Page 2182 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 3 August 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
We have the Commissioner for Standards who was appointed in 2013 to investigate specific matters in relation to the members code of conduct. We have had, I think, two investigations under that process now, and that has proven to be an important mechanism to take some debates out of this chamber and give them an objective place to be assessed so that members can get a fair hearing and also so the community can get an objective assessment of an issue. As well as the members code of conduct for which the Commissioner of Standards has oversight, there is also the ministerial code of conduct.
At a government level we have a number of mechanisms as well. We have the Ombudsman who examines administrative deficiencies through independent review of complaints about the ACT government. The Ombudsman investigates complaints from people who believe that they have been treated unfairly or unreasonably by an ACT government directorate or agency, including the Australian Federal Police in its community policing role, the ANU, CIT and the University of Canberra. It also conducts inspections of law enforcements agencies’ use of covert powers under ACT legislation.
We also have the Commissioner for Public Administration who has a role in investigating the operation of government agencies and reports to the Chief Minister on these matters. The Public Sector Management Bill the Assembly will debate tomorrow includes creating a new position of public sector standards commissioner, which will be independent and for the first time will not be an ACT public servant. We, of course, have the Auditor-General, who has been discussed this morning, responsible for audit of all ACT public sector agencies including annual financial statements and performance audits as well as having a role in public interest disclosures. We have the Public Interest Disclosure Act, which is legislation to protect whistleblowers. These public interest disclosures are able to be referred to either the Commissioner for Public Administration or the Auditor-General, which gives the whistleblower two distinct options for investigation and they can choose the most appropriate one depending on the circumstances.
That is quite a list, and we have Mr Hanson’s motion this morning calling for increased funding for the Auditor-General’s Office. I note that the public accounts committee tabled a report yesterday calling for an increase in funding for performance audits starting next financial year. I have not had a chance to read that public accounts committee report yet, and I will do that and consider that recommendation. I imagine that will be something that will need to be considered in the budget process as well, and it is certainly something Mr Barr’s amendment refers to.
We also need to consider the role of the Auditor-General in relation to all of the other oversight agencies I have just listed. The overlaps need to be looked at. For example, the committee report outlines the number of public interest disclosures that have been examined, but the Commissioner for Public Administration also investigates public interest disclosures. So we need to reflect on which channels are best and whether we need both channels. I do not have a view on that at this point, but these are the sorts of matters that need to be considered.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video