AMSA has implemented internal controls to ensure costs recovered for regulatory charging activity outputs are measured correctly and are collected on time. In adherence with legislative obligations, an officer of Australian Border Force may detain a vessel at any Australian port for any unpaid and outstanding levies. The vessel can only be released after payment is received. This process ensures the existence of any unpaid levies are consistently at a very low level.
An assessment of regulatory charging activities was conducted using Department of Finance’s Charging Risk Assessment. AMSA considers the risk to remain low to medium, given no anticipated changes (other than indexation) to current activities in 2023-24. Identified risks, accompanying mitigation strategies and controls, are provided in Table 7 with additional details provided in AMSA’s Corporate Plan.
Risk identified | Inherent risk | Mitigation strategy and controls | Residual risk |
Reserves not enough to fund a major pollution incident clean-up A major environmental emergency pollution incident resulting in clean-up costs exceeding retained earning reserves, damaging reputation, and forcing AMSA to seek special appropriation funding from the Australian Government. | High | • Maintenance of a pollution response reserve to fund any potential clean-up costs deemed appropriate for up to a 450-500 tonne oil spill. • Should an extreme pollution incident occur, work with the Australian Government to consider a temporary increase in levy rates to fund any shortfall. • Seek a drawdown for a special appropriation should an extreme pollution incident occur. | Low |
Funding risk to levies Levies are collected based on tonnage proxies predominately from the number of arriving international commercial vessels, with most levies (67%) sourced from iron ore and coal bulk cargo. | Moderate | • Capability to implement a range of efficiency measures within a medium timeframe to offset any potential reductions in levy revenue without adjusting levy rates. • Regularly compare costs against revenue and volumetric data to ensure unit costs are reflective of pricing within each tonnage bands. • Review use of tonnage-based proxies for levies to enable charges to be more reflective and closely linked to level of effort – weighed up against ease of operation and associated costs to administer. | Low |
Secure funding for National System National System regulatory-based activities are funded by a combination of government budget appropriations and jurisdiction contributions. An Independent Review Panel have been commissioned to review funding for functions commencing in January 2022 and expected to report to the Australian Government in mid-2023. The final report will include recommendations of future funding and charging arrangements and will be considered as part of the 2024-25 Commonwealth Budget Process. | Moderate | • Provide submissions to the Independent Review Panel outlining AMSA’s concerns. • Engage early and regularly with government and industry groups (principle external stakeholders). • Determine and segregate one-off developmental and transitional costs from business-as-usual costs associated with National System, with the former funded by retained earnings. • Work with the Australian Government to consider future funding models and arrangements for the National System following the Review. | Low |
Ensure regulated industry are operating to appropriate standards Failure as a regulator to prevent an incident or fatality in relation to compliance and enforcement arrangements. | Moderate | • Continue to review measures to minimise the risks of shipping and pollution incidents and maximise safety of people involved – including education and training. • Ensure targets are being met for ship inspection programs, navigational services, and safety and regulatory, assessed on a risk-based approach, while implementing and applying lessons learnt. | Low |
Inflated or escalating costs Escalating costs to provide regulatory activities to principal stakeholders and costs that may be beyond that deemed efficient. | Low | • Analyse direct costs, including staffing levels and classifications, average time in service delivery, ICT infrastructure (software) support, managerial engagement, and supplier (contractual) costs. • Business process map tasks in the delivery of regulatory services (direct tasks) and compare (benchmark) to other agencies providing similar services. • Review and analyse all corporate related costs (property, networking, ICT, and corporate support), benchmarking to similar agencies – incorporate some measurement into key performance indicator reporting. | Very low |
Key performance indicators Not effective in measuring progress of specific activities, not maintained as an ongoing and reportable measurement. Difficult to assess AMSA’s effectiveness in the delivery of services and progress achieving policy outcomes to acceptable standards of industry. | Low | • Engage and agree KPIs with external stakeholders. • Report on KPIs in external published documents (e.g. annual report, PBS, and CRIS). • Use KPIs and costing model outputs to support strategic decisions. | Very low |