GOWLAND, Mr Kynan, Acting Assistant Secretary, Office of Northern Australia, Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts McBEAN, Ms Cathie, Chief Strategic Policy and Engagement Officer, Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility [by video link] MacDONALD, Mr Neil, Chief Executive Officer, Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility [by video link] RAUTER, Ms Lisa, First Assistant Secretary, Regional Development, Northern Australia and Local Government Division, Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts Committee met at 08:37 CHAIR ( Ms Scrymgour ): I declare open this hearing of the Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia. I begin by acknowledging the traditional custodians of the land on which we meet, the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of Ngunnawal country, and I pay my respects to their elders past and present. I extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people here today. The committee will be conducting today's hearing in person and via videoconference. These are public proceedings being video streamed live via the parliament's website, and a Hansard transcript is being made. I remind witnesses that in giving evidence to the committee they are protected by parliamentary privilege. It's unlawful for anyone to threaten or disadvantage a witness on account of evidence given to a committee, and such action may be treated as a contempt. It is also a contempt to give false or misleading evidence. Witnesses also have a right to request to be heard in camera. The Senate has resolved that an officer of a department of the Commonwealth or of a state shall not be asked to give opinions on matters of policy and shall be given reasonable opportunity to refer questions asked of the officer to superior officers or to a minister. This resolution does not preclude questions asking for an explanation of policies or factual questions about when and how policies were adopted. If a witness objects to answering a question, they should state the ground upon which the objection is made, and the committee will determine whether it will insist on an answer, having regard to the ground which is claimed. If the committee determines to insist on an answer, a witness may request that the answer be given in camera. Commonwealth officers appearing today are also reminded of the Senate order specifying the process by which a claim of public interest immunity should be raised. A copy of the order is available from the secretariat. The extract read as follows— Public interest immunity claims That the Senate— (a) notes that ministers and officers have continued to refuse to provide information to Senate committees without properly raising claims of public interest immunity as required by past resolutions of the Senate; (b) reaffirms the principles of past resolutions of the Senate by this order, to provide ministers and officers with guidance as to the proper process for raising public interest immunity claims and to consolidate those past resolutions of the Senate; (c) orders that the following operate as an order of continuing effect: (1) If: (a) a Senate committee, or a senator in the course of proceedings of a committee, requests information or a document from a Commonwealth department or agency; and (b) an officer of the department or agency to whom the request is directed believes that it may not be in the public interest to disclose the information or document to the committee, the officer shall state to the committee the ground on which the officer believes that it may not be in the public interest to disclose the information or document to the committee, and specify the harm to the public interest that could result from the disclosure of the information or document. (2) If, after receiving the officer's statement under paragraph (1), the committee or the senator requests the officer to refer the question of the disclosure of the information or document to a responsible minister, the officer shall refer that question to the minister. (3) If a minister, on a reference by an officer under paragraph (2), concludes that it would not be in the public interest to disclose the information or document to the committee, the minister shall provide to the committee a statement of the ground for that conclusion, specifying the harm to the public interest that could result from the disclosure of the information or document. (4) A minister, in a statement under paragraph (3), shall indicate whether the harm to the public interest that could result from the disclosure of the information or document to the committee could result only from the publication of the information or document by the committee, or could result, equally or in part, from the disclosure of the information or document to the committee as in camera evidence. (5) If, after considering a statement by a minister provided under paragraph (3), the committee concludes that the statement does not sufficiently justify the withholding of the information or document from the committee, the committee shall report the matter to the Senate. (6) A decision by a committee not to report a matter to the Senate under paragraph (5) does not prevent a senator from raising the matter in the Senate in accordance with other procedures of the Senate. (7) A statement that information or a document is not published, or is confidential, or consists of advice to, or internal deliberations of, government, in the absence of specification of the harm to the public interest that could result from the disclosure of the information or document, is not a statement that meets the requirements of paragraph (1) or (4). (8) If a minister concludes that a statement under paragraph (3) should more appropriately be made by the head of an agency, by reason of the independence of that agency from ministerial direction or control, the minister shall inform the committee of that conclusion and the reason for that conclusion, and shall refer the matter to the head of the agency, who shall then be required to provide a statement in accordance with paragraph (3). (d) requires the Procedure Committee to review the operation of this order and report to the Senate by 20 August 2009. (13 May 2009 J.1941) (Extract, Senate Standing Orders) CHAIR: I now welcome representatives from the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts and the Office of Northern Australia. I understand that information on parliamentary privilege and the protection of witnesses giving evidence to committees has been provided to you. I invite you to make a short opening statement, and at the conclusion of any remarks I'll invite members of the committee to ask questions. Ms Rauter? Ms Rauter : Thanks for the opportunity to appear today. The Australian government remains committed to unlocking northern Australia's enormous potential and actively preparing for emerging industries across the region. The Australian government continues to invest in infrastructure across Australia to improve productivity, resilience, safety and livability for communities around the country. As at the budget of 2026-27, the infrastructure programming includes $26 billion of funding towards major projects across northern Australia, including the Bruce Highway, Outback Way and Tanami Road. The department works across other government departments and industry to support productive, sustainable and connected communities across the north. This includes targeted investments to strengthen supply chains, such as delivering a national freight and supply chain strategy; to expand digital connectivity, including free wi-fi for communities to connect them in 23 remote First Nations communities; and to upgrade transport networks and infrastructure through the Infrastructure Investment Program to prepare for new opportunities and develop emerging industries. Through the Office of Northern Australia, the Northern Australia Action Plan 2024-2029 sets our strategic direction for the region. Northern Australia holds many of the assets needed to develop emerging industries at scale. These include land, natural resources, significant reserves of critical minerals and strategic resources, proximity to key markets in South-East Asia, and significant opportunities for First Nations economic participation. The department is very aware of the unique challenges for businesses operating in Northern Australia, including vast distances, thin markets, climate vulnerabilities, housing pressures and workforce shortages. The department is driving collaboration to support economic development in northern Australia through mechanisms such as the Northern Australia Ministerial Forum and working groups under this forum, such as the housing working group, and through working with the Northern Australia Indigenous Reference Group, as well as engagement with government supported entities such as interdepartmental committees, the Cooperative Research Centre for Developing northern Australia and other external stakeholders. In communities undergoing major economic transition, such as Gove Peninsula, Weipa, Groote Eylandt and Mount Isa, limited economic diversity will be further impacted by downsizing and closure of mining operations, affecting local employment, assets and services, but they also provide opportunities to foster emerging industries. Supporting communities undergoing this economic transition with policy influence and leveraging past experience offers us a chance to realise opportunity and ensure that these communities are positioned to directly support and sustainably benefit from emerging industries. I also thought it worth pointing out that the Office of Northern Australia, which Kynan and I represent today, is not a deliverer of actual infrastructure projects. We do coordinate across government, and we do influence government policy and also support government mechanisms such as the Northern Australia Ministerial Forum, but questions on specific projects may need to be directed to other parts of the department or across government. CHAIR: Mr MacDonald, do you have an opening statement? Mr MacDonald : Yes. Thank you, Chair and members of the committee. NAIF welcomes the opportunity to contribute to this inquiry. Since 2016, we've