HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2017-02-15 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Parliamentary Committees

Crime and Public Integrity Policy Committee: Annual Review

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (17:02): I move:

That the report, entitled 'Annual review of the Crime and Public Integrity Policy Committee into public integrity and the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption 2015-16', 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, and there are a few:

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 of South Australia, whose office investigates complaints about the SA government and local government agencies;

the Office of the Police Ombudsman, which provides independent oversight of the South Australia Police; 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 effectiveness of the ICAC Act. In particular, the committee must:

consider the performance of functions and exercise of powers by the ICAC and the Office for Public Integrity (OPI);

inquire into and consider the performance of functions and exercise of powers by the Ombudsman; and

report to parliament on any matter arising of public policy.

During the review period in question 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 of South Australia, Mr Wayne Lines, the South Australian police force, namely Commissioner Grant Stevens, Assistant Commissioner for Crime, Linda Fellows, and the Chief Superintendent, Doug Barr, ethical and professional standards. The committee made nine recommendations relating to matters of public policy. Overall, the committee found that:

1. 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 to the owner or driver of the vehicle to which the warrant applies;

2. 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;

3. The Local Government Code of Conduct should be revised to address various concerns expressed by the ICAC and the Ombudsman;

4. The Criminal Law Sentencing Act 1998 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;

5. A detailed analysis should be performed in accordance with the terms of reference of the independent reviewer to ascertain efficacy of the ICAC;

6. The potential overlap in the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman and the Health and Community Services Complaints Commissioner should be reviewed and clarified;

7. 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 in power to examine practices, policies and procedures of the Ombudsman. It may be more appropriate for an independent reviewer to fulfil this function; and

8. Also, in accordance with the recommendation made by the Ombudsman, the 'public interest' test in the Freedom of Information Act 1991 should be clarified.

Throughout this report the committee considered the potential impact of the reform package comprising:

the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption (Miscellaneous) Amendment Act 2016;

the Police Complaints and Discipline Act 2016; and

the Public Interest Disclosure Bill 2016.

The committee notes that this reform has addressed many of the committee's recommendations in its first annual report. On behalf of the committee, I thank all those who gave evidence to the committee. I also thank members of the committee from this chamber: the Hon. Gerry Kandelaars MLC, who has been the Presiding Member of the committee; the Hon. Andrew McLachlan MLC (honourable and gallant); as well as my colleague the Hon. Robert Brokenshire MLC, a former member of the committee.

From the other place, I thank the Hon. Tony Piccolo, the member for Light; Mr Lee Odenwalder, the member for Little Para; Mr Vincent Tarzia, the member for Hartley; as well as Mr Chris Picton, the member for Kaurna and a former member of the committee. I was the acting chair of the committee. Finally, I thank the committee staff, especially Jane, for supporting the committee throughout the review, and I commend the report to the council.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. J.M. Gazzola.

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