Chapter 2Annual reports of departments
2.1The annual reports of the following departments for the financial year 2023-24 were referred to the committee for examination and report:
Attorney-General’s Department (AGD); and
Department of Home Affairs (Home Affairs), including the Australian Border Force (ABF).
Attorney-General’s Department
Tabling of report
2.2The Attorney-General’s Department Annual Report 2023-24 was presented out of session in the Senate on 28 October 2024 and tabled in the House of Representatives on 4 November 2024. The report was submitted to the Attorney-General on 9 October 2024, meeting the requirements under section 46 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act).
Secretary’s review
2.3In her review for 2023-24, the Secretary of AGD, Ms Katherine Jones PSM, outlined several of AGD’s achievements and priorities during the reporting period which included the:
provision of assistance to the ‘…Commonwealth on key immigration-related, national security and regulatory matters, class actions and Royal Commissions’;
provision of legal advice to the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) on initiatives including the Marinus Link electricity interconnector between Tasmania and Victoria and the Capacity Investment Scheme;
provision of advice on constitutional issues such as the recommendations of the Robodebt Royal Commission, the Nature Positive Bill, aged care, the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) Act, housing initiatives and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal;
provision of ‘international legal advice’ to the government regarding Australia’s nuclear-powered submarine program, the Future Made in Australia Agenda and policies relating to the outcomes of the High Court’s decision in NZYQ v. Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs & Anor;
‘approval of settlement terms’ for 100 out of 600 ‘significant legal issues’ reported by Commonwealth entities to the Office of Legal Services Coordination (OLSC);
management of casework relating to nine high-risk terrorist offender matters;
finalisation of 49 extradition matters, 805 mutual assistance matters, 32 international transfer of prisoner applications and ‘…173 international family law matters and 341 private international law [matters] on behalf of the Commonwealth’;
processing of national security reforms intended to prevent terrorist acts, prohibit the use of hate symbols, ‘strengthen oversight of the national intelligence community’ and ‘implement recommendations of the Comprehensive Review into the Legislative Framework for the National Intelligence Community’;
implementation of a National Firearms Register;
passage of the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Combatting Foreign Bribery) Act 2004;
delivery of the Modern Slavery Amendment (Australian Anti-Slavery Commissioner) Act 2024;
support provided to the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) and the delivery of the new Commonwealth Fraud and Corruption Control Framework;
funding provided to the National and Central Australia Justice Reinvestment Programs;
reforms to the Family Law Act 1975;
amendments to the Marriage Act 1961;
progression of legislation supporting victims and survivors involved with the Commonwealth criminal justice system;
launching the Minimum Practice Standards for Specialist and Community Support Services Responding to Child Sexual Abuse;
launching the Abuse of Older People Awareness campaign;
implementation of legislative reforms providing protections for whistleblowers;
Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme;
Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability;
Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide;
establishment of the Administrative Review Tribunal in place of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; and
development of the Pacific Island Law Officers’ Network Strategic Plan for 2024–25;
Performance reporting
2.4AGD’s reporting framework is set out in the Attorney-General’s 2023–24 Portfolio Budget Statements (AGD PBS) and the Attorney-General’s Corporate Plan 2023–27 (AGD Corporate Plan). The AGD PBS sets out AGD’s two outcomes and the programs administered underneath them. It also sets out high-level performance measures to measure success in meeting AGD’s outcomes, including standards of ‘effectiveness’ and ‘timeliness and responsiveness’.
2.5The outcomes outlined in the AGD PBS are reflected by the purpose set out in the AGD Corporate Plan, which is to:
achieve a just and secure society through the maintenance and improvement of Australia’s law, justice, security and integrity frameworks.
2.6AGD aims to achieve this purpose through five key activities which are to:
provide legal services and policy advice and oversee legal services across government;
manage casework;
administer and advise on legal and policy frameworks;
administer and implement programs and services; and
establish and support royal commissions.
2.7The performance of the department is measured through 14 performance measures, which comprise 21 performance targets that relate to these five key activities.
2.8In the reporting period, AGD did not achieve three of its 14 performance measures, as it failed to achieve all the performance targets associated with those measures. Those measures were:
performance measure 1.3: constitutional policy and related public law advice;
performance measure 1.5: manage significant legal issues and arrangements for Australian Government legal services; and
performance measure 4.6: crime prevention assistance.
