Page 1894 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 14 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
... ... ...
where appropriate, the terminology used in the Public Sector Management Bill be adopted for the stand alone whistleblower legislation;
... ... ...
It went on to say that the Government should review the definitions of "public servant" used in the Crimes Act to get the language correct, and so on. I am sure that the committee was not universally happy with the Public Interest Disclosure Bill. There is good reason for that; some of the drafting was light on. I do not think too much effort went into it. One thing that struck my eye as being particularly offensive was what was described as corrupt conduct in clause 4 of the Public Interest Disclosure Bill, which states:
For the purposes of this Act, conduct is taken to be corrupt if -
(a) it is of a type referred to in subsection (2); and
(b) it could constitute -
(i) a criminal offence;
(ii) a disciplinary offence; or
(iii) reasonable grounds for dismissing or dispensing with, or otherwise terminating, the services of a public official who is engaged in it.
It could constitute; it does not have to have been proven. So somebody can be accused of being involved in corrupt practice if somebody forms the view that it could constitute an offence under any of those headings I read out.
Madam Speaker, I agree emphatically with the first recommendation. I think such a committee could play a very important role in dealing with this entire matter; but I think it has to be allowed to deal with it against the background of the operation of the Public Sector Management Bill, rather than going through the process of delaying the Bill. I do not think, on my examination of the issues, there are major flaws which should result in the Bill being delayed. As I said at the outset, I agree with the chairman's statement that he is not going to stand in the way of the passage of this Bill; he is not going to interfere with the Government's program. I do not think a satisfactory case for a delay in the Government's program has been made out by those people who gave evidence to the committee. I am perfectly happy to listen to them in the future, while the legislation is in operation, and I would see that as a positive move.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .