, directing 'that Legal work as solicitors assisting the Commission of Inquiry into certain Australian companies in relation to the UN Oil-for-Food Programme established on 10 November 2005 is tied to the Australian Government Solicitor'.

At the time it was established the Inquiry had no budget allocation, premises or staff. Under the current Commonwealth Administrative Arrangements Orders the Prime Minister has responsibility for the Royal Commissions Act, but administrative support for commissions of inquiry is provided by the Attorney-General's Department. Accordingly, the Attorney-General's Department took the initial steps to set up the Inquiry until the Executive Officer was appointed; it continued to provide support through a number of corporate services areas, including the negotiation of budgetary requirements with the Department of Finance and Administration.

Accommodation

The Attorney-General's Department was immediately able to locate suitable long-term office accommodation on level 19 of 55 Market Street, Sydney. It was fortuitous that this space was available in the same building as the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, whose hearing rooms were to be used by the Inquiry. Since the premises would not be available until early December and a small amount of fit-out and construction work was required, interim accommodation had to be found. In the first instance the Commissioner was provided with an office at the Central Registry of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal

AGS Sydney, appointed solicitors to the Inquiry, was able to make some relatively self-contained space available in its premises at 133 Castlereagh Street, Sydney. The Inquiry occupied the offices and used AGS support services on a cost-recovery basis for the short period required. The arrangement, while unavoidable in the circumstances, was not conducive to a smooth and easy start-up for the Inquiry team. Counsel, solicitors and paralegals were engaged within a short time: limited space in the temporary area necessitated some officers being located on other floors of the building and other personnel having to use inappropriate office facilities adjacent to the Commissioner's office. The Inquiry operated from AGS premises between 17 November and 13 December 2005.

The Inquiry took over its long-term office space on 5 December 2005. In the following week the office was cabled for voice and data services and servers, and PCs and a telephone system were installed. This work was undertaken by a team from the Attorney-General's Department Information and Knowledge Services Division, under the direction of the Inquiry's Executive Officer. Modifications were made to the existing office fit-out to construct suitable offices for the Commissioner and Senior Counsel and to remove excess work stations; otherwise the existing fit-out was used. All additional office furniture was hired to avoid a large capital outlay and the subsequent problems of disposal at the conclusion of the Inquiry.

On 13 December 2005 the Inquiry was able to move into its own premises. The space occupied was some 678 square metres leased at a cost of $535 per square metre-a sufficient area to accommodate the staff and provide adequate storage for the quantity of documents subsequently received. Fortunately, the lease on these premises was able to be extended month by month.

Throughout the Inquiry, entrance to the tenancy was restricted to pass holders: visitors were greeted at the door and escorted on the premises. A video surveillance camera was installed to monitor entrances to the office. There were no instances of breaches of or threats to security.

Profile of the Inquiry

Resources required to conduct the Inquiry were estimated on the basis of the Inquiry's expected duration and the scope of the original terms of reference. In addition to the Executive Officer and a research associate for the Commissioner, provision was made to appoint four counsel and a team of four solicitors. Paralegal and administrative support staff were also recruited. Numbers fluctuated slightly and some personnel changed over the course of the Inquiry, but 20 was the maximum number of people engaged full time at any point. This level was reached in February 2006 and was largely sustained until the end of June 2006, which matched the timing of the main block of hearings. Despite several extensions of time, the Inquiry was largely able to maintain its core staff throughout the period. A list of people who were attached to the Inquiry for all or part of the period is at Table 10.1.

Counsel Assisting

In appointing Counsel Assisting, an effort was made to form a team of experienced barristers who possessed a range of skills and expertise relevant to the areas of investigation and law the Inquiry was likely to encounter. A list of suitable candidates was drawn up in consultation with the Attorney-General's Department: the time frame prevented any public call for applications or expressions of interest.

On the Commissioner's recommendation, the Attorney-General, acting under s. 6FA of the Royal Commissions Act 1902, appointed the following people as Counsel Assisting:

• John Agius SC
  
  
• Gregory Nell SC
  
  
• Michael Wigney
  
  
• Miles Condon.