supported economic growth, jobs and improved social outcomes by financing economic infrastructure across northern Australia. Over that period, we've committed more than $4½ billion across 35 projects in energy, resources, agriculture, transport, water and social infrastructure, and these projects are forecast to generate approximately $33 billion in economic impact and support more than 18,700 jobs. This experience gives NAIF a practical perspective on what is required to unlock the north's economic potential. Northern Australia is at an important point. The energy transition, demand for critical minerals, defence investment, agriculture and Indigenous enterprise all present significant national opportunities. In our experience, the main constraint is not a lack of opportunity; it is the challenge of delivering enabling infrastructure in remote, high-cost and thin-market environments. Common barriers that we see include underdeveloped energy systems, limited transport and port capacity, workforce and housing shortages, and financing gaps for large long-life assets. We help address these gaps by providing patient, flexible capital that can de-risk projects and attract private investment. Looking ahead, we see significant opportunities in renewable power, critical minerals processing, manufacturing, defence aligned infrastructure, common-user infrastructure and regional supply chains. Realising these opportunities requires coordinated investment, integrated infrastructure planning and continued attention to workforce and community benefits. Our current pipeline remains robust. We've got 20 projects in the pipeline, representing a potential loan value of approximately $2.2 billion and a total project value of $6.8 billion. We stand ready to continue partnering with the government and industry to support sustainable economic development across northern Australia. Thank you. We look forward to your questions. CHAIR: Matt, do you have any questions? Mr MATT SMITH: Yes. All of us here spend a fair bit of time traversing around the far north, speaking to industry and business, and some of the feedback we get, particularly around the NAIF loans, is that the process itself is quite burdensome on small business in particular. Is there a thought of streamlining these processes to make it easier? When you're trying to get something up and running, particularly in some of these places, you're flat out anyway, without having to run through a variety of hoops. Is that something that's on the radar? Mr MacDonald : We're definitely looking at our processes to make sure that we're easy to do business with and identifying opportunities where we can streamline those processes. One of the things that we do in our role is to do due diligence on projects, and that process itself can be valuable for proponents as well. Yes, we are very much focused on making sure that we are streamlining our processes to make sure that what we're doing is fit for purpose. CHAIR: Mr MacDonald, are you able to tell me—following on from Mr Smith's question—how many projects have been funded by NAIF across northern Australia, in Western Australia, the Northern Territory and North Queensland? Mr MacDonald : Yes. In terms of projects, we've funded 35 projects across northern Australia, of which I think nine were in the Northern Territory, 11 in Western Australia and 15 in Queensland. Ms McBean : Can I jump in and review those numbers. There's $1 billion and nine investments in the Northern Territory; $1.7 billion in WA, with 10 investments; and $1.8 billion in Queensland, with 16 investments. Sorry, I just had it in front of me. Senator STERLE: That's good. Mr MacDonald : Thanks, Cathie. CHAIR: Thank you, Ms McBean. Are you able to table that? You've just said there are nine in the Northern Territory, 11 in—was that Western Australia or Queensland? Senator STERLE: In WA. Ms McBean : There are 10 in Western Australia. CHAIR: And then there are the others in Queensland. Are you able to table—I get the commercial-in-confidence—where those projects are and at what level they are funded? Mr MacDonald : We can provide that information. It is publicly available, but we can table that. CHAIR: Thank you. Mr MacDonald, the government made some changes to the NAIF requirements to allow the external territories to apply for those loans or to the NAIF fund. Have there been any applications or approaches from the external territories to the department? Mr MacDonald : Yes. I might just hand that one to Cathie because she's been involved in some of our engagement with the Indian Ocean Territories. Ms McBean : We have had strong discussions with multiple organisations in the IOTs. However, we haven't had one that has joined our pipeline. CHAIR: Is that because—when we look at emerging industries and some of our terms of reference, the biggest issue is the lack of crane operations or infrastructure to enable those industries to develop and work, so nothing's been submitted or there's been no discussion with the department. Ms McBean : The department looks after their port infrastructure, so I might throw back to them, but in relation to— CHAIR: I'm going to come to the department in a minute. Ms McBean : Okay. In relation to proponents on the island, we've spoken to numerous businesses that were looking at expanding, but we haven't received a formal application on any of those as yet. CHAIR: Thanks, Ms McBean. Ms Rauter, can I go to you. In terms of the Indian Ocean Territories, the Commonwealth does have responsibility for the external territories. There are a number of infrastructure projects—not just in emerging industries, but infrastructure per se—across there. Defence is doing a major airstrip, I think, on Cocos. What's the view from the department? That crane's been inoperable for some time. What's the timeline on that? Ms Rauter : The government did commit, I believe, $10 million towards putting in a new crane. However, an engineering study to prepare the landing area for that crane found that the area that the crane was to be positioned on was inadequate and wasn't going to support a new crane, so that $10 million has been redirected towards creating a stable base for the new crane, and then we'll have to approach government for funding for a new crane once that new base is put in place and secured. So that work is underway. CHAIR: The engineering work? Ms Rauter : Yes, the engineering work, for the footings to support a new crane. CHAIR: Do you know how long that may— Ms Rauter : I don't know. I'd have to take that on notice and come back to you. CHAIR: Okay. Are there any conversations with the public works committee about what next? If that money's been redirected to look at the pad to try and get stability so a new crane can go on, have discussions happened with the public works committee to look at that in terms of government— Ms Rauter : I'm not responsible for territories, so I'd have to take that on notice. But I think the Public Works Committee gets triggered, if you like, where projects are of a certain size and value. So I'm not sure that Public Works was triggered for that particular project. CHAIR: Thank you. Matt. Mr MATT SMITH: You've specifically mentioned Weipa in terms of challenges with the downgrading of the mining and things of that nature, and the decommissioning process—particularly the Comalco Act—in which things are going to be returned to their natural state. Where do the opportunities lie for communities like Weipa and others in the Far North who have been wholly dependent on some of those mining things that are coming to the end of their natural life? What do you see as our opportunities there for that future investment? How do we streamline this and get it up and running now so that we're not panicking in 20 or 30 years time? Mr Gowland : Thank you. We are absolutely doing some policy work around looking at communities undergoing that economic transition, and Weipa and the Gove Peninsula are classic ones where the mining industry is transitioning or ceasing. For Weipa, there's further work that needs to be done with the state government, and I personally have had some local conversations with—I want to say the council—the effective representatives. Mr MATT SMITH: The town authority. Mr Gowland : Yes. Some of their idea is establishing common workplaces and the like to encourage businesses to come in, to lower the cost to start up and the like. There is, absolutely, further work that is required there, and some more strategic planning, but that work, from our perspective, is ongoing. We have our Northern Australia Indigenous Reference Group looking at a policy piece and advice to government on how we support those First Nations communities undergoing those economic transitions. So it's work underway at the moment. And we know that CRC TiME are also looking at this piece. They're looking at how you support these communities as the mining industry is closing down and how you maintain the economy post. Mr MATT SMITH: Is the social impact of that being further looked at? Rio is moving south, which is creating more of a fly-in fly-out experience for people who have previously been able to drive to work in the morning. Are further social supports being put around those families who are going to be impacted, moving forwards? Ms Rauter : Yes, certainly there would be. I know that you're talking with the National Indigenous Australians Agency later today, and they'll be able to answer those questions. CHAIR: Senator Sterle. Senator STERLE: Thank you to the officers of both departments. Mr MacDonald, you touched on this in your opening statement—although, Ms Rauter, you said that you don't talk about infrastructure. I'm going to ask some questions around ports and infrastructure but, firstly, I just want to have a little bit of a preamble. The work being done between the state government and the federal government—I've got my Western Australian hat firmly screwed onto this head here—has been nothing short of magnificent in the last four, five or six years. The widening of the road, the passing lanes and the rest areas for our trucks have been fantastic, as is the work around the Kununurra airport, which is imperative because the new mine has started opening up out there. Sorby Hills, I