2.9Of its 21 performance targets, 62 per cent were achieved (13 targets) and nine per cent were partially achieved (two targets). AGD reported that 29 per cent of its targets were not achieved (six targets).This is a higher rate of achievement than reported during the previous reporting period. During the previous reporting period, 57 per cent of targets were achieved, 14 per cent were partially achieved, and 29 per cent were not achieved.
2.10The six targets not achieved are outlined in the following paragraphs.
2.11Target 1.3.1 – Average performance rating from stakeholders of 77 index points or above out of 100 for: ‘effectiveness’, ‘timeliness’ and ‘responsiveness’ of provision of constitutional policy and related public law advice. AGD reported that respondents provided positive ratings for the department’s effectiveness of 68 index points, nine points below the target. AGD noted that qualitive feedback from stakeholders on its effectiveness suggested potential improvement to its quality of work and communication. However, AGD also suggested that respondents’ lack of knowledge about departmental practices and procedures may have distorted their perceptions of the department’s effectiveness. AGD also explained that a ‘lower than usual staffing level’ within the department may have impacted its ability to meet deadlines and the lower efficiency score.
2.12Target 1.5.1 – average performance rating of 77 index points for effectiveness of initiatives to support compliance with obligations under the Legal Services Directions 2017. AGD reported that respondents provided positive ratings for the department’s effectiveness of 73 index points, marginally lower than the target. AGD noted overall positive stakeholder feedback, particularly in relation to ‘expertise’, ‘quality and consistency of advice provided’ and the value added to ‘inform decision-making’ and ‘solutions to problems’. Areas identified for potential improvement included AGD’s ‘meaningful and effective communication’ and ‘risk appetite when pursuing optimal solutions’.
2.13Target 1.5.2 – satisfaction of government lawyers with initiatives provided by the Australian Government Legal Service (AGLS) greater than 80 per cent. Results from the department’s stakeholder survey indicated that 60 per cent of respondents were ‘somewhat’ or ‘very satisfied’ with the AGLS and its initiatives, compared to 57 per cent of respondents in 2022-23. AGD noted two areas to improve performance which were its capacity for meeting the needs of more experienced government lawyers and its ability to ensure availability of AGLS initiatives to government lawyers nation-wide.
2.14Target 2.1.1 – average performance rating from stakeholders of 77 index points for: ‘effectiveness’, ‘timeliness’ and ‘responsiveness’ in relation to managing casework functions and related litigation. AGD reported that respondents to the stakeholder survey provided positive ratings of 76 index points for ‘effectiveness’ and 69 index points for timeliness and responsiveness’, both below the target. AGD attributed these results to a continued growth in casework volume and complexity. AGD noted that some feedback suggested the need for better coordination with state and territory stakeholders and better timeliness and consistency of advice.
2.15Target 4.1.1 – average performance rating from stakeholders of 77 index points or above out of 100 for: ‘effectiveness’ and ‘timeliness and responsiveness’ in relation to the delivery of Australian Government-funded legal assistance. AGD reported that respondents to the stakeholder survey provided positive ratings of 66 index points for ‘effectiveness’ and 64 index points for ‘timeliness and responsiveness’, both below the target. AGD further reported that responses indicated stakeholders’ general satisfaction with the advice and engagement received from the department. AGD also noted that feedback from stakeholders acknowledged the negative impact of the delayed implementation of the National Legal Assistance Partnership (NLAP) review.
2.16Target 4.6.1 – average performance rating from stakeholders of 77 index points or above out of 100 for: ‘effectiveness’ and ‘timeliness and responsiveness’ in relation to the administration of funding provided for crime prevention assistance. AGD reported that respondents to the stakeholder survey provided positive ratings of 74 index points for ‘effectiveness’ and 70 index points for ‘timeliness and responsiveness’, lower than the target. AGD noted stakeholder feedback about the department’s ‘positive collaboration and support’ for a grant funded project on lived experience engagement, part of the Modern Slavery Grants Program.
Australian National Audit Office performance audits
2.17The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) released the report Performance Statements Auditing in the Commonwealth — Outcomes from the 2023–24 Audit Program on 19 February 2025.
2.18The report assessed the maturity of AGD’s performance reporting as advanced, the highest rating out of five possible ratings. However, the report identified record keeping as an area for improvement to support performance measures.
Financial performance
2.19The total departmental operating result for 2023-24 was a $6.930 million operating surplus compared with the $2.697 million deficit recorded in the previous reporting period. After accounting for $16.066 million of unfunded depreciation and the impacts of accounting adjustments under the Australian Accounting Standards Board 16 of $9.524 million, the underlying result is a surplus of $20.234 million. AGD attributed this result to a strong performance by the Australian Government Solicitor during the reporting period, transfer of identity and biometrics functions to the department, delays with procurements for the National Office of Child Safety and Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements funding received in April 2024.
