Legislative Council Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Parliamentary Committees Select Committee on Staffing, Resourcing and Efficiency of South Australia Police SELECT COMMITTEE ON STAFFING, RESOURCING AND EFFICIENCY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA POLICE The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY Legislative Council Leader of the Opposition The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (20:27): I move: That the report of the select committee be noted. This select committee, as members would be aware, was reconstituted after the last parliament. This select committee did an extensive amount of work and took a tremendous amount of evidence. South Australia Police and the Police Association, on that select committee, made some significant submissions and the committee provided an interim report before the last election. However, one or two witnesses who wanted to give evidence to the select committee were unable to do so because of the election and its timing in 2006, so we reconvened this select committee to allow a particular witness, Mr Kerry McCloud, who had some issues in relation to the handling of his particular circumstances within SAPOL, to come in and give us an account of how SAPOL had handled those issues. Then, of course, we were grateful to have the South Australia Police and the Police Association give evidence in response to the matters raised by Mr McCloud. We also had another witness who did not wish to be identified and who had been working in the Paedophile Task Force. That witness also raised a number of issues consistent with Mr McCloud in relation to harassment, bullying and intimidation in their experience. We also sought evidence from the Police Association and South Australia Police on those issues. I do not wish to speak at length about the evidence given by either of the witnesses or, in particular, the evidence given by the Police Association or the police themselves. I think that members themselves are quite capable of reading the report. I believe that the recommendations encapsulate the views of the committee. We believe that SAPOL does have an adequate mechanism and processes in place to handle issues of human resource management, although I suspect that committee members all agree that probably over the time of these cases they may not have adhered as diligently to their practices and procedures as they should have. Of course, once you end up with a bit of a 'he said/they said' set of circumstances, then it starts to become blurred and people feel as though they have not been treated fairly in any of these processes. Our recommendation is that we request SAPOL to adhere more closely to its stated human resources management policy. Our view was that, if they adhered to that more closely and more strictly, there would be more clarity in relation to the people involved in these particular circumstances. Nonetheless, we do thank Kerry McCloud for coming forward and putting his set of circumstances on the record. I think we all saw that he had a significant number of issues that should have been addressed properly and quickly in the initial stages. That did not happen, and the issue continued to be a problem for both Mr McCloud and, of course, SAPOL itself. Members will recall that Mr McCloud was directed by a senior officer not to have any contact with the media or even with his local member of parliament, and I raised this by way of a question to the Hon. Paul Holloway when he was minister for police. During the evidence, SAPOL did say that it was not intended that he not have any contact with his member of parliament, but clearly that was another issue where Mr McCloud felt he was being intimidated and, if you like, silenced and gagged, and in no way able to tell his side of the story when he felt that his employers were not listening. The other interesting fact was that the person from the paedophile task force who gave evidence to the committee certainly had some issues with human resource management, but also in relation to practices occurring within that task force, particularly with the fact that a large percentage of the cases were being shelved because they wanted to wind it up by 30 June 2010. I think that caused that person particular concern, given that there were a large number of cases and given the very difficult sets of circumstances with which they dealt. SA Police gave evidence suggesting that, while it had not shelved a third of the cases, with a number of the cases there simply was not sufficient evidence to investigate further. As you can see, Mr Acting President, a number of issues were raised. The committee recommends that SAPOL adhere more closely to its policies. I think it is the same with any issue; right from day one, when the concerns were raised, if there were some clarity about the process and everyone knew where they stood then I am sure that the issues would have been resolved and we would not have had the angst and stress that has been caused to the two people who gave significant amounts of evidence. I would like to thank the members of the committee: the Hon. Terry Stephens, the Hon. Russell Wortley, the Hon. John Darley, and the Hon. Ann Bressington. I would also like to thank Mr Chris Neale, the secretary of the committee. Again, it is quite a small report because it is just the add on from a significant select committee. I would also like to thank the witnesses for coming forward and giving their evidence in the frank and fearless way they did, as well as SAPOL and the Police Association for the way they were able to bring back responses and evidence in a timely manner. With those few words, I commend the report to the council. Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. J.M. Gazzola.