Proposed Basin Plan consultation report

Appendix A:
Process for considering submissions on the proposed Basin Plan

Section 43 of the Water Act 2007 (Cwlth) describes the process required to be carried out by the Murray–Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) following publication of the proposed Basin Plan — a draft for consultation and the plain English summary of the proposed Basin Plan. Following the release of the proposed Basin Plan and the plain English summary on 28 November 2011, MDBA began a 20-week consultation period that ended on 16 April 2012. A flow chart setting out how the MDBA considered submissions and met the requirements set out in section 43 of the Act is presented in figure A1.

Figure A1: Flow chart of submissions process

A1. Inviting submissions

MDBA invited members of the public and each Basin state to make submissions on the proposed plan.

The invitation for public submissions was published in the Commonwealth of Australia Special Gazette (S187, 28 November 2011). This invitation was also published in newspapers circulating generally in each Basin State (both state-wide and regional papers; see Table A1, Press advertisements calling for submissions) and on MDBA website (www.mdba.gov.au/have-your-say/make-submission).

Table A1: Press advertisements calling for submissions, 28 November to 10 December 2011

Newspaper	Date	Newspaper	Date
Adelaide Advertiser	28 Nov	Forbes Advocate	1 Dec
The Australian	28 Nov	Goondiwindi Argus	30 Nov
Courier Mail (Brisbane)	28 Nov	Area News (Griffith)	2 Dec
Canberra Times	28 Nov	Horsham Wimmera Mail Times	2 Dec
Herald Sun (Melbourne)	28 Nov	Koori Mail	30 Nov
The Age (Melbourne)	28 Nov	The Land	1 Dec
National Indigenous Times	30 Nov	Sunraysia Daily (Mildura)	3 Dec
Stock Journal	1 Dec	Moree Champion	1 Dec
Sydney Morning Herald	28 Nov	The Murray Valley Standard	6 Dec
Tamworth City News	28 Nov	Narrandera Argus	1 Dec
Weekly Times (Vic)	30 Nov	Queensland Country Life	1 Dec
Border Mail (Albury)	3 Dec	The Murray Pioneer (Renmark)	2 Dec
Western Herald (Bourke)	1 Dec	The Western Star (Roma)	2 Dec
Dalby Herald	2 Dec	Rural Weekly	1 Dec
Deniliquin Pastoral Times	2 Dec	Shepparton Advisor	7 Dec
Daily Liberal (Dubbo)	2 Dec	The Chronicle (Toowoomba)	3 Dec
Echuca Riverine Herald	2 Dec	Shepparton News	10 Dec

The invitation to make submissions included:

how a person could obtain a copy of the proposed Basin Plan and the plain English summary

the physical and email address to which people could send their submissions on the plan (MDBA also included fax and general email contact details)

the date by which submissions must be received (16 April 2012)

that every submission would be published on MDBA website unless the submitter requested full or partial confidentiality.

MDBA’s invitation also included additional information about lodging submissions by means other than the online system; provided more detail about the requirement to publish all submissions in their entirety (i.e. including personal and third-party information), unless otherwise requested by the submitter; and specified a 1800 telephone number that people could call for further information on making submissions.

In addition to the statutory requirements for advertising submissions, MDBA publicised the submission process widely by conducting a press conference, issuing media releases and using other media (Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Free Flow, MDBA blog). The plain English summary also included, on one of its preliminary pages, an invitation for public submissions, including how to make and lodge submissions on the plan (see Figure A2). Similar text was used in advertisements supplied to newspapers.

MDBA also produced a ‘Make a submission’ postcard, which was distributed through key stakeholder groups, and at meetings and other community engagement activities held during the 20-week consultation period.

Figure A2: Advisory note published in the plain English summary

Figure A2 is a copy of the advisory notice published in the plain English summary; similar text was used in advertisements supplied to newspapers.

A2. Administering submissions

Defining what constituted a submission

Because of legal requirements about how MDBA was required to treat submissions (including the requirement to publish submissions and report on them), it was important to be able to clearly identify submissions from other items (such as correspondence).

General items

It was equally important that general items such as letters or emails were not treated as submissions and published on the website when that had not been the author’s intention. Items that fell into this category included correspondence directed to MDBA Chair or Chief Executive, as well as the Australian Government Minister for Water and other Australian Government ministers. As indicated in section A1 of this appendix, the invitation to make a submission on the proposed Basin Plan included the request that items sent to MDBA outside the online system be clearly identified as submissions by the inclusion of ‘Submission on the proposed Basin Plan’ in the document title, email subject line or in the body of the submission itself.

General submissions

General submissions were submissions lodged by individuals and organisations unaffiliated with a campaign or a petition. Submissions lodged by state agencies are included in this category.

MDBA established a process to help Aboriginal people and organisations make submissions on the proposed Basin Plan. It employed external consultants to help Aboriginal people prepare and lodge their submissions. Once a submission was completed, the consultant submitted it through the MDBA online submission system, where possible, or by post where they were unable to lodge submissions online (i.e. where facilities did not exist).

Petition submissions

In some cases submissions came in the form of petitions. MDBA treated and reported petitions as single submissions with many signatories. Petitions were published on MDBA website under the name of the person or entity that organised the petition or signed any covering documentation.

Campaign submissions

Some submissions contained identical text to others, and these were reported on as submissions sent as part of a campaign. MDBA defined a campaign as:

... an explicit and organised action by a group or organisation to encourage people to send in submissions advocating a particular viewpoint or position.

Campaign organisers usually provided content for the submissions and encouraged submitters to send that content either as their complete submission or as part of their own submission.

Following feedback from the public that it was difficult to find non-campaign submissions for viewing, MDBA published submissions it considered to be part of organised campaigns with the words ‘campaign submission’ included with the submitter’s name.

In all other ways, campaign submissions were treated in the same way as other submissions.

Accessibility issues

In some instances people were unable to make their submission in writing because of language or other barriers, and MDBA responded to these on a case-by-case basis. See also section 4 of this appendix.

Preparing submissions for publication

Database management

MDBA used a custom-built database to receive, manage and publish submissions. The database allowed members of the public to lodge their submissions online. It also provided a secure administration interface for MDBA staff to manage and track submissions.

Submissions lodged online were entered directly into the submissions database. Submissions made by email, fax and post were entered into the database by MDBA staff.

All attached text files were converted to PDF and attached to the submission for uploading to the website.

Confidentiality and other requirements

Once submissions were received and entered onto the database, MDBA read them closely to determine whether they contained private, confidential, legal or other sensitive material (e.g. health or financial details, or the names and locations of family members).

To protect submitters’ privacy, MDBA removed personal contact details of individuals (e.g. phone number, email and postal address) from submissions before publishing them online.

Where a submission contained personally sensitive material, MDBA contacted the submitters to confirm that they indeed wanted this material published online.

Submissions were also checked to ensure that they did not contain illegal material or defamatory content.

Reviewing and summarising submissions

Initial review of submissions involved identifying the issues raised and categorising submissions according to the topics they addressed. MDBA also recorded other information about submissions in the database to assist reporting on the feedback process. This information included:

• 
  Basin region (where applicable)
  
• 
  postcode
  
• 
  whether the submission was from an individual, business or organisation (government or non-government)
  
• 
  sector of interest (for organisations)
  

A3. Consideration of submissions by MDBA and actions taken

Following the initial review and categorisation of submissions, their content underwent further analysis. MDBA staff accessed the submissions database to review submissions and identify further technical issue.

Issues relating to the proposed Basin Plan chapters and schedules and issues relating to broader proposed Basin Plan content

When an issue related to the content of the proposed Basin Plan was identified, MDBA:

• 
  considered the issue for the potential to inform a change to the proposed Basin Plan and developed a proposed policy response
  
• 
  determined what action to take, such as:
  

• 
  amending the proposed Basin Plan (adding, removing or modifying a provision)
  
• 
  including the issue in the 2015 SDL review or taking longer term action (e.g. suggestions for further research)
  
• 
  deciding the issues required no action
  

Issues raised in submissions related to broader water reform

MDBA received submissions raising issues related to broader water reform (i.e. not related to specific content within the proposed Basin Plan).

The Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities and the Department of Regional Development Australia have been provided access to submissions raising these types of issues.

Issues raised in submissions that are not related to water reform

Submissions raising issues not related to water reform were summarised and recorded in the database for reporting purposes, but MDBA took no further action.

Other changes to the proposed Basin Plan after the start of the consultation period

Changes made to the proposed Basin Plan following consideration of issues not included in a submission were captured separately. These issues came from sources such as:

• 
  MDBA engagement activities, including public meetings, round-table meetings and social media forums
  
• 
  MDBA's own work including work to incorporate new information and internal peer review processes
  
• 
  external peer review processes
  
• 
  advice from the Basin Community Committee
  
• 
  advice from other committees and working groups such as the Basin Plan Working Group
  

A4. Publishing submissions

As noted earlier, all submissions received during the feedback period were published on MDBA website, unless submitters requested confidentiality for all or part of their submissions.

Accessibility requirements

Submissions were published in a format (.aspx) that meets government accessibility requirements, while attachments that form part of submissions were published in PDF only. The MDBA publication webpage included a note advising anyone who has difficulty viewing any submission to contact MDBA for assistance, and supplying a 1800 number and email address.

A5. Report on submissions

This report is compiled as directed in section 43(11) of the Act. It is structured to mirror the Proposed Basin Plan, with chapters referencing the proposed Basin Plan’s layout. Issues raised are discussed in the appropriate chapter, and include MDBA’s response and action (if required).

This structure was designed to explain clearly all elements of the submission process on the proposed Basin Plan and how MDBA treated submissions and responded to the issues raised in them.