2.20During the reporting period, AGD reported that its administered expenses for 2023-24 were $522.551 million compared to $617.816 million in 2022-23. The major expenses included $383.403 million in grant payments and $77.535 million in supplier payments.
2.21The total administered revenue for the reporting period was $68.364 million compared to $40.396 million in the previous year. The major source of revenue for 2023-24 was Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 revenue of $59.001 million.
Conclusion
2.22The committee considers the report to be ‘apparently satisfactory’.
Department of Home Affairs, including the Australian Border Force
Tabling of report
2.23The Department of Home Affairs Annual Report 2023-24 was tabled in the Senate on 30 October 2024 and the House of Representatives on 4 November 2024. The report was submitted to the Minister for Home Affairs on 1 October 2024, meeting the requirements under section 46 of the PGPA Act.
Secretary’s review
2.24The Secretary of Home Affairs, Ms Stephanie Foster PSM, provided a review for the annual report.
2.25The Secretary outlined a number of initiatives that Home Affairs (including the ABF) implemented throughout the reporting period, including:
support of the development and implementation of the Migration Strategy for Australia;
establishment of a dedicated Immigration Compliance Group which supported the government’s response to the High Court’s decision in NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs & Anor;
support for the publication of the Strengthening Australian democracy: a practical agenda for democratic resilience report;
support for the implementation of the 2023–2030 Australian Cyber Security Strategy;
collaboration with industry to co-design the Critical Infrastructure Resilience Strategy;
support of government-wide initiatives to combat illicit tobacco and e-cigarettes;
equivalent weight of 1 738.83 tonnes of illicit tobacco detected;
detection of a total of 2 122 878 vaping units, accessories and substances from 1 March to 30 June 2024;
the resolution of 10 maritime people smuggling ventures by the Joint Agency Taskforce Operation Sovereign Borders (JATF OSB), including the transfer of 109 unauthorised maritime arrivals to regional processing and the return of 30 potential irregular immigrants; and
51 educate and disembark activities, disposal of 56 unseaworthy vessels, and apprehension of 22 illegal foreign fishers.
Performance reporting
2.26Home Affairs’ performance framework is set out in the 2023-24 Home Affairs Portfolio Budget Statements (Home Affairs PBS) and the Home Affairs 2023-24 Corporate Plan (Home Affairs Corporate Plan). The Home Affairs PBS outlines the department’s three outcomes and the programs related to each of them, as well as several performance criteria. The Home Affairs Corporate Plan highlighted three purposes, each of which reflect the outcomes in the Home Affairs PBS:
national security: protect Australia from national security and criminal threats, and support national resilience, through effective national coordination, policy and strategy development and regional cooperation;
prosperous and united society: support a prosperous and united Australia through effective coordination and delivery of immigration and social cohesion policies and programs; and
border and customs operations: advance a prosperous and secure Australia through trade and travel facilitation and modernisation, and effective customs, immigration, maritime and enforcement activities across the border continuum.
2.27Each purpose contains several activities and performance objectives through which Home Affairs assesses its performance. The performance statement in the annual report clearly sets out the relationship between the purposes, activities, and objectives. The performance of the department is assessed against a series of performance metrics that are outlined in the Home Affairs Corporate Plan.
2.28Home Affairs met or substantially met 29 out of 38 of its performance metrics. One metric was also classified as ‘unable to be determined’. The performance metrics not met are outlined in the following paragraphs.
2.29Target 7 – Stakeholders’ expectations of advice provided by the department on matters related to the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 are met in 90 per cent of requests. Home Affairs reported that this target was not met as only 66.67 per cent of survey respondents indicated that they were satisfied with the advice provided by the department, 23.33 per cent below the target.
2.30Target 10 – The time taken to finalise received applications for aviation security identification cards (ASICs) and maritime security identification cards (MSICs), including identity assurance, lodgement processing and card issuance, remains stable or is reduced. Home Affairs reported that this measure was not met as the average time taken to finalise ASIC and MSIC applications increased by 8.06per cent in the reporting period. Home Affairs attributed failure to meet this target to the transition of additional processing workloads from two issuing bodies of ASIC and MSIC applications (Canberra and Adelaide airports) to the department.
