Page 4729 - Week 15 - Wednesday, 7 December 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MRS CARNELL: Mr Berry, please! As I said, amendments 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 achieve that end. With amendment 5, there is a need for consistency with regard to the use of the category "Territory instrumentality" in the definition of "public official". Again, it is a matter of consistency. Amendment 8 implements recommendation 5 of the standing committee, which says that the legislation should not derogate from legal professional privilege. It provides that, where a lawyer or a solicitor is in possession of knowledge which has been conveyed by a client on the basis of strict professional confidence, then the lawyer or the solicitor is not required to breach that professional confidence. That is something that we totally support.
Amendment 9 arises from the select committee's expressed concerns about the power given under clause 14 of the original Public Interest Disclosure Bill to the Ombudsman to give procedural directions to public sector agencies. It said that this was not a function which the Ombudsman should perform. I accept the committee's suggestion to reconsider this provision; and, accordingly, when we get to that stage, I will move that this clause be omitted. Amendment 10 implements recommendation 11 of the select committee, which requires that persons making a public interest disclosure reveal their identity. This mendment adds strength to the provisions already in the Bill which relate to declining to act on information regarded as trivial, frivolous or vexatious and which impose penalties on persons who knowingly or recklessly make so-called disclosures which are false or misleading. Again, we totally support that approach. Amendment 11 implements recommendation 7 of the select committee that the whistleblowing provisions of Division 12 of the Public Sector Management Act should remain in place until such time as stand-alone legislation is passed by this Assembly. With a bit of luck, that will be today. Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure that this Bill has finally come on for debate. Rather than take up time by saying things that we have already said in this place - and we certainly have a lot of business to get through before 7 o'clock - I will leave my remarks at that.
MR BERRY (Manager of Government Business), by leave: This legislation has turned out to be one of the greatest wastes of time that this Assembly has been subjected to, because we have a piece of legislation that has been remoulded largely to look exactly like, or perform the tasks of, existing legislation; except in respect of some contractors outside the public service. Essentially, that describes it. We have had a whole host of committee energy being poured into this legislation, just to reform it so that Mrs Carnell can have her way. It has been a waste of energy; it has been a waste in terms of its effect on the community. There are still some outstanding matters which have not been considered. The committee's work is incomplete, because we have not yet looked at the effects that whistleblowing measures might have in the private sector. That is all that is left. Mrs Carnell wants to look at only a little of that; she does not want to be patient and wait until the inquiry is completed. That is similar to the knee-jerk way that she has been dealing with these issues to this point. Last week was an example of how not to do it. I know that my remarks will not make any difference, because everything is set in concrete in terms of numbers. It has been a disgraceful waste of the energy of this Assembly, with no real change as far as the community is concerned.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .