Office of National Assessments
What ONA does
ONA provides assessments on international matters of political, strategic and economic significance to the Prime Minister, members of the National Security Committee of Cabinet and key senior policy makers in the government. ONA bases its assessments on information from a range of sources, both inside and outside the government.
While ONA reports directly to the Prime Minister and sits within the Prime Minister’s portfolio, responsibility for the preparation of assessments and day-to-day management issues falls to the Director-General of ONA. The Director-General of ONA is an independent statutory officer who is not subject to external direction on the contents of ONA assessments.
In addition to setting out ONA’s assessment function, the Office of National Assessments Act 1977 (ONA Act) charges ONA with responsibility for coordinating and reviewing Australia’s foreign intelligence activities and issues of common interest among Australia’s foreign intelligence agencies. ONA is also responsible for evaluating the effectiveness of Australia’s foreign intelligence effort and the adequacy of its resourcing.
Further information can be found on the Office of National Assessments website.
Review activities
One of the more significant recommendations made by Mr Flood in his 2004 review of the Australian intelligence agencies, at least in terms of accountability arrangements, was that the IGIS should conduct periodic reviews of ONA’s statutory independence.
Mr Flood explained the rationale for this recommendation in the following terms:
“Given the nature of the assessment business, where individuals’ judgements are a key factor in the final product, and ONA’s direct line of responsibility to the Prime Minister, with the consequent potential for charges of political interference, there is a need for some external process to ensure independence is preserved, and is seen to be so. This relates to the content of what is reported, and to what is not reported.” 40
The report emphasised that “…while intelligence priorities should be driven by policy needs, intelligence judgements must be uninfluenced by policy or political considerations”.41 Mr Flood reported that there was no evidence of improper influence on assessments such as those relating to Iraq and weapons of mass destruction,42 but that “there is a need for some external process to ensure independence is preserved, and is seen to be so”. 43
When the Intelligence Services Legislation Amendment Act 2005 came into effect on 2 December 2005, that Act inserted a new provision – s8(3)(c) – into the IGIS Act which requires the Inspector-General:
“(c) At the request of the responsible Minister or of the Inspector-General’s own motion, to inquire into any matter in relation to the statutory independence of ONA.”
There has also been an amendment to s35(2) of the IGIS Act so that the Inspector-General is required to include in his or her annual report, comments on any inquiry conducted in accordance with the new s8(3)(c).
It must be emphasised that this remit of the IGIS is a quite specific one of reviewing independence and propriety. This means looking to ensure that the preparation of assessments is conducted legally and ethically, and in particular that there is no attempt to improperly influence the independence of the assessments from without.
The IGIS remit does not include (at least in a direct sense) efficiency, effectiveness or “second guessing” key judgments in assessments. Following acceptance of other Flood Review recommendations, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet undertakes an annual review of ONA’s performance. There is also to be a periodic external review of the intelligence community every five to seven years (presumably along similar lines to the Flood Review).
In order to fulfil my new responsibilities in relation to ONA, I began planning and undertaking a review of ONA’s statutory independence in the last reporting period. I engaged in discussions with the Director-General on the form this review activity might take, and I held a series of meetings (from small groups of analysts to an organisation-wide presentation) with ONA staff to outline my plan for the review, and to scope their thoughts and suggestions. I indicated to the Director-General that I would periodically visit ONA to inspect records and discuss issues with staff, and review ONA product.
The Director-General has facilitated the regular provision to my office of ONA assessments. These are read carefully and give my office the necessary knowledge base to be able to explore particular issues or themes in this area of our work.
As another basis for the review, my office articulated a set of principles on what independence and propriety in respect of ONA’s assessments are and are not.
This document also described some of the possible manifestations of independent and rigorous analysis at ONA, and what a person might expect to see if independence and propriety were absent, or lacking, in ONA. This document was workshopped with two groups of ONA analysts. I believe the document will be a useful reference for analysts and others in terms of articulating the principles of independent and objective intelligence assessment. A copy of the Principles is at Annex 8.
A significant part of the methodology of my review was to conduct an inaugural survey of ONA analytical staff and SES officers. This survey attempted to examine the processes that drive and support the analytical process at ONA (including sourcing information, editing processes, feedback provided to analysts, and language and style issues) and also directly questioned analysts about ONA’s culture in relation to contestability of assessments and discussion of alternative views, and also the independence of the Director-General and ONA’s assessments. I also asked about perceptions of any improper pressure/influence from any source such as allies, policymakers or politicians, or internal staff.
I received 39 survey responses from ONA analysts which represented approximately 65 per cent of the analytical staff at ONA. This is a representative survey of ONA analysts across all of the APS classification levels.
As envisaged by Mr Flood, I also conducted interviews with senior government officials in the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, the Department of Defence, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and advisors from the offices of the Prime Minister, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Minister for Defence. The interviews focused on how departments and ministers’ offices interact with ONA, how they understand and view the independence of ONA assessments, and the feedback and advice that is provided to ONA.
At the end of the reporting period I was ready to commence a series of confidential interviews with selected ONA analysts to explore survey responses and related issues.
Privacy guidelines
As mentioned in the previous chapter on DIO, ONA has also developed privacy guidelines that outline the handling, use, and further dissemination of information about Australian persons. The guidelines apply to references to personal information about Australians in external communications—including reports, briefings, emails and advice—emanating from ONA.
I was consulted by ONA in the preparation of the drafting of the ONA privacy guidelines. The guidelines that were developed for ONA are consistent with the rules made under section 15 of the ISA that apply to ASIS, DIGO and DSD.
Consistent with section 5(4) of the ONA Act, the ONA privacy guidelines were promulgated within ONA by the Director-General once he received my formal agreement to the guidelines and the agreement of the Attorney-General. The guidelines were brought into effect on 20 December 2005.
As well as providing advice during the development of the guidelines my office also worked with ONA during the implementation of the new privacy guidelines. This helped to ensure that the guidelines would be applied in a manner consistent with use elsewhere in the AIC.
ONA embarked on an organisation-wide program to educate analysts on applying the guidelines and reporting on compliance with the guidelines. The implementation of the privacy guidelines at ONA was conducted in a thorough manner and I was satisfied with the level of awareness of the privacy guidelines among analysts.
I conducted one inspection of ONA’s use of their privacy guidelines in April 2006 (with another scheduled for 5 July 2006). I have been provided with a comprehensive information pack, and on inspections examine the ONA register of instances where reference has been made to Australian persons in ONA product/less formal exchanges of information. I was pleased with the overall quality and level of detail contained in the documentation.
I intend to conduct inspections relating to ONA’s use of the privacy guidelines every three months.
A copy of the ONA privacy guidelines is at Annex 7.
Training
In May 2006 I addressed an all-staff meeting on the role and functions of my office and also outlined my plans for the first review of ONA’s statutory independence. This presentation was well attended and I intend to repeat such a meeting at a suitable time to encourage greater interaction between my office and ONA. Information about the role and functions of my office is also accessible on ONA’s internal web pages.
Throughout the year I also presented to the AIC common induction course, to which ONA staff are regularly allocated places. One of my staff also attended the internal ONA induction course to better familiarise themselves with internal processes at ONA.
As part of my new responsibilities in relation to ONA I have attempted to communicate to ONA staff that I am available for consultation by any ONA staff should a particular incident arise where the staff member has concerns about whether independence is at issue. I believe analysts will become more familiar with my new role in this regard over time.
Complaints and inquiries
There were no complaints made to my office about ONA in 2005-06, and no formal inquiries under the IGIS Act were conducted into ONA activities in this period.
Footnotes
40 Flood, op. cit., p. 105.
41 ibid, p. 9.
42 ibid, pp. 28-29.
43 ibid, p. 105.