HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2015-10-14 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Independent Commissioner Against Corruption Annual Report 2014-15

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:45): A further supplementary: the Attorney-General's position is that unless he receives a specific complaint, and yesterday's ICAC report makes absolutely clear one in four are too scared to make a report, he is not going to progress the recommendation to impose a criminal offence and sanction on those who either interfere with or attempt to interfere with FOI processes.

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice Reform, Minister for Planning, Minister for Housing and Urban Development, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Child Protection Reform) (14:45): I did not say anything of the sort and I do not say anything of the sort. I was attempting to answer the earlier question, which unhelpfully contained additional material which was not contained in the original source document.

What I am trying to say is that we are looking at all of those things. I am not ruling out the notion that there might be, if there is a demonstrated need for it, the inclusion of some offence. I do make the point that one should not, as a matter of good public policy, legislate to create criminal offences in circumstances where there is no evidence that the offending behaviour is occurring. I continue to have an open mind about this.

We will continue to work these things through, but let's be very plain about this. At the time, we did make inquiries because we wanted to know, if it was going on, where it was going on and what we could do to stop it immediately, not just by legislating but also by all of the executive arm of government providing very clear instructions, which were also provided on a whole range of other issues arising from that report, if my memory serves me correctly. The point is that I am not ruling anything out, but we are looking at all of these issues.

Whilst we are on whistleblowers, can I just make this point, too, because it is an important point. The whistleblowers legislation predates the ICAC legislation by decades. The whistleblowers legislation is, in one form or another, extant in all of the other Australian jurisdictions and has been reviewed in those jurisdictions from time to time.

There is quite a degree of diversity around the country as to what whistleblowers legislation looks like, though there is the central core concept which is repeated. No other state has the equivalent of the Office for Public Integrity—a place to which you can go anonymously, make a report anonymously and have that report vetted and examined anonymously, without necessarily having to formally engage the provisions of the whistleblowers act.

So, whilst I accept and agree that a review of the Whistleblowers Act is important and is something we are doing, lest anybody be mistaken about what the consequences of us not having done that completed yet might be, let's bear in mind that, since the Office for Public Integrity has been open, anybody with a complaint about maladministration, corruption or any of those other matters mentioned can just get in touch with OPI. They are completely protected and anonymous in respect of that, without having to necessarily engage the whistleblowers legislation.

Just so it is clear, that does not mean we do not have to look at the whistleblowers legislation, but I am saying that they do have another alternative which does not exist in any other state in the commonwealth.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT