CHAPTER 3Performance report

Output 1—Review of administrative action

1.3—Response to advice, submissions, services, findings and recommendations by government agencies and other organisations.

1.4—Agency satisfaction with the quality of services/acceptance of findings and recommendations.

This year, the Ombudsman released public reports on seven own motion and major investigations. The reports contained a total of 51 individual agency recommendations—agencies accepted 49 of the 51 recommendations.

• September 2005—Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs: inquiry into the circumstances of the Vivian Alvarez matter.
  
  
• October 2005—Australian Defence Force: management of service personnel under the age of 18 years. The ADF did not support the recommendation that it undertake an analysis of the costs and benefits of accepting minors for enlistment in the ADF with a view to determining whether the enlistment age should be raised to 18 years.
  
  
• February 2006—Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs: administration of s 501 of the Migration Act 1958 as it applies to long-term permanent residents. DIMA did not support one of the recommendations, as it was considered to be a matter for the Australian Government.
  
  
• March 2006—Administration of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 in Australian Government agencies.
  
  
• March 2006—Australian Taxation Office: administration of the superannuation co-contribution scheme.
  
  
• March 2006—Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs: report on referred immigration cases: Mr T.
  
  
• April 2006—Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs: management of a frail, aged visitor to Australia.

Two indications of a high degree of satisfaction with our capacity to conduct thorough, rigorous and fair investigations are that agencies accepted the overwhelming majority of the Ombudsman's recommendations and that several of these investigations were conducted at the request of the Australian Government or the relevant department.

Several current own motion investigations that will be completed in 2006–07 include investigations into:

• issues relating to the implementation of the marriage-like relationship policy
• the administration of the pension bonus scheme
• complaint-handling procedures available in airports
• the management of complaints about unacceptable behaviour in the ADF
• the complaint-handling process of the Migration Agents Registration Authority
• the quality of the notification of reasons by DIMA for decisions and review rights for refused visa applicants.

In June 2005, the Australian Parliament amended the Migration Act 1958 to confer on the Ombudsman a new role of reviewing the cases of people who had been in immigration detention for two years or more. At the end of June 2006, we had received 235 reports from DIMA concerning 262 people who had been in detention for two years or more. We had interviewed 167 people and provided reports on 70 cases. The minister had tabled responses to 66 of those reports in parliament.

Of the 106 recommendations contained in these 66 reports, the minister agreed to 51% of the recommendations, disagreed with 25% and delayed making a decision on a further 24%. Of the reports where the minister disagreed with the Ombudsman's recommendations, 46% concerned the grant of a bridging visa and 42% concerned the Ombudsman's recommendation that the minister make a decision before tabling the report in parliament. The remaining 12% involved consideration of an alternative to detention, the issue of a permanent visa or the revocation of a decision to cancel a visa.

See the 'Looking at the agencies—Immigration' section in Chapter 7 for further information on immigration-related matters.