think it is. Anyway, going down this path, the chair, Senator Smith and I did a tour of the Wyndham port. We were privileged to get out there and see what Cambridge Gulf Limited are doing on the Wyndham port with great support from Kimberley Ports. One of the greatest achievements, I think, for that part of the world, particularly Wyndham—as an old truckie who's been running there since 1980—was the reintroduction of first port of entry. Are you able to answer questions around that? Ms Rauter : We can answer some basic questions. We certainly did work, or liaise closely, with the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, who are responsible for first port of entry. We spoke with them regularly about progressing that as fast as we could because we knew the importance of that to the projects in the area. I know that that has now been granted, and that there's work underway to build the necessary infrastructure to enable the biosecurity testing that needs to happen at that port. I think Western Australia is responsible for delivering that infrastructure at the moment, and that's progressive. I believe it's about a year or two away from actually being operational. Senator STERLE: It's still that long, is it? Ms Rauter : I believe so, but I would have to take that on notice. Cathie is nodding. Mr Gowland : The Department of Agriculture and Fisheries and Forestry, I understand, is on later on today. To go into detail, it's probably best to ask them those questions because, whilst we made that framework decision about the first point of entry, the border security piece, biosecurity piece and assessing the planning for the infrastructure is all DAFF. Senator STERLE: That's very helpful because we will have questions for them. I'll put the department on notice: we're going to ask you questions about where we're up to. If you're out there listening, we're looking forward to hearing that it's going to open up next week or something like that. CHAIR: I've got a couple of questions for Mr Gosling online as well as the deputy chair. The deputy chair asked how many staff are in the Northern Australia team. Mr Gowland : There was a question on notice that was asked at the recent Senate committee. I can break it down by location, if that assists. CHAIR: You can table it if you want, if there's a whole lot of detail. Mr Gowland : I can absolutely table it. We've already done a question on notice that will be coming out soon. Absolutely, for— CHAIR: For Senate estimates? Mr Gowland : Yes. CHAIR: Can we get that information to here. Then, the deputy chair has asked that question— Ms Rauter : There are about 26 staff in the Office of Northern Australia. That includes the staff that we recently, as of December last year, moved into the Office of Northern Australia who are responsible for the governance and operational elements on the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility that we have within the department. That moved within the Office of Northern Australia. CHAIR: Where is that office based? Ms Rauter : The office is based across Darwin and Cairns; we have staff in Townsville. We also have staff now in the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility based in Sydney, Canberra, Perth and Alice Springs. Mr Gowland : I'm based in Cairns. CHAIR: If we can get that detail— Mr Gowland : We can table that. CHAIR: If you want to take that as a question on notice and then table that information, that would be good. The second part of the deputy chair Melissa Price's question is: is NAIF able to fund joint Commonwealth and private projects? Mr MacDonald : Yes, we can. We assess each project on its merits, and that includes projects that have got some level of private sector and Commonwealth or government involvement. CHAIR: Have we got an estimation of how many are in the pipeline at the moment? Mr MacDonald : I'd say the majority of the projects that we have are private sector proponents. CHAIR: This is a question from Mr Gosling. He asked, 'Stakeholder reports say current processes are too slow and complex for northern Australian based projects. Is NAIF sufficiently agile in providing early-stage financing?' Mr MacDonald : We believe that we are agile. We work with a lot of proponents and we tailor financing to meet their specific needs. I think it's probably fair to say that some of the projects that we deal with are quite complex. We're set up to be able to support projects that are high risk and face challenges reflecting the unique circumstances of northern Australia. For some of the projects that we work with, it does take time to get the financing in place, but that's really about being able to provide long-term patient capital to support long-term projects. CHAIR: His second question, which may be for the department, is: the federal government has committed over $440 million for regional logistics hubs in the Northern Territory. Where is this commitment up to? Ms Rauter : The regional logistics hubs have been undergoing business case development within the Northern Territory government. Previously, we asked National Intermodal to help progress that process