Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.
| Identifier: | 05CANBERRA1047 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 05CANBERRA1047 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | Embassy Canberra |
| Created: | 2005-06-17 02:54:00 |
| Classification: | UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY |
| Tags: | CVIS CPAS AS |
| Redacted: | This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks. |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS CANBERRA 001047 SIPDIS SENSITIVE DEPT FOR CA/VO/F/P E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: CVIS, CPAS, AS SUBJECT: AUSTRALIA ON TRACK FOR VWP REQUIREMENTS REF: SECSTATE 111324 1. (U) Post demarched Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) Passport Systems and Technology Director John Osbourne on June 15 regarding the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) biometric passport requirements (reftel). Osbourne identified DFAT as the responsible ministry and designated himself as the point of contact for VWP coordination. His details are below: John Osbourne Director, Passport Systems & Technology Section Passports Branch Tel: 61-2-6261-1035 Fax: 61-2-6261-1038 Email: john.osbourne@dfat.gov.au 2. (U) Osbourne affirmed that Australia was on the path to full compliance, having issued machine-readable passports (MRP) since 1982 and digital photographs in passports since 1992. He also saw no obstacle to the initial October 26, 2005 deadline for digitized chips, which were in progress. 3. (SBU) Osbourne did express frustration about the recurrent extension of deadlines to accommodate problems other VWP countries had with compliance, especially since Australia had invested large sums of money to meet the initial deadlines. He remarked that, had our demarche occurred before the GOA budget was announced in May, there would not have been funding for the implementation of digitized chips by October 2005. Parliament would not have authorized the funds knowing that an extension for the chips had been made for October 2006. STANTON
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04