DEPARTMENTAL EXECUTIVES

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (14:56): I seek leave to make an explanation prior to directing a question to the minister representing the Premier in relation to chief executive contracts.

Leave granted.

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: The issue of the contract for the new chief executive for the Department for Education and Child Development has attracted some public attention in the last couple of weeks. An inspection of Mr Harrison's contract at the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment's office this morning and a comparison with the equivalent contract for Mr Keith Bartley, the previous chief executive officer, reveals a number of significant differences.

Mr Harrison's contract is for five years, while Mr Bartley's was for four; Mr Harrison must be given at least six months' notice about any intention by government to reappoint him, whereas Mr Bartley only had to be given five months' notice; and there is a significant difference in the termination provisions of Mr Harrison's contract. Mr Harrison's contract says:

The Chief Executive shall not be entitled to any termination payment if he has a right to return to other employment in the South Australian public sector or if the appointment is terminated to enable him to be appointed to other duties in the South Australian public sector (whether under Section 36 of the Act or otherwise) or if his employment is terminated under Clause 10.1(a).

Clause 10.1(a) refers to termination where a chief executive becomes bankrupt or becomes an MP or does paid work without the consent of the minister, etc.

The contracts, however, are similar in terms of the total salary paid; that is, Mr Harrison is to receive a pay increase of just under $100,000 from his previous position (he is to be paid $387,722, to be precise), even though he has, as has been publicly acknowledged, no educational background compared to the comprehensive and significant educational background of Mr Bartley, who had been headhunted by Premier Jay Weatherill of the Jay Weatherill Labor government variety. My questions to the minister representing the Premier are:

1. Can the Premier indicate why Mr Harrison commenced work without an agreed and signed contract between himself and the Premier? The contract that was sighted this morning was only signed on Friday 19 July 2013.

2. Has Mr Harrison resigned from SAPOL and, in particular, does he have the right to return to SAPOL if his position as chief executive is terminated? In particular, I refer the Premier to the provision in his contract that says 'if he has a right to return to other employment in the South Australian public sector'. That particular provision was not in the contract of Mr Bartley and is a different provision to the standard provision.

3. Why does Mr Harrison's contract require him to be given at least six months' notice about any intention to reappoint him compared to Mr Bartley only having to be given five months?

4. Given that Mr Harrison has acknowledged to have had no educational background at all, why is the Premier prepared to pay him $387,722, which is exactly the same remuneration that was paid to Mr Bartley, who had a very significant and comprehensive educational background, according to the Premier?

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for State/Local Government Relations) (15:00): I thank the honourable member for his questions and will refer them to the relevant minister in another place and bring back a response.