House of Assembly Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Parliamentary Committees Crime and Public Integrity Policy Committee: Annual Review Crime and Public Integrity Policy Committee: Annual Review The Hon. A. PICCOLO House of Assembly Light The Hon. A. PICCOLO (Light) (11:55): I move: That the second report of the committee, entitled 'Annual Review of the Crime and Public Integrity Policy Committee into public integrity and the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption', be noted. The Crime and Public Integrity Policy Committee was established under the Parliamentary Committees Act 1991. A key function of the committee is to consider the operations of the following South Australian integrity bodies: the ICAC, whose role includes the investigation of corruption and oversight of the investigation of misconduct and maladministration in public administration; the Office for Public Integrity, which receives and assesses complaints and reports about potential matters of corruption, misconduct and maladministration in public administration; the Ombudsman SA, whose office investigates complaints about South Australian government and local government agencies; the Office of the Police Ombudsman, which provides independent oversight of SAPOL; and the anti-corruption branch of SAPOL, which ensures that allegations of corruption in public administration referred to the police by the ICAC are appropriately investigated. During the review period from April 2015 until June 2016, the committee considered various annual and other reports tabled in parliament from the ICAC, the Ombudsman, the Police Ombudsman, the Commissioner of Police and the independent reviewer of the ICAC. The committee is charged with examining these reports while also inquiring into and considering the operation and the effectiveness of the ICAC Act. In particular, the committee must consider the performance of functions and exercise of powers by the ICAC and the OPI, inquire into and consider the performance of functions and exercise of powers by the Ombudsman and report to parliament on any arising matter of public policy. During the review period, the committee heard evidence from the ICAC, Commissioner Bruce Lander; the independent reviewer of the ICAC, the Hon. Kevin Duggan; the Acting Police Ombudsman, Mr Michael Grant; the Ombudsman SA, Mr Wayne Lines; and SAPOL, namely Commissioner Grant Stevens; Assistant Commissioner (Crime) Linda Fellows; and Chief Superintendent Doug Barr, Ethical and Professional Standards. The committee made nine recommendations relating to matters of public policy. Overall, the committee found: There should be an obligation on a person executing a search warrant to provide a copy of that warrant to the occupier of a place or the owner or driver of the vehicle to which the warrant applies. The penalties under the ICAC Act may be too low to provide an adequate deterrent, specifically in the new section 54 confidentiality provision and schedule 3 procedure for resolving legal professional privilege claims. These penalties should be reviewed. The local government code of conduct should be revised to address various concerns expressed by the ICAC and the Ombudsman. The Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988 should be amended to allow the ICAC, as a law enforcement agency, to be able to make submissions in sentencing proceedings where the person has cooperated with the ICAC's investigation. A detailed analysis should be performed in accordance with the terms of reference of the independent reviewer to ascertain the efficacy of the ICAC. The potential overlap in the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman and the Health and Community Services Complaints Commissioner should be reviewed and clarified. Given that the ICAC will no longer be empowered to issue direction to the Ombudsman, consideration should be given as to whether the ICAC should remain empowered to examine practices, policies and procedures of the Ombudsman. It may be more appropriate for an independent reviewer to fulfil this function. In accordance with the recommendation made by the Ombudsman, the public interest test in the Freedom of Information Act 1991 should be clarified. I seek leave to continue my remarks. Leave granted; debate adjourned.