Ombudsman

The Hon. S.L. GAME (14:42): I seek leave to direct a question to the Attorney-General regarding complaints submitted to the Ombudsman.

The PRESIDENT: Do you seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking or do you just want to ask him a question?

The Hon. S.L. GAME: I seek leave to make a brief explanation.

Leave granted.

The Hon. S.L. GAME: The percentage of complaints not being investigated by the Ombudsman has risen from 17.53 per cent in 2019-20 to 23.92 per cent the following year, to 54.64 per cent in 2022-23 and then to 88.48 per cent in 2023-24. In the year ending 30 June 2024, of the 2,685 complaints about government departments, 2,376 were not investigated. These decisions not to investigate were made under section 12H(1)(c) of the South Australian Ombudsman Act 1972 because each complaint was considered 'trivial, vexatious or frivolous', or it had been decided there is no reason to re-examine these complaints. Complainants are then prevented from talking about these decisions. My questions to the Attorney-General are:

1. Can the Attorney-General reassure the public that confidentiality provisions, which carry the threat of large fines or imprisonment, aren't being used to cover up systemic wrongdoing or malpractice in government departments?

2. What is the explanation for the increase in the number of complaints about government departments not being investigated on the basis that it is not in the public interest to do so?

3. Will the Attorney-General commit to establishing an independent review of decisions where the Ombudsman has used his discretion under section 12H(1)(c)?

4. Will the government amend section 12H(1)(c) so that confidentiality only applies in a case where the matter has been investigated?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector, Special Minister of State) (14:44): I thank the honourable member for her question. The Ombudsman is an independent statutory officer who carries out her functions without fear or favour, or influence from government, so any suggestion that there is some systemic desire by government to try to hide things by the way the Ombudsman conducts herself is not something that could happen, given the independent nature of the Ombudsman.

In relation to dissatisfaction with decisions taken by the Ombudsman, there are significant rights of appeal to SACAT for people who are dissatisfied with certain elements. I am not aware of any instance where there has been an attempt to try to hide wrongdoings of government by confidentiality provisions in relation to complaints made to the Ombudsman.

I have no reason not to have confidence that the Ombudsman conducts her work, and that her office conducts its work, in the most professional way.