Anzac biscuits may be a delicious, and commemorative, treat but for the Department of Veterans' Affairs they're serious business.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
DVA is charged with protecting the use of the acronym "Anzac", to ensure it is treated with respect and dignity.
This duty means the department keeps a very close eye on the commercial production and sale of Anzac biscuits, including by issuing permits and threatening penalties if rules are breached.
Its guidelines - set out in a 2022 document - are explicit that they are absolutely not to be called "Anzac cookies".
They also shouldn't deviate substantially from the DVA-approved recipe for biscuits - don't even think about tossing in choc chips.
"Each year DVA declines applications for permits where products include the word 'Anzac' but which do not bear any resemblance to generally accepted forms of Anzac biscuits," its guidelines read.
"Some examples include 'Choc Chip Anzac Biscuits', 'Anzac cheesecake', 'Anzac muffin' and 'Anzac sandwich'."
Though, this rule doesn't extend to adjustments for dietary requirements, such as gluten-free and vegan ingredients.
In response to questions from Public Eye, the department said it had issued 55 permits for the sale of Anzac biscuits in the last five years.
It hasn't knocked any applications back in that period - perhaps it has just workshopped them.
READ MORE:
The department is not playing around, though. It has the power to issue fines of up to $1000 for misusing the word "Anzac", or to pursue imprisonment of up to 12 months.
"DVA has not needed to take punitive action or issue penalties during the last five years, however, will take action against any non-compliance if needed," a spokesperson for the department said.
They noted Australians were "deeply respectful of our servicemen and women" and generally compliant with the rules.
"While there are occasions where the guidelines are breached, DVA aims to educate the individual or corporation in the first instance and resolve it without taking punitive action," they said.
"It is DVA's experience that most matters are usually resolved once the individual or corporation is made aware of the breach."
APVMA's estimates training
The agency which once had to admit allegations of a "private urination incident" at a Senate estimates hearing has sought out a private training session ahead of the next round.
In November 2022, the Australian Pesticides And Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) was forced to answer questions about an allegation a male member of the executive team had urinated on staff members at a work Christmas party.
The staff member had resigned after the incident, which spurred a review into workplace culture.
In answer to a QoN from the February estimates, the APVMA said it had engaged an external company to offer training for officials ahead of the May budget estimates.
The QoN was actually one of the barrage of questions Liberal senator Jane Hume has taken to sending out to every agency.
The practice has prompted the Prime Minister's Office to issue advice to ministers' offices on how to respond - or rather, not respond - to such questions, Capital Brief revealed last week.
But the agency refused to answer questions from Public Eye on the training session - including its cost, attendance, and why a private provider was sought out - and instead provided a statement.
"As part of [our] approach to learning and development, staff are provided with training across a broad range of areas relevant to their roles as employees of the APVMA and public servants more broadly, in line with the Australian Public Services Integrated Leadership System," a spokesperson said.
"At the APVMA, we pride ourselves on our culture of continuous learning which ensures our staff remain current in their respective fields and helps drive organisational success and engagement with innovation.
"Training may be provided in-house, through the APS Academy, or other external providers."
Senate estimates training isn't unheard of, but agencies do have the option to get it through the Department of the Senate.
Keeping hydrated
The Frank Green trend has officially swept into government.
The Cotton Research and Development Corporation spent just under $1700 on 48 of the fancy water bottles this financial year, it revealed in its response to a question on notice (QoN).
It opted for the light green, 500ml version, with the agency's logo printed on the bottles.
At about $35 apiece, that's a fancy water bottle.
Over to you
- Got a tip for us?
- ps@canberratimes.com.au