2.31Target 11 – Effective development and implementation of Australia’s Cyber Security Strategy 2023–2030. Home Affairs explained that the Cyber Security Strategy was delivered by the deadline of 2023, however, only 62.5 per cent of departmental initiatives within the strategy were progressed, failing to meet the target of 100 per cent. Home Affairs also explained that project delivery dates had been impacted by external factors such as the passage of legislation.
2.32Target 16 – Visa processing times (from application lodgement to point of decision) for applications are reduced across at least four categories, in line with government priorities. Home Affairs explained that this metric was not met as reductions in processing times were only achieved in three categories. Home Affairs also stated several factors which influenced visa processing times such as ‘the completeness of an application’, ‘resourcing available to process applications’ and ‘health and character checking…that requires follow up engagement with third parties’.
2.33Target 18 – For complaints received after 1 July 2023, 75 per cent of less serious complaints received are resolved within 90 days and 50 per cent of serious complaints received are resolved within 180 days. Home Affairs reported that this metric was not met as the percentage of serious complaints received and resolved within 180 days was below the target of 50 per cent by 25 per cent. Home Affairs explained that despite missing the target benchmark for serious complaints resolved, 10 Registered Migration Agents were sanctioned for misconduct, an increase of 150 per cent from 2022-23.
2.34Target 27 – Reduce the transitory person caseload by 25 per cent. Home Affairs explained that this metric was not met as the transitory person caseload was only reduced by 13.47 per cent, below the target by 11.53 per cent. Home Affairs explained that the department has limited control over resettlement outcomes as resettlement approval is dependent on the resettlement country.
2.35Target 28 – 90 per cent of citizenship by conferral applications are finalised within agreed target timeframes from lodgement to decision. Home Affairs explained that this metric was not met as 73.6 per cent of citizenship by conferral applications were finalised within six months from lodgement, below the target of 90 per cent by 16.4 per cent. Home Affairs attributed the failure to meet this target to increased application lodgements and fewer full-time employees in conferral delivery teams during the reporting period.
2.36Target 34 – The revenue collected from customs duty, the Import Processing Charge (IPC) and the Passenger Movement Charge (PMC) against a target of achieving Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements (PAES) estimates. Home Affairs explained that the target was not met as the actual revenue was $15.39billion, 18 per cent below the budget of $18.81 billion.
Australian National Audit Office performance audits
2.37ANAO released three performance audit reports that examined Home Affairs and the ABF during the reporting period:
Department of Home Affairs’ Regulation of Migration Agents;
Administration of the Adult Migrant English Program Contracts; and
Evaluation of Australian Government Pilot Programs.
2.38Several findings from the ANAO’s report, Department of Home Affairs’ Regulation of Migration Agents, indicated that Home Affairs’ ‘regulation of migration agents is not effective’ and that ‘appropriate arrangements are not in place to support the regulation of migration agents’. The ANAO made 11 recommendations in relation to these issues.
2.39Findings from the ANAO report, Administration of the Adult Migrant English Program [AMEP] Contracts, included that ‘[t]he design and administration of the AMEP contracts has not been effective’ and that ‘[a]ppropriate contractual arrangements are not in place’. ANAO outlined 10 recommendations in relation to these issues.
2.40The ANAO also released the report, Performance Statements Auditing in the Commonwealth — Outcomes from the 2023–24 Audit Program, on 19 February 2025. The report assessed the maturity of Home Affairs’ performance reporting as baseline, the middle rating out of five possible ratings.
2.41Some issues identified with the performance statements of Home Affairs by the ANAO report are:
lack of consideration on how ‘business areas can be supported to implement enterprise data governance policies and processes’;
lack of performance information relating to the Adult Migrant English Program and the management of regional processing arrangements; and
deficiencies in the design of survey methodologies for performance measures.
Financial performance
2.42The total departmental operating result for 2023-24 was a $288.4 million operating deficit compared with a $480.6 million operating deficit recorded in the previous reporting period. After accounting for $533.8 million in depreciation and amortisation expenses (including for right-of-use leased assets) and $207.0 million in principal repayments for leased assets, the 2023-24 operating result was a surplus of $28.6 million.
2.43During the reporting period, Home Affairs reported that its administered expenses were $2.0 billion, compared to $1.9 billion in the previous reporting period. Home Affairs attributed this increase to ‘higher impairment allowances on customs duty receivables, mainly as a result of entities that have gone into administration or liquidation’.
2.44Home Affairs reported that its net asset position was $0.9 billion (assets minus liabilities), equivalent to the net asset position reported in 2022-23.
Conclusion
2.45The committee considers the report to be ‘apparently satisfactory’.