and do a study on where they thought that the most economically viable logistics hubs might be. They undertook that study. Then, as a result of that, in the 2026-27 budget the government agreed to allocate $10 million of that $440 million to National Intermodal to continue that study and to help progress the business case such that we can continue to work with the Northern Territory government on delivery of that commitment. CHAIR: How long has this been going? Is this from 2022? Ms Rauter : Yes, that's right. CHAIR: What have been some of the challenges or barriers with that? Ms Rauter : I think it is a Northern Territory government led project. I think the progress of the business case has been slow. They did submit a stage 2 business case to Infrastructure Australia. I believe that was back in 2024, early 2024, and they were given a large amount of feedback as to how that business case needed further development. I think the time had passed and perhaps the initial assumptions around where the logistics hubs were best placed had changed, hence why the department asked National Intermodal to step in and modernise the assumptions around that. So it is progressing, but, yes, I acknowledge it's progressing slowly. CHAIR: When you say 'the department', that is the Commonwealth department; is that right? Ms Rauter : Yes, that's right. CHAIR: Originally, of those logistics hubs, one was at Katherine, and I think one was at Tennant. Was it Tennant Creek? Ms Rauter : There was one at Tennant— Mr Gowland : And Alice. Ms Rauter : and Alice. CHAIR: Alice Springs, not Katherine? Mr Gowland : Yes, Katherine, sorry. It was regional logistics hubs in Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs. They were and still are the areas of focus. But, as Ms Rauter has explained, through the business case process and through the assistance of National Intermodal, doing that feasibility study is refining where the industry demand is and where we collectively, the Northern Territory government in particular, should be focusing the effort to develop which logistics hubs first. CHAIR: Given the emerging industries and the critical mines that are happening both in Tennant Creek and near Alice Springs, wouldn't it be imperative to get these logistics hubs in place and fast-track to meet that demand of what's happening with those emerging industries that are happening? Ms Rauter : That's certainly what National Intermodal have been looking at and will continue to study now in a deeper way now that there's more funding available. But definitely I suspect that it will happen in a staged way and make sure that, as industries are emerging, those hubs become available. The Beetaloo is another area that I know National Intermodal had a look at as well. So, yes, we are waiting on the next phase of that study before any decisions can be made. But, at the end of the day, it will be informing Northern Territory and their business case, which they will have to put through Infrastructure Australia. Once Infrastructure Australia makes their recommendations, then the government can make a decision under the Commonwealth Investment Framework. CHAIR: Matt. Mr MATT SMITH: I'm just curious about the risk profile for some of the NAIF loans. All projects in the far north right across the country are going to be higher risk just by definition due to the connectivity, distances, natural disasters and lack of people, but is there any thought given to the risk if the project does not go ahead? We are looking at places that are desperately crying out for economic diversification. It might look like a high-risk position on paper, but, if we do not go forward with these projects, there will be knock-on effects for not just that region but the entire far north in terms of defence, sovereign capability and all those sorts of things. We've got a lot of opportunity, but, if you're going to try to stack up a business case for something in Sydney versus something in Lockhart River, it's going to be a very difficult conversation. Mr MacDonald : Absolutely. NAIF has a high-risk appetite for the north, and particularly for the unique risks faced by the north in terms of long distances and constraints around people and around infrastructure. We very much focus on being able to support projects and taking those risks on board. We balance that by being prudent stewards of taxpayer funds, as well, but we make sure that we give every project every chance to succeed. CHAIR: Senator Sterle. Senator STERLE: My question will go to you, Mr MacDonald, and Ms McBean. When this committee was in Kununurra we toured the brand new cotton gin and heard from them. That's magnificent. I was up there for the opening before that. This is a magnificent achievement. I remember the old cotton gin, when I was trucking up there, got shut down in the late eighties, I think it was. They are very buoyed, and it also goes to the importance of the first port of entry. I know this is for agriculture, not to dillydally but to get moving. The management of the gin told this committee that they were seeking a loan from NAIF. Can you shine a light on that for