All counsel came from the New South Wales Bar and had a range of expertise-including criminal, corporations, commercial, administrative and maritime law and previous experience on commissions of inquiry. Mr Agius was appointed Senior Counsel Assisting the Inquiry. Mr Nell was made Senior Counsel during 2006.

By 25 November 2005 all counsel had taken up their appointment and were retained throughout the Inquiry.

Terms of engagement for Counsel Assisting were negotiated by the Civil Justice and Legal Services Division of the Attorney-General's Department, in accordance with the approved fee structure for the engagement of counsel by the Commonwealth.

The role of Counsel Assisting was to conduct the specific investigations, select the matters that were presented in the hearing room, and call and examine relevant witnesses. Counsel Assisting also presented submissions concerning the findings they considered were established by the material presented to the Inquiry. Further, they provided advice on questions of law and practice as they arose. Most of the work performed by Counsel Assisting was conducted outside the hearing room. For efficient resource use it was decided to run with a principal hearing room team consisting of Mr Agius and Mr Condon. On some occasions this was varied according to the matters under consideration: Mr Wigney led the examination of matters relating to knowledge of the Commonwealth; Mr Nell handled matters relating to BHP and Tigris Petroleum.

Table 10.1 Inquiry personnel

The Inquiry team
Sheila Butler	Executive Officer
John Agius SC	Senior Counsel Assisting
Gregory Nell SC	Counsel Assisting
Michael Wigney	Counsel Assisting
Miles Condon	Counsel Assisting
Glenn Owbridge	Solicitor Assisting
Stephen Vorreiter	Senior Solicitor
George Kamencak	Senior Solicitor
Alice Potton	Senior Solicitor
Kristy Alexander	Senior Solicitor
Asaf Fisher	Associate/Research Assistant
Rick Willis	Media Liaison
John Sidoti	Paralegal
Alexandra Smith	Paralegal
Julia Riley	Paralegal
Michael Lanigan	Paralegal
Sharna Clemmett	Paralegal
Grace Jiang	Paralegal
Sarah Carrodus	Paralegal
Julia Hvistendahl	Paralegal
Ivan Leong	Paralegal
Diana Kondilios	Executive Assistant
Eva Papadopoulos	Clerical Assistant
Denise Sippel	Clerical Assistant
Anna Granger	Clerical Assistant
<e.law> Australia-key personnel
Bruce Grant	Director
Rebecca Grant	Project Director
Matthew Schultz	Project Manager
Yian Sun	Technical Support
Mario Rodriguez	Paralegal
Sally Hicks	Computer Reporters Pty Ltd
Mandy Ferguson	Computer Reporters Pty Ltd
AGD technical support team
Tony D'Amico
Adam Reis
Manh Nguyen
Geoff Thornthwaite
Editorial and design team
Chris Pirie	Comprehensive Editorial Services
Debbie Phillips	DP Plus
Ray Sharpe	Rayzor Sharpe Designs

Solicitors assisting the Inquiry

After consideration of any potential conflicts of interest, the Australian Government Solicitor was appointed by the Attorney-General to provide legal services to the Inquiry. AGS is a government business enterprise that operates on a fully commercial basis. It is one of Australia's largest law firms and a leading provider of legal and related services to Australian government agencies and departments. It was agreed that the provision of services would be managed by the Sydney office of AGS. The Inquiry indicated that it would need a team that included four experienced lawyers as well as a senior paralegal or junior lawyer to act as the Commissioner's research assistant and associate. To ensure continuity, AGS was also asked to provide a person to act as the Commissioner's executive assistant. A short list of candidates was provided and brief interviews were conducted by the Commissioner and the Executive Officer before final selections were made.

The legal team that commenced with the Inquiry was led by Mr Glenn Owbridge, a senior executive lawyer from AGS Brisbane. The others were senior and junior lawyers from the Sydney office and one senior lawyer from the Melbourne office. Over the course of the Inquiry there were several changes in personnel, and for the latter half of the Inquiry the team was reduced to three lawyers in total. Terms of engagement, which included hourly rates (subject to a daily cap) and, where necessary, conditions for reunion travel and accommodation in Sydney, were negotiated between the Executive Officer and AGS. The need, in a couple of instances, to engage interstate lawyers added to the overall cost. Once agreed, rates and conditions remained constant for the duration of the Inquiry.

The role of the solicitors was focused on issuing notices to produce documents and summonses and providing assistance with the preparation of witness statements. As instructing solicitors, their role included the discovery of evidence and obtaining, analysing and preparing material to be presented by Counsel Assisting. The solicitors were the main point of contact with the Inquiry for the legal representatives of the companies covered by the terms of reference and other witnesses summonsed to appear. Solicitors also assisted counsel in the preparation of their submissions on matters arising from the hearings.

The Commissioner's associate was also part of the AGS team. His function was to:

• carry out research under the Commissioner's direction
  
  
• draft discussion papers
  
  
• disseminate the Commissioner's directions
  
  
• attend all hearings
  
  
• manage the exhibits
  
  
• participate in the analysis of submissions made to the Commissioner by Counsel Assisting and others
  
  
• assist in the preparation of the report and manage a process to ensure references and endnotes were accurate.

On two occasions during the Inquiry AWB Limited initiated legal action in the Federal Court on matters relating to legal professional privilege. The Commissioner was a respondent to the proceedings but on both occasions chose to enter a submitting appearance. As far as was necessary, AGS Melbourne represented the Inquiry in these proceedings. The Inquiry also briefed Lindsay Foster SC and Dr James Renwick on a particular matter relating to the Federal Court proceedings.

AGS also provided some limited ancillary research and advisory services.

Paralegal and administrative support

Support staff for the Inquiry were recruited through Hays Personnel Services (Australia) Pty Ltd, a private employment agency. Recruiting temporary staff through an agency avoided drawn-out selection processes and allowed the flexibility to vary the number of staff according to demand. The Executive Officer was responsible for the recruitment of all support staff.

The legal team was supported by a group of paralegal staff. While the size of the group fluctuated during the Inquiry, a core of five paralegal staff were generally required. In most instances the paralegals had completed law degrees, and some had been admitted to practice. Their functions included research and analysis, assistance with the compilation of witness bundles and exhibits for hearings, and maintenance of the Inquiry's records. During the preparation of submissions and drafting of the report, the paralegals were tasked with searching the evidence in relation to particular matters and witnesses for the consideration of counsel and checking all references to transcript, submissions and exhibits and other documents and authorities cited.

In addition to the Commissioner's executive assistant, who also acted as the administrative assistant to the Executive Officer, two clerical assistants were engaged for the greater part of the Inquiry. Their functions included general word processing and formatting of documents from audio tapes or handwritten drafts, typing the final report, copying and assembling witness bundles and reference material, maintaining the hearing room, and reception duties.

The executive assistant managed the Commissioner's office and provided secretarial support to other senior staff as required. As part of her duties, she managed incoming and outgoing mail, purchased stationery and stores, acted as the coordinator and point of contact for service providers, and prepared invoices rendered on the Inquiry for payment by the Attorney-General's Department.

Hearings

A directions hearing was held on 12 December 2005 at the Family Court of Australia, 97-99 Goulburn Street, Sydney. Subsequently all public hearings were held at level 5, 55 Market Street, Sydney, in Hearing Rooms 1 and 2 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

For the purposes of the Inquiry the two rooms were opened into one space. The hearing room furniture was reconfigured into a court-like arrangement. An elevated bench was constructed for the Commissioner and a raised witness box was installed. Seating for the public and the media was provided at the rear of the hearing room. Full electronic facilities were installed, enabling the private and public display of documents and a view of real-time transcript. A court operator and transcript writers were present at all hearings.

At the inception of the Inquiry a relatively short period of hearings was foreseen and the facilities were considered adequate for the purpose. In the event, several factors combined to reduce the suitability of the hearing rooms:

• Hearings ran for over 14 weeks, with a three-month break between May and August. During this break the hearing room had to be dismantled and then reconstructed.
  
  
• The number of people authorised to appear quickly exceeded expectations, making it necessary for barristers and their instructing solicitors to work at crowded bar tables, with little space for briefcases and papers.
  
  
• Public and media interest was high, and seating space was at a premium-especially on days when there were high-profile witnesses.
  
  
• Facilities were stretched to the extreme when three government Ministers, including the Prime Minister, were called to give evidence. Additional security measures and personnel had to be arranged at the building entrances and on the hearing room storey. It was necessary to institute procedures for crowd control and managed access to the hearing room. Audio and vision feeds were required in an additional hearing room to cater for the overflow of attendees.

