MEETINGS

During 2003-04, meetings were held on 10 October (meeting 2003/3) at the Bureau's South Australian Regional Office in Adelaide, on 3 March (meeting 2004/1) at Parliament House in Canberra and on 24 June (meeting 2004/2) at the Bureau's New South Wales Regional Office, Sydney. Member attendance at meetings is provided below.

Dr Sharman Stone, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, briefly attended meetings 2003/3 and 2004/1.

MAJOR ISSUES EXAMINED IN 2003-04

Across the three meetings, the Board considered the following major issues:

• the Bureau's five-year Strategic Plan;
• operation of the Special Services Unit;
• the Bureau's one-year Operational Plan; and
• the Bureau's role in disaster mitigation.

More information on each of these is provided below.

The Board was also able to assist the Bureau by:

• providing guidance on the Bureau's publications policy;
• helping the Bureau refine its guidelines for dealing with the media;
• reviewing proposals for the 2004-05 budget; and
• providing advice on the Bureau's Cost Recovery Impact Statement (CRIS).

Bureau Strategic Plan

The Board had a key role in the development of the Bureau's strategic plan throughout the year. Members worked with the Bureau on identification of a set of broad strategies (meeting 2003/3), more detailed strategic planning (meeting 2004/1) and the development of a tightly focused strategic planning document with prioritised major objectives (meeting 2004/2).

Members provided feedback and advice on a range of both specific and overarching issues they considered needed to be addressed over the one to five-year timeframe.

These included:

• support for end-to-end nationally-focussed severe weather services, based on the best science and monitoring systems together with strengthened community and emergency services liaison;
• support for the formal establishment by the Bureau of an operational oceanographic service as strategically important and complementary to, and supportive of, the role of other government agencies such as the National Oceans Office;
• advice that there is potentially scope for the Bureau to take on a national responsibility for air quality monitoring, forecasting and associated data archival, recognising the need to resolve the issue of State vs Commonwealth authority for air quality policy and implementation issues;
• advice that an enhanced strategic focus by the Bureau on climate monitoring issues, at a national and international level, is consistent with, and supportive of, government priorities. The Board also agreed that the Bureau's strong national and international involvement in operational and science policy aspects of climate is essential for the Bureau to gain access to global data and technology, to develop and improve operational climate monitoring and prediction systems and to participate in securing acceptable national outcomes from international climate negotiations such as the Kyoto Protocol;
• recognition that while the Bureau website is a crucial element in the public face of the Bureau, is heavily accessed and includes a wide range of valuable information, it would benefit from an extensive revamp in terms of both look and usability;
• advice that new targeted funding initiatives will bring new corresponding responsibilities, and that the projected decrease in real base funding will require greater efficiencies in existing activities, including better use of technology and skills, or a reduction in current programs; and
• advice on the importance of a well-developed communications strategy for the Bureau, driven visibly by the Director, to better position the Bureau with key decision makers and the public as well as to underpin organisational change.

Special Services Unit

At Meeting 2004/1, Dr Love provided the Board with an overview of the operations of the Special Services Unit (SSU) and highlighted a number of issues. The Board noted the new management arrangements put in place to strengthen the governance of the SSU and to increase profitability.

The Board reaffirmed its support for the current system of operation, including particularly the clear separation between commercial and non-commercial activities. With effective implementation, the model adopted would enable the Bureau to avoid many of the difficulties that might otherwise be encountered such as assertions about the use of public funds to subsidise commercial activities.

The Board recognised that as a government business, the SSU faces some limitations in the market place, and noted the possible political ramifications if it was to compete more aggressively in the domestic market or to cease commercial services altogether.

Bureau Operational Plan (2004-05)

At meeting 2004/2, Dr Love presented the Board with an overview of key aspects of the Bureau Operational Plan for 2004-05. He reported on the Bureau's financial position for 2004-05, noting the difficulty for the Bureau as an operational organisation without access to program funds. Reduced appropriations will require a reduction in staff numbers and in the purchase of goods and services. The Board agreed that while there were immediate issues associated with the lease arrangements associated with the transition to the new premises, the non-discretionary increase in insurance and superannuation contributions, the increase in staff costs and the reduction in appropriation due to the efficiency dividend, were continually putting pressure on the Bureau and were imperatives for long term structural change.

Dr Love briefed the Board on the adoption of a program-based internal funding allocation model to drive change within the organisation. The Board was very supportive of the funding model and felt it would contribute to a more strategic view of funding priorities and a nationally consistent approach to the achievement of efficiencies.

The Board closely considered the options for necessary savings proposed by the Bureau. They suggested that they be implemented as a matter of some urgency so that the Bureau would have access to the full year effect of the proposals to allow it to operate within the resources available.

Disaster Mitigation

The Board considered the Bureau's role in disaster mitigation at meeting 2004/2 and also the recent development of a specific Disaster Mitigation program. The Board observed that, even though meteorology-related disasters make up the majority of Australia's natural disasters, the Bureau could be better represented within high-level emergency management forums. It was the Board's strong advice that the Bureau focus on involvement at the Australian Emergency Management Committee (AEMC) working group level.

The Board also considered the Bureau's recognition within this sector more generally. While the Bureau is well recognised in relation to floods, much of its recognition in other areas is informal and relies on individuals being aware of the appropriate contacts. The Board suggested the Bureau seek to have its role written into the various emergency management plans. The Board also suggested that the annual briefing exercises undertaken by the Bureau in cyclone-prone areas could be replicated in other regions with respect to possible meteorological threats.

The Board also supported the Bureau's development of graphical products to aid in the provision of thunderstorm warnings. They also noted that while there is significant community benefit from such products, there is no financial gain for the Bureau, but rather a cost for each Internet download. The Board congratulated the Bureau on the development of the new products with the expectation that they would be eagerly used.

OTHER ACTIVITIES

Inspection of Bureau Facilities

In conjunction with Meeting 2003/3, the Advisory Board toured the operations of the South Australian Regional Office, including the observation and engineering area, the climate section and the forecasting area.

Board Representation

Members of the Advisory Board are, from time to time, invited to attend Bureau activities to represent the Board and to increase their knowledge of the Bureau, its operations, services, clients and stakeholders. Generally speaking, members are invited to Bureau events that are held in their local area or that pertain to their particular area of expertise.

A limited budget and conflicting engagements limited the number of official representation activities undertaken in 2003-04.

This activity was supplemented by the attendance of Board members at various meetings, conferences and other interactions at their own initiative, at which, or from which, they have been able to gain valuable information, insight or other benefit for the Bureau.