us, please? Where's that at? Mr MacDonald : I'm very glad you had the opportunity to go and visit that project, because I think that's a great example of how NAIF can support projects in the north. The local farmers needed a cotton gin to help support the growth of the industry, and that is something we were able to support a few years ago with a $34 million loan. They're now operational, and they're looking to make some further investments to be able to expand what they're doing and to make sure that the gin can process as much cotton as possible. We're working closely with them to see whether we can provide some additional funding to support that expansion. Senator STERLE: They've put the request in—they've put the application in; is that correct? Or is it still in talks? Mr MacDonald : That's correct. Senator STERLE: I know you can't go it. What's the process from here? Can you share that with the committee? Mr MacDonald : In terms of our investment process, what we're doing at the moment is some further analysis on that. It's something that we have progressed internally, and the next stage will be to advance that so we can make a formal investment decision and be able to respond to the proponent. Senator STERLE: Good. For all of us who sit in Senate estimates for the sins of our previous life—I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but how long would you assume this project will take? Is it a couple of weeks? A couple of months? Mr MacDonald : Based on our discussions with the company, we're expecting that we will be seeking to make an investment decision over the next couple of months and then, subject to approval, going through the administerial consideration period. Senator STERLE: Tremendous. Thank you very much. CHAIR: Ms Rauter and Mr Gowland, can I ask you questions about the Office of Northern Australia? What other work does the Office of Northern Australia do on strengthening supply chains across the north? Is there a coordinated supply chain approach across different industries in the north? Mr Gowland : The Office of Northern Australia doesn't necessarily get involved in supply chains, because within the department there's work done on the supply chain strategy, which was released last year with an associated action plan. That strategy was developed in consultation with and supported by the jurisdictions. That's not a Northern Australian supply chain; that's a national supply chain, but, obviously, supply chains are crucial— CHAIR: Who does that body of work? Is that infrastructure and transport? Mr Gowland : Yes, it's within the department. The Office of Northern Australia doesn't do that work. CHAIR: If there's work that has to be done in those supply chains and the department does it, once that has been done and we've had assessment, does that then get given to the Office of Northern Australia? Mr Gowland : It's certainly information that we would use in our conversations with jurisdictions and other agencies, and in trying to advocate for and support the importance of resilient supply chains in the north. Ms Rauter : I'll add that that supply chain strategy is not about specific investments. It is about defining and modelling. The current ideal future freight networks are developing a national freight resilience plan, conducting periodic supply chain and resilience modelling, developing a freight infrastructure investment framework and conducting a current and future skills gap analysis for the freight and logistics sector. In developing that framework, they have consulted across government, including with areas like the Office of Northern Australia. The Office of Northern Australia is there to advocate for why you sometimes need a different lens for the north, why the risk appetite in the north needs to be different and why costs in the north tend to be higher. CHAIR: Who then coordinates that body of work? We all represent northern Australia and the supply chain, challenges, barriers and difficulties. This is something that comes up all the time. Who takes responsibility for the coordination and making sure that any framework and investment by government is seamless and can be less of a cumbersome issue, particularly for remote communities, private enterprise or emerging industries on the receiving end of that? Ms Rauter : For that particular strategy, it would be the transport area of our department. CHAIR: I'm going to ask one quick question in terms of decommissioning. This industry has huge potential for northern Australia and represents a significant emerging industry. What work is the Office of Northern Australia doing to advocate and coordinate this industry? Mr Gowland : We influence government's submissions through our policy development, which may be happening via other departments. We contribute to numerous submissions, particularly through the budget process, and make sure that when policies are being developed, some of the unique challenges in the north are acknowledged. These include the remote distances, the major weather events and the resilience piece in supply chains. When it comes to the emerging industries that you mentioned, it also goes to the housing piece. Where are we going to house the workforce? If it's about where that decommissioning piece is going to happen, obviously in Darwin there's great opportunity with the various offshore extractive industries that will need to be shut down. It's also about prioritising investment and it's also needs work. It's a collaboration piece with the jurisdictions, as well as working across our colleagues, particularly in the Department of Industry, Science and Resources. It's the influencing piece. CHAIR: I have a last question. Northern Australia has several key structural challenges as a region, as you know. What are the ways in which the Office of Northern Australia facilitates across portfolio? It would be easy just to lump it all on. What are the cross-portfolio or cross-jurisdictional discussions on these challenges? You don't have to answer that straightaway. You could take that on notice. Mr Gowland : I can frame it. From a cross-jurisdictional piece, we have the Northern Australia Ministerial Forum. That's a forum where WA, through the minister for Northern Australia, Madeleine King, and also Senator McCarthy attend these forums. Queensland, Northern Territory and WA are represented. That's the opportunity for those three jurisdictions and the Commonwealth government— CHAIR: Is that ministerial? Mr Gowland : That's ministerial, but under that there's a senior officials working group that reports back and provides some policy work or opportunities for that ministerial group to focus on a policy challenge where a cohesive approach would benefit from the three jurisdictions and the Commonwealth government. Previously there's been some work done on housing, and that work was then provided to the housing minister. Now we're looking at potential other work. In particular, there's potential to do some policy work around the communities in economic transition piece. Coming back to how we influence departments, we do that through various IDCs that the Office of Northern Australia attend and represent on. CHAIR: When you do cross-jurisdictional and cross-department—I don't know if it was Ms Rauter or Mr MacDonald who talked about an Indigenous reference group that feeds into that process. Are we able to get, or are you able to table, who's represented across Queensland, the Northern Territory and Western Australia? Mr Gowland : At the ministerial forum? CHAIR: You've got the ministerial forum, but I think you've got— Mr Gowland : The Indigenous Reference Group? Absolutely. I've got the information here, but we can table that if that's what you prefer. CHAIR: Can we get that? Thank you. Ms Rauter : I can quickly read it out for you. The chair of the Indigenous Reference Group is Professor Martin Nakata, and he is from Queensland. He has a higher education research and Indigenous leadership background. We have Mr Troy Fraser, also from Queensland, who is local and state government and has experience in Indigenous organisations. Ms Ninielia Mills, from Western Australia, has Indigenous organisational leadership. Ms Flora Warrior, from the Torres Strait, has experience in business administration, business start-ups and microfinancing. Also Mr Damien Djerrkura, from the Northern Territory, and Ms Alinta McGuire, from the Northern Territory. They make up the Indigenous Reference Group. That Indigenous Reference Group was formed on 17 July 2025 and runs until the end of December this calendar year, and then the government will make a decision as to what the next steps for that Indigenous Reference Group are. They have set three priorities for themselves. It's very much an Indigenous Reference Group led agenda. Their first priority is a legacy mission for the Northern Australia Action Plan and holding us to account for making sure that we're progressing those commitments under the action plan for the benefit of First Nations communities. Their second priority is the education and employment pipeline for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. Their third policy priority is supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander enterprise. Mr Gowland : There's a recent piece which this group is looking at, which is communities undergoing economic transition. That group is also going to provide advice to government about how to support those Indigenous communities undergoing those economic transitions. CHAIR: That's good. Another follow-on question from the deputy chair: is the work on the housing ministerial forum available? Mr Gowland : I'll have to take that on notice. That report has been given to Minister O'Neil. CHAIR: I'll just repeat that at the end of the session. Thank you. Thank you all for your appearance and evidence today. The committee has agreed that any responses to questions on notice should be provided within two weeks of receiving the Hansard transcript. You guys are veterans; you know the drill after Senate estimates. I think there were two questions from the deputy chair that were taken on notice. We look forward to receiving that information. Thank you all for your appearance today. Proceedings suspended from 09:24 to 10:14 .