Although this last situation might have occurred whatever the location of the hearings, the 'make-do' arrangements in the hearing rooms were detrimental to the Inquiry's operations. In similar circumstances in the future, consideration should be given to the advantages and efficiency of constructing a purpose-built hearing room that is appropriately wired and furnished and available for the duration of an inquiry.

Records management

The Inquiry received documents in response to notices to produce, as general correspondence, or as submissions from various sources. Documents were received as hard copy or electronically or in both forms. All documents were held at the Inquiry's premises.

All documents received by the Inquiry were processed in a similar fashion. Original documents received by the Inquiry were routinely barcoded (page by page), scanned electronically, objectively coded, and entered into a searchable electronic database. Original documents were then stored securely and generally were not used in day-to-day business. At the conclusion of the Inquiry, all original property was returned. Special measures were introduced to ensure the security of any classified material received from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and other government sources. Some 121,000 documents were held in the Inquiry's database.

All incoming and outgoing correspondence was logged, noting the date of receipt and response, and filed. Correspondence received electronically was printed to paper and filed.

In accordance with the provisions of the Royal Commissions Act and the Archives Act 1983, the Inquiry's records were passed to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the National Archives of Australia at the conclusion of the Inquiry.

Litigation support

In December 2005 <e.law> Australia Pty Ltd was appointed provider of litigation support, to establish and maintain an electronic database for processing documents produced to the Inquiry and to operate an 'electronic court' for the hearings. Time did not allow the conduct of even a limited tender process, so a 'direct source' approach, in line with the Commonwealth's Procurement Guidelines, was followed. The company has extensive experience in providing similar services to numerous government inquiries-including the HIH Royal Commission and the Royal Commission into the Building and Construction Industry-and was able to offer the full range of services at rates that represented value for money. The Attorney-General's Department approved a contract with <e.law> on a fee-for-service basis against a fixed transaction fee schedule and individual hourly consultancy rates. Work for the Inquiry was carried out either on site or at <e.law>'s premises. Services provided included:

• barcoding, scanning and objectively coding all documents received by the Inquiry and providing print sets as required
  
  
• loading documents onto a searchable electronic database (Summation iblaze) for use by Inquiry officers
  
  
• posting copies of exhibits tendered in evidence on the Inquiry's website on a daily basis
  
  
• setting up an electronic court book (Transcript Analyser/Brief Analyser) for document retrieval and display in hearings and providing court operators to perform that function during hearings
  
  
• establishing an FTP site for dissemination and receipt of submissions of counsel and submissions in reply from other parties
  
  
• preparing the Inquiry's electronic database for transfer to the National Archives and the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet at the conclusion of the Inquiry.

Communication

Measures were implemented to ensure that the conduct of the Inquiry was as transparent as possible for all interest groups and the general public. The following steps were taken:

• Notices were published in selected daily and national newspapers-the Financial Review, The Australian, The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald on 2 December 2005 and the Courier Mail and the West Australian on 6 December 2005- advising of the establishment of the Inquiry, calling for notice from persons seeking leave to appear, and inviting submissions from anyone with information relevant to the Inquiry. A tentative date of 17 January 2006 was set for the commencement of hearings.
  
  
• A website, www.oilforfoodinquiry.gov.au, was operational by the end of November 2005 and could be accessed directly through the URL or via the website of the Attorney-General's Department, www.ag.gov.au. The website is to be maintained by the department at the conclusion of the Inquiry. Material posted to the website included:

- the terms of reference and Letters Patent

- notice of hearing dates

- the transcript of hearings-twice daily

- exhibits

- all statements, directions, reasons and practice notes issued by the Commissioner

- links to relevant Federal Court judgments

- a link to the report of the Independent Inquiry Committee via the United Nations website

- profiles of the Commissioner and Counsel Assisting

- contact details, including the street and postal addresses and switch and 1800 telephone numbers.

• From 16 January 2006 all hearings were conducted in open session and provision was made to seat members of the public and the media.
  
  
• The transcript of five days of confidential hearings in December 2005 and January 2006 was made public before the conclusion of the Inquiry.
  
  
• A general email address, oilforfoodinquiry@ag.gov.au, was published and used extensively by members of the public, both in Australia and overseas, to communicate with the Inquiry. A list of those who wrote to the Inquiry is at Table 10.2.

Mr Rick Willis of Hinton & Associates (Aust) Pty Ltd was appointed media liaison officer in early December 2005. His function was to act as a point of contact for representatives of the print and electronic media on matters relating to the Inquiry and to deal with any questions on general matters. He attended the Inquiry on hearing days and was available to the media via telephone and email at other times. Mr Willis' contract was terminated shortly after hearings concluded.

There were no regular or special media briefings arranged, and neither the Commissioner nor other officers of the Inquiry gave interviews to the media. Journalists present in the hearing room were usually provided with copies of witness statements and some exhibits of interest, but only after those materials had been tendered. On a few occasions Senior Counsel Assisting spoke briefly at the close of a day's proceedings to a random group of journalists in order to provide clarification on certain issues that had arisen. This was done in the interests of better understanding and accurate reporting. No media releases were issued by the Inquiry.

In general, there was no filming or televising of Inquiry proceedings. Cameras were allowed into the hearing room only by arrangement. This occurred on 16 January 2006, the first day of public hearings, when the Commissioner's opening remarks and the opening address of Senior Counsel Assisting were recorded. On a few other occasions cameras were allowed in during the reading of a statement by the Commissioner. At no stage was any witness filmed or recorded giving evidence or entering or leaving the hearing room.

Table 10.2 People who wrote to the Inquiry

Bain, John	Fozzard, Robert	Moodie, Rob
Bannon, Ron	Gaekwad, Dr U	Mullard, Philip
Barnett MLA, Colin	Gaisford, Alastair	Newman, Julie
Barton, John	Goater, Terry	Newnham, Allan R
Bartos, Prof. Stephen	Grieve, Ian	Polya, Dr Gideon
Belmonte, Jon	Griggs, Tony	Price, Ronald
Benjamin, P	Gurciullo, Dr Sebastian	Prowse, Trevor
Bennett, Frank	Harris, Mr	Rigg, Tony
Bennett, PP	Hauptmann, Ally	Robinson MP, Tony
Bradley , Leon	Hawkins, David	Rudd MP, Kevin
Brown, Ken	Howard, Peter	Seymour, Michael
Burton, Tony	Janevich , Jordan	Siewert, Senator Rachel
Carmody, RJ	Johnston , Felicity	Skyring, Alan
Clauson, Derek	Jull MP, The Hon. David	Thomson MP, Kelvin
Coogan, K	Kevin, Tony	Tremain, Robert
Easterbrook, Sandy	Laurie, John	Unger, Paul
Elliston, Robert	Lipsett, John	Versteegen, Joseph
Emerson MP, Dr Craig	Ludwig, Senator Joe	Whitton, Evan
Eyres, Tony	MacMillan, W	Wilson, James
Fishpool, Terry	Mason, Malcolm E	Wright, Richard
Fitzgibbon MP, Joel	McCredie, James D	Winston, Chris
Forsyth, Dawn	McGregor, John
Fox, JL	McGuirk, Michael

The Inquiry was aware that photographers and camera crews representing various media organisations were stationed in the street outside the Inquiry's premises, and witnesses and their legal representatives were frequently photographed or filmed on their way to and from hearings. That material was widely published in the national media. This was beyond the control of the Inquiry.

Budget

Initially the Inquiry was allocated a budget of $5,564,916 for the financial year 2005-06; this amount was based on a reporting date of 31 March 2006. When the term of the Inquiry was extended to 30 June 2006 the budget allocation was increased to $8,170,167 for the financial year. This amount was not fully expended since a further extension meant that some costs that would normally arise at the closing stages were not incurred. To 30 June 2006 expenditure totalled $6,450,078. In 2006-07 the Attorney-General's Department, in consultation with the Executive Officer, proposed a further allocation of $5,758,714 to cover Inquiry operations to its final reporting date of 24 November 2006 and the wind-up phase. The Inquiry made no requests for increases to its budget allocation beyond consideration of the funds required to cover its extended reporting dates.

At the end of October 2006 expenditure was